Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

View from City Road: Laudable aims may not be enough

Tuesday 24 May 1994 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Don't blame me, blame the remuneration committee, is the standard defence of a chief executive when asked to justify his mega-salary or vastly inflated pay rise - it produced the rules for judging my performance. Unfortunately, no one judges the performance of the remuneration committee.

Yesterday's guidance notes from the Association of British Insurers, which represents most of Britain's largest shareholders, is a valiant attempt to fill that gap.

It says that long-term bonuses should really reflect long-term performance, not short-term manipulation, that share options should be granted over a number of years, not in one lump, and that directors should be encouraged to hold on to these shares rather than cashing in straight away. Above all, it recommends that the performance criteria on which salaries and options are based should be clearly set out in annual reports.

Laudable aims. As always, persuading companies to comply is another matter. The ABI suggests that shareholders should ask for 'comment or explanation' if the remuneration committee is failing to do its job properly. That hardly looks like much of a deterrent.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in