Jul
23
2010

Enactment of Dodd-Frank Law Spurs Memo Wave

By now, you’ve probably been deluged with alerts, client memos, invitations to webinars and live conferences in the past week all centered on the recently enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

If you are a director, C-level executive, corporate secretary or anyone for that matter involved in the corporate governance area, you are most likely asking the question, “How will this affect my company?” Unfortunately, the answer is not so easy. Based on watching hours of testimony, listening to several conference panels and reading reams of blog posts and articles on the topic, I can tell you the spirit of the law is to make corporate governance more transparent, less complex and include more dialogue with shareholders. Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Jun
22
2010

SEC Will Have Hands Full Once Financial Reform Passes

As the House-Senate Conference Committee gets closer to an agreement for financial regulatory reform, directors and chief executives are wondering how the voluminous legislation will affect the governance of their companies.

How the proposed law plays out in boardrooms depends on what the SEC does. According to Commissioner Troy A. Paredes, a guest speaker at an executive compensation roundtable hosted by The Conference Board’s Directors Institute and the Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware Monday night, there’s most likely going to be anywhere up to 50 or 60 new rules coming out of the agency over the next six months. Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Jun
11
2010

Executive Compensation Conference Share: Board Placemats

Another week, another conference as the spring corporate governance season kicks into full gear. This week I attended the 2010 Executive Compensation Conference: Everything Directors and Senior Executives Need to Know About Effective Risk and Reward Sharing, which focused on risk assessments, SEC proxy disclosures, Say on Pay and compensation principles.

While the nearly 100 attendees at the June 9-10 conference at New York City’s Intercontinental Barclay were engaged on all those topics, there was one takeaway I thought many directors should most certainly have. It is a sample “Compensation Placemat” that was shared by Janet M. Clarke, a compensation committee chair with ExpressJet Holdings and Asbury Automotive Group.placemat

What’s a compensation placemat, you may ask? It’s a one-page document that fits into a board book. The placemat (it’s called that because it literally looks like a menu placemat you see in diners) is a quick read of a company’s executive compensation plan complete with the executive pay strategy; a list of peer group revenue, earnings and market value; the company’s officer compensation, a description of the annual incentive and long term incentive plans; the company’s run, or burn, rate (Equilar definition: the sum of options granted and options assumed divided by total shares outstanding.); share ownership guidelines; termination provisions; and director compensation, including retainers, chair premiums and long term incentives.

The particular example that Clarke shared during the panel on how boards can engage management to improve risk management and incentive compensation was put together by Semler Brossy Consulting Group LLC. It is based on an actual compensation placemat for a health care company.

I have included a link to a larger version of the placemat here and in the image above. It’s a shared file using Adobe’s file sharing program.

- Gary Larkin


Jun
02
2010

Worth Reading … Financial Reform (the Final Chapter?)

Numerous law firms and at least one stock exchange are telling their clients and issuers to prepare for new corporate governance rules as early as this summer and do what they can to shore up communications with shareholders.

“Everybody knows it’s [proxy access] coming; we just don’t know what it will look like,” David Huntingdon, a partner with Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, said during Corporate Board Member’s This Week in the Boardroom Webcast last week. “We’ll just have to wait until later this summer when the SEC takes action.” [To view Board Member Webcast, click here.] Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Apr
29
2010

Corporate Governance Changes Still Linchpin of Financial Reform

Whether or not you have been watching the Goldman Sachs “synthetic CDOs” hearings, it has become more and more clear that the corporate governance parts of the legislation will remain when the financial regulatory reform is finally passed.

Let’s be honest, those will have the most effect on public boards. Sure, the regulation of the derivatives market, creation of a consumer financial protection agency and instituting the so-called Volcker Rule (named after former Fed Chair Paul Volcker), which would limit certain investment practices such as swaps and derivatives by banks, could be felt by non-financial companies. But will they really change how public boards operate?

I bring up those three parts of the financial overhaul legislation because they are being cited as the big stumbling blocks by Republicans, who this morning relented after blocking the bill from a floor vote for three days. And in the end those parts will either be modified or left out of the bill. Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Apr
13
2010

Worth Reading … Say on Pay

Sen. Chris Dodd has added an amendment to the proposed financial regulatory reform bill that could be problematic for company boards seeking approval of Say on Play proposals. Meanwhile, at least one company has a compelling argument for not allowing Say on Pay.

