Reality: The High Pay Commission report shows that CEO pay has soared, while the value of their companies has stagnated.
-
LATEST: Only London and the South East have recovered from the bank crash, says Bank of England director
Nor has the "jobs recovery" been a "wages recovery." Well done Cameron and Osborne
-
DON'T BE FOOLED: BREXIT was about Inequality not Immigration. Why won't politicians, pundits and social media realise this?
Because blaming racists, or "unpatriotic" internationalists, is so much easier than blaming yourselves
-
RIP-OFF NEWS ROUND-UP, OUR PICK OF THE LAST MONTH'S MEDIA
Paradise Papers: Queen and Bono kept money in offshore funds, leaked files reveal
Cameron's former energy minister lands top job at Russian oligarch's metals firm
UK mobile phone firms overcharging customers after contracts expire, +more stories...
-
ELECTION 2020: Since 1997 the percentage of those under 55 who don't vote has doubled
Who Dares (to win them back) Wins
-
EYE OPENER: The Top 1% are paying more income tax? Because their income has doubled since 1995 while the bottom 90%'s has stagnated
Half of us are borrowing to cover living costs. Since the 1980s the poorest fifth have been borrowing more and more
From report by IRRC Institute:
ReplyDeletehttp://corpgov.net/2014/11/ceo-pay-link-to-the-cost-and-future-value-of-capital/
"For the vast majority of S&P 1500 companies, there is a major disconnect between corporate operating performance, shareholder value and incentive plans for executives.
The study details an over-reliance on accounting metrics that do not measure capital efficiency, and how total shareholder return obscures a line of sight to the underlying drivers of economic performance. Moreover, economic performance explains only 12% of variance in chief executive officer (CEO) compensation.
The report finds that:
Economic performance explains only 12% of variance in CEO pay. More than 60% is explained by company size, industry, and existing company pay policy. None of those are performance driven.
Some 75% of companies have no balance sheet or capital efficiency metrics in their disclosed performance measurement and long-term incentive plan design.
Only 17% of companies specifically disclose return on invested capital or economic profit as a long-term performance measure for long-term executive compensation.
Some 47% of S&P 1500 companies over the last five years (2008 – 2012) did not generate a positive cumulative economic profit or return on invested capital greater than their cost of capital.
More than 85% of the S&P 1500 have no disclosed line of sight process metrics aligned to future value such as innovation and growth drivers.
Only 10% of all long-term incentives have a disclosed longest performance period for named officers of greater than three years.
Nearly 25% of companies have no long-term performance based awards at all, relying instead stock options and time-based restricted stock in their long-term compensation plans.
Total shareholder return (TSR) is the most dominant performance metric in long-term incentive plans, present in more than 50% of all plans despite the fact that executives do not have line of sight accountability for key drivers that impact TSR outcomes.
Nearly 60% of companies changed performance metrics for CEO compensation in 2013, and one-third of companies changed at least 25% of the peer group used for performance benchmarking. That lack of stability of performance metrics can suggest a short-term focus despite the fact that the incentive plans are supposed to be long-term focused."