The Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act requires a “Say on Pay” vote on executive compensation. This means that all public companies must submit executive compensation packages, with related materials about payment schemes, to shareholders for a nonbinding vote. A shareholder vote is also required for so-called “golden parachute” payments, large payments executives often receive upon the merger or acquisition of their firm. The legislation also establishes regulations to improve the independence of compensation committees and requires the disclosure of compensation arrangements to federal financial oversight authorities to determine if the pay arrangements encourage excessive risk taking by executives. The oversight authorities can prohibit compensation packages that encourage undue risk.
The Middle-Class Position:
Middle Class Supports. Today nearly half of Americans own some stock, with many middle-class families relying on 401(k)s and other investments to finance their retirement security or help their children afford college. Workers with traditional pension plans, including many public employees, also have a stake in the long-term financial performance of companies their pensions are invested in. As a result, the retirement security middle-class Americans work a lifetime to earn can be thrown into jeopardy by lavish CEO pay and retirement packages that reward executives with hundreds of millions of dollars even if they perform poorly, behave unethically, or manipulate pay through a biased compensation committee. As the financial crisis demonstrates, excessive pay can provide incentives for executives to take on excessive risk, endangering both shareholder value and the entire economy.
When executives get sumptuous rewards for inferior or mediocre work, middle-class Americans get shortchanged on the retirement benefits they have earned. Yet there is little shareholders can do to curb the excesses of companies in which they have a vital stake. This bill would introduce an important element of accountability, giving all shareholders “a say on pay” in the form of a nonbinding advisory vote to the Board of Directors. Although the vote is nonbinding, knowing they have option to vote increases shareholders’ scrutiny of executive pay and provides regular shareholder feedback to Boards of Directors. The mechanism of a nonbinding vote on compensation has been used successfully in other countries to put the brakes on questionable compensation plans and tie CEO pay more closely to performance. Some U.S. companies, such as Blockbuster, have also voluntarily adopted a shareholder vote on executive compensation, which they regard as a “best practice” in corporate governance. The improved independence of compensation committees, which can be heavily influenced by management and compensation consultants overly favorable to the interests of executives, and federal oversight of the riskiness of pay schemes will further improve accountability.
From the Experts:
“Opportunities to become closer to the shareholder through measures like ‘Say on Pay’ are yet another step in building credibility and trust in the investment community…At Blockbuster we think it is just good corporate governance to listen to our shareholders. As employees we recognize it is our role to serve as trustees for the people who own this company. If we have any chance of success, we recognize the importance of building that trust and credibility with…both our customers and our shareholders. We think that adopting the ‘Say on Pay’ policy reinforces that we take this trust very, very seriously.” –James Keyes, Chairman and CEO, Blockbuster Inc. (November 13, 2008)
“Boards cheat shareholders and workers when they arrange pay programs that encourage excessive risk taking or approve exorbitant executive compensation that doesn’t reflect performance. That’s why AFSCME supports [giving] shareholders “say on pay” power. This bill will promote responsible executive pay for all companies by establishing an advisory vote on compensation packages and tough independence standards for compensation committees. We need to hold corporate leaders responsible and accountable to their owners – company stock holders—for unjustifiable CEO pay.” –Gerald W. McEntee, President, American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (July 28, 2009)
Beyond this Bill:
Congress could provide shareholders with additional tools to hold corporate boards and management genuinely accountable. For example, shareholders could be given access to a company’s proxy to elect their own nominees to the Board of Directors, ensuring the openness and independence of boards currently dominated by insiders and their hand-picked successors.
The effectiveness of the legislation, particularly the provision to allow so-called “clawback” of compensation awarded on the basis of false financial statements, will depend on regulations drawn up by financial oversight agencies. These agencies should formulate them so that they protect vulnerable shareholders, not powerful executives.
Factor by which the average CEO pay exceeded that of the American worker in 2007: 344 times
Average value of perks like private jets given to executives in 2008: $336,248
Payment included in an executive compensation package that the heirs of James Bernhard, Chairman and CEO of the Shaw Group, were to receive from the construction giant upon his death: $40 million
Percentage of Shaw shareholders who voted in favor of having a say on executive compensation packages that include such payments to heirs: 66.7%
Search our analyses of legislation
significant to America’s current and
aspiring middle class, and find out
how members of Congress voted on
those bills.