Dodd’s amendment would deem all votes regarding executive compensation plans, policies and procedures to be non-routine. If approved, that would mean that under the change in the broker voting Rule 452 (which went into effect earlier this year) brokers holding “uninstructed” shares (mostly retail investors) could not vote those shares. Instead, each investor would have to. Under the revised Rule 452, brokers can only vote uninstructed shares if the matter is routine.

Eric W. Hilfers, who blogs The Tally Sheet for Boardmember.com and who is a partner and the head of the executive compensation practice at Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP, wrote, “With the change in broker voting rules, however, it will be harder to obtain that majority support because the retail vote will essentially not exist (the SEC would like the outcome to be that retail investors spend the time to instruct their brokers, but many observers think this is unlikely.” Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Mar
15
2010

Corporate Governance Parts of Financial Regulatory Reform Intact

After listening to Sen. Christopher Dodd’s financial regulatory reform bill press conference this afternoon and poring over the summary, I can say that not a whole lot has changed from the initial discussion draft from November. And, for some, that is both good and bad.

The biggest changes in the 1,300-page bill are some new powers granted to the Federal Reserve (including extending regulatory powers to the Fed over nonbanks that pose risk to the economy), a new name for the systemic risk overseer (Financial Stability Oversight Council, which sounds a lot like the G-20’s Financial Stability Board), the number of independent members on that board (from two to one), and the addition of the so-called Volcker Rule (named after former Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker, it prohibits proprietary trading for banks).

“This legislation will create an early warning system so that someone is tasked with looking out for the next crisis, which will surely come,” Dodd said during the press conference. “We will create a systemic risk council with a job of scanning the economic radar to identify unsafe products or practices that could threaten our economic stability, and the authority to stop them when they occur.” Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Mar
12
2010

Say on Pay Takes Early Lead in Proxy Season Shareholder Proposal Race

Executive compensation continues to be a hot topic in the board room and among shareholders. In the beginning of the 2010 proxy season RiskMetrics reports that four of the Top 10 governance shareholder proposals are compensation-related with advisory vote on compensation, or Say on Pay, ranked first with 46 proposals on the ballot.

The other three compensation proposals include having a retention period for stock awards (13 proposals), establishing anti-gross-ups policy (six proposals) and limiting the number of CEOs on compensation committees (three proposals). [By the way No. 2 on RiskMetrics list is shareholders’ right to call special meetings with 42 proposals.]

While Say on Pay has been considered by the SEC and included in several financial regulatory reform bills on Capitol Hill, momentum for advisory votes on compensation has picked up steam in the past year following the requirement for TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) recipients to hold such a vote. As of March 2, a coalition of investors reports that more than 70 Say on Pay shareholder proposals have been filed for this proxy season. And more than 50 public companies have voluntarily adopted advisory votes for compensation. Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Dec
02
2009

Q&A With Charles Elson: Top Corporate Governance Issues for 2010

Heading into the first full post-financial crisis proxy season that will most likely include a bevy of new corporate governance regulations,

Charles Elson, Chair of Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance, University of Delaware

Charles Elson, Chair of Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance, University of Delaware

I decided to chat with Charles Elson, the Edgar S. Woolard, Jr., chair of the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware. Our topic: the Top 5 corporate governance issues for 2010.

Elson, who is also a director on various boards, of counsel with Holland & Knight and a member of the Technical Advisory Group of The Conference Board Task Force on Executive Compensation, believes that before all is said and done politicians and regulators will dictate how corporate governance is carried out in the next year.

“Regulations and laws will affect all of the top corporate governance issues in 2010 substantially,” Elson said. “God knows it is a mess. This is one of the most volatile, mind-numbing points  in corporate governance that I have ever seen.”

For the most recent update on fiduciaries’ responsibilities with respect to these issues, as usual I direct you to The Conference Board Corporate Governance Handbook: Legal Standards and Board Practices (Third Edition). Below is his list of the Top 5 corporate governance issues for 2010 as well as some additional reference points on each issue: Read the rest of this entry »

- Gary Larkin


Oct
22
2009

With Executive Compensation Pay Cuts, What’s Next? Say on Pay

Now that the shock of Special Pay Master Kenneth Feinberg’s decision (Reuters, Oct. 22) to cut the pay of 175 executives at companies receiving the most government aid is starting to wear off, the real fun will begin. It’s looking more like Feinberg’s announcement Thursday (Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s comments) is just the first salvo in a fight between shareholders and public company boards.

Actually, another salvo was just thrown by the Federal Reserve today when it issued its long awaited proposal to oversee bank incentive compensation policies. (read the press release)

And the battle cry will be, “Say on Pay!” At least that is what the researchers at The Corporate Library (TCL) and the compensation consultants over at Pearl Meyer & Partners believe. In the same week that Feinberg’s decision was leaked to the press, TCL released a “10-Point Test” for shareholders to use when they are allowed to vote on a non-binding resolution on their company’s executive compensation packages.

Say on Pay Survey

During the recently completed National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) annual Corporate Governance Conference, Pearl Meyer released the results of an online survey (read the press release) on company preparedness for Say on Pay. The survey of 231 participants found that more than two-thirds said their company hasn’t taken any steps to prepare for such a vote and only 35 percent plan to do so in the next six months.

Just look at what they are saying over at Pearl Meyer.“Although many believe such a requirement will not take effect until the 2011 proxy season, decisions being made now regarding 2010 compensation practices could potentially be the subject of Say on Pay votes in 2011,” said Mike Enos, the company’s managing director.

A 10-Point Test

In his “10-Point Test,” Paul Hodgson, senior research associate at TCL, wrote, “More importantly, investors, straining at the leash to have a say on pay, feel that a chance for reform is within their grasp. And not just activist investors. All investment firms are likely soon to have a say on pay, whether they like it or not…”

Some might think it a bit premature to start planning for life with Say on Pay since the Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act of 2009, which would require an annual shareholder advisory vote on executive compensation, is not even law yet. As of Oct. 22, that bill had been approved by the U.S. House and still faces a Senate vote. But maybe the Obama Administration is starting to move into high gear on the financial regulatory reform. Case in point: Feinberg’s executive pay cut decision.

Broc Romanek’s TheCorporateCounsel.net blog has one of the best descriptions of Feinberg’s actions. Click here to read.

Principles, principles, principles

I find it interesting that while investors and some companies are gearing up for Say on Pay and the possibility that executive compensation packages will be cut, some are actually trying to get ahead of the reform wave by being proactive. Credit Suisse (Wealth Bulletin, Oct. 21) did just that on Oct. 21 when the Swiss bank adopted the G-20 compensation model that was announced back on Sept. 25. Basically, the bank will focus on higher base pay and more deferred variable compensation tied to the long-term performance of the bank. The bank has also included clawback provisions for bonuses in the new model.

With Credit Suisse’s action, I thought it was a good opportunity to write a list of top executive compensation principles. So below is a table comparing the G-20 principles to that of The Conference Board Task Force on Executive Compensation.

And right here are the principles released by the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA):

  • Firms should establish compensation policies consistent with effective risk management
  • Compensation should be linked to sustainable performance
  • Risk management professionals should be appropriately independent
  • Firms should communicate their compensation practices to shareholders.

Executive Compensation Principles

G-20 Summit Financial Stability Board Principles for Sound Compensation Practices
(Released Sept. 25, 2009)

1.) Financial institutions should have an independent board remuneration (compensation) committee that oversees compensation policies.

2.) Compensation should be aligned with long-term value creation by avoiding multi-year guaranteed bonuses and requiring a significant part of variable compensation be deferred, tied to performance and subject to clawback. They should also take into account current and potential risks.

3.) Financial institutions ensure that compensation of senior executives and others who have a material impact on risk exposure align with performance and risk.

4.) Financial institutions disclose compensation policies and structures to guarantee transparency.

5.) Variable compensation be limited as a percentage of total net revenues when it is inconsistent with the maintenance of a sound capital base.

The Conference Board Task Force on Executive Compensation
(Released Sept. 21, 2009)

1.)  Compensation plans should establish a clear link between pay, strategy and performance.

2.)  Provide compensation that is fair, affordable and clearly aligned with actual performance.

3.)  Eliminate controversial compensation practices that conflict with the notions of fairness and pay for performance – such as excessive golden parachutes, overly generous severance arrangements, gross-ups of parachute payments or perquisites, and golden coffins – unless specific justification exists.

4.)  Demonstrate credible board oversight of executive compensation.

5.)  Foster transparency with respect to compensation practices and appropriate dialogue between boards and shareholders.

- Gary Larkin