engagement et activisme actionnarial | Page 2

Le bien informé Financial Times (« Brussels deal to give shareholders more clout on directors’ pay« , 8 décembre 2016) vient de révéler une information qui fera réagir les lectrices et lecteurs de ce blogue. L’UE serait sur le point d’adopter un accord donnant plus de pouvoir aux actionnaires en matière de rémunération des dirigeants, l’objectif étant de contrecarrer le court-termisme dont feraient preuve les CA.

Pour les points essentiels, voici ce qui a été décidé :

Under the deal struck between negotiators from the European Parliament and Slovakia, which holds the EU’s presidency, shareholders will get a vote on companies’ pay policy at least every four years.

The agreement reached will leave individual nations to decide whether to opt for a system of binding shareholder votes on pay, or to allow votes to be advisory. However, even an advisory vote against pay structures would require companies to present a revised policy for another vote at the next general meeting of shareholders.

Investors will also get an advisory say on listed companies’ annual remuneration reports, which provide an individual breakdown of pay and benefits given to individual directors over the last financial year.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

« Should Say-on-Pay Votes Be Binding? » (The CLS Blue Sky Blog, 13 septembre 2016)… en voilà une belle question que se posent Yvan Allaire and François Dauphine.

The practice of allowing shareholders to cast non-binding say-on-pay votes has spread quickly and broadly throughout the world. It seemed that investors would finally get the opportunity to express their dissatisfaction with outrageous or ill-conceived compensation packages.

The practice was, at first, voluntary, with companies having the option of submitting their compensation policies to a vote. As the number of volunteers remained small, though, investors submitted proposals for requiring companies to carry out the non-binding votes.

In some jurisdictions like the United States, non-binding say-on-pay votes were made mandatory. In Canada, say-on-pay votes are not required, but 80 percent of the largest companies have adopted the practice voluntarily or as a result of pressure from investors.

Now that say-on-pay has been around a few years, what does research tell us about its effectiveness?

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Bonjour à toutes et à tous, le Parlement devrait adopter d’ici à la fin du mois d’octobre la loi Sapin 2 qui impose notamment un vote contraignant des actionnaires des sociétés cotées en AG concernant la rémunération des dirigeants. Une démarche à risques estime Fabrice Rémon, Fondateur de Gouvernance en Actions.

Accéder ici à capsule-vidéo

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian