FairPensions is a charity that promotes Responsible Investment by pension funds and fund managers. Bringing together leading charities, trade unions, faith groups and individual investors, our aim is to catalyse a shift at at each level of the investment chain, so that Responsible Investment becomes the norm.
FairPensions was launched in 2005 and now has a strong track record of persuading major investors to increase shareholder activism on environmental, social and governance issues. Today, FairPensions is recognised in the UK as the leading NGO that monitors and engages with the investment industry.
It's a simple but under-appreciated fact that the trillions of pounds invested in pensions have the power to change our world.
FairPensions has launched a campaign on high pay. If you have pension savings or an ISA* then you have a stake in Britain’s biggest companies. Your pension or ISA provider is a shareholder in Britain’s biggest companies and that gives you the right to have your say on high pay. Directors' pay and bonuses are put to a vote of shareholders.
therefore a visit to and follow the Take Action link.
Only last Friday at their AGM, Barclays management suffered a significant revolt by shareholders, after 26.9% of those who voted, said no to the company's executive pay package and almost 21% voted against the re-election of remuneration committee chairman Alison Carnwath.
Whilst it's being reported today that insurance giant Aviva have announced it will look again at how much it pays new senior executives after concerns expressed by shareholders.
In today's Queen's Speech, it was announced that the government will amend company law so that shareholder votes on big businesses' prospective remuneration plans for executives will be binding - as opposed to the current system of advisory votes (which have the power to embarrass companies but not to compel them).
:thumbup:
This comes the day after it was announced that Insurance firm Aviva that group chief executive Andrew Moss will be leaving with immediate effect after the firm suffered the embarrassment of losing a shareholder vote on executive pay (54% of Aviva shareholders against) at its annual general meeting last week.
(However it's understood he'll still receive a payout of about )
what i'd like to know is how much profit do these executives make for their respective companies to deserve such amounts of payouts.
I suppose it is how much MORE profit can they make than a cheaper salaried person, or how much can they cut off the losses, but not just execs of course, buying a footballer can cost a lot but can earn millions more than the outlay or the high salary, Ronaldo for example, costas fortunas but could be the difference for a club between Champions Leauge placings, premier league etc, and that in turn means bagsa cash more for the club.
For example Alan Shearer, bought by Newcastle, broke the club record for both purchase and salary at the time, yet within 2 weeks of arriving at the club the sales of Shearer shirts and other memorabilia had brought in more than the purchase fee.
Lets see if this happens.............
Business Secretary Vince Cable will announce plans on Wednesday to force companies to have binding votes on executive pay every three years.
Companies will then have to stick to their pay plans for the next three years or have another shareholder vote.
They will also have to publish a simple figure every year showing how much executives have been paid.
And they will have to say how much an executive will be paid if they are sacked or quit.
It would be nice if Vince Cable did get some of these plans through, particularly as the average rate of executive pay has risen 12% this year. Also unlike footballers these rises seem to be totally unrelated to performance.
Whats wrong with a large bonus or pay if its deserved. I think success should be rewarded and failure not! Success in whatever industry shouldn't ever be punished by being taxed more than anyone else.
If the company is private too then what on earth can Mr Cable or anyone else not on the board or deciding bonus percentage possibly have to do with any of it!!
The 50% tax uproar for instance ... punishing successful people clearly! Or whats the point in achieving after working hard to become successful? The well paid people who pay 40% pay way more than most monthly never mind annually.
At least be fair people!
J
And yet the rate of executive pay in many organisations has risen. These being organisations that haven't succeeded as such, how does this reward success?
I meant only success should be rewarded. Failure as has been rewarded clearly in the past should not. Thats why its called a bonus. Some market traders where I work are on a minimum of 10%, if they have a limit of 10 million and bring in 50 then what is the issue rewarding them their 5 million. Its all relative.
There is a whole argument that this sort of bonus based pay then lead to the 'Traders' (more their bosses) creating the whole mess of derivative based products that caused the banking problems in 2008. But to my mind if they are stupid enough to pay the money ......
