Forum Home Page [see Broadridge note below]

 The Shareholder ForumTM`

Fair Investor Access

See related case examples of

Dell Inc.

appraisal rights for intrinsic value realization

and

Walgreen Co.

stock buyback policies

"Fair Access" Home Page

"Fair Access" Program Reference

For graphs of specific company and related industry returns, see

Returns on Corporate Capital

For graphs of specific company voting for the past 5 years, see

Shareholder Support Rankings

 

 

 

Forum distribution:

Fund manager response to its investors' concerns about portfolio company executive compensation

 

For other recent attention to fund manager support of stockholder interests, see

 

Source: Reuters, May 2, 2016 article

 
Reuters

 


Business  |  Mon May 2, 2016 12:21am EDT

Capital Group leaders look to rein in inflated CEO pay

BOSTON   By Ross Kerber

Alan Berro, Capital Group portfolio manager, is seen in an undated picture courtesy of Capital Group. Capital Group/Handout via

Reuters


The usually close-mouthed Capital Group is speaking up on executive pay - throwing more brickbats than bouquets.

In a recent interview, leaders of the $1.4 trillion Los Angeles-based investment manager said they worry about the magnitude of pay for chief executives and question whether corporate boards are using the right benchmarks to determine compensation.

"There has been this continued escalation where everybody wants to be in the upper quartile," Alan Berro, senior portfolio manager at Capital Group, told Reuters.

"Once one guy raises it, they all want those raises, and we are willing to say no," he said.

Berro's comments are important because Capital Group, which oversees the big American Funds mutual fund family, is one of the largest holders of U.S. stocks and is emerging as one of the toughest critics of corporate compensation.

A measure is its voting record on what are known as "say-on-pay" resolutions - non-binding measures which let shareholders vote on whether to approve compensation for top executives.

Last year, big mutual fund providers including BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) and Vanguard Group voted in support of say-on-pay resolutions of S&P 500 companies at least 96 percent of the time, according to research firm Proxy Insight. Capital Group, however, was less generous in its support, with its funds supporting the pay 86 percent of the time, one of the lowest rates among big U.S. fund managers.

Executive pay, which has been a source of controversy for some time, has drawn more scrutiny amid stagnant U.S. wages for the typical worker. Median pay among S&P 500 CEOs rose to $11.3 million in 2014 from $9.4 million in 2010, according to pay consultant Farient Advisors.

Capital Group has rarely spoken about its proxy voting before, but decided to offer more explanation because of growing interest in the area, including from financial advisers and institutional investors, executives said.

Like other asset managers, Capital Group says executive pay should be linked to performance. But proxy voting principles Capital recently posted online also have an unusual caveat about "preventing excess" pay.

In making pay judgments, Berro said, "We always come back to fairness, and what makes sense in the given circumstances."

Berro and others at Capital declined to single out individual companies whose pay packages they view as problematic. A securities filing shows the $140 billion Growth Fund of America mutual fund (RGAGX.O) voted "against" pay at two of the fund's 10 largest holdings last year: Broadcom Corp and Oracle Corp, (ORCL.N) historically among the higher-paying technology firms. (Broadcom is now part of Broadcom Ltd (AVGO.O).)

Top holdings of its Capital World Investors unit include Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O), Amazon Inc (AMZN.O) and Home Depot Inc (HD.N), according to securities filings tracked by edgar-online.com. Capital World has a stake of at least 4.5 percent in each of those companies, and other Capital Group units hold additional shares.

Lately, the firm has been building up a database to track topics like how companies' executive pay compares to peers, and to what extent stock grants to executives have diluted outside shareholders, Berro said.

Berro helps oversee investment selection among a wide range of blue-chip companies that are now entering the season for annual meetings.

Not all of Capital Groups' votes will please corporate critics. Its funds opposed nearly all proposals calling for companies to report on climate change, for instance. Berro said regulators are better-positioned than shareholders to oversee such matters.

Capital Group has also gained a reputation in some quarters as being activist-friendly - for instance, backing some dissident nominees to Dupont's (DD.N) board last spring.

But Capital Group senior counsel Walt Burkley said his firm does not recruit activists to target companies for changes. "There is no call to activism from us," he said.

(Reporting by Ross Kerber; Editing by Lauren Tara LaCapra and Leslie Adler)

 

 News and Media Division of Thomson Reuters

© 2016 Reuters All Rights Reserved

Shareholder Support Rankings

The following graphs are presented in the order of the article's reference to the company, and are linked to the relevant text. To view full-size graphs, and for graphs of other companies or indices, click here.

Votes for Management Compensation

Shareholder Support Rankings™ analyses are produced by

The Shareholder Forum from research data provided by Equilar, Inc., calculated as the percentage of total votes cast for, against and abstaining in advisory “Say on Pay” shareholder approvals of executive compensation.

© Copyright 2012-2016 The Shareholder Forum, Inc.

 

 

 

This Forum program is open, free of charge, to anyone concerned with investor interests in the development of marketplace standards for expanded access to information for securities valuation and shareholder voting decisions. As stated in the posted Conditions of Participation, the Forum's purpose is to provide decision-makers with access to information and a free exchange of views on the issues presented in the program's Forum Summary. Each participant is expected to make independent use of information obtained through the Forum, subject to the privacy rights of other participants.  It is a Forum rule that participants will not be identified or quoted without their explicit permission.

This Forum program was initiated to address issues and objectives defined by participants in the 2010 "E-Meetings" program relevant to broad public interests in marketplace practices, rather than investor decisions relating to only a single company. The Forum may therefore invite program support of several companies that can provide both expertise and examples of leadership relating to the issues being addressed.

Inquiries about this Forum program and requests to be included in its distribution list may be addressed to access@shareholderforum.com.

The information provided to Forum participants is intended for their private reference, and permission has not been granted for the republishing of any copyrighted material. The material presented on this web site is the responsibility of Gary Lutin, as chairman of the Shareholder Forum.

Shareholder Forum™ is a trademark owned by The Shareholder Forum, Inc., for the programs conducted since 1999 to support investor access to decision-making information. It should be noted that we have no responsibility for the services that Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., introduced for review in the Forum's 2010 "E-Meetings" program and has since been offering with the “Shareholder Forum” name, and we have asked Broadridge to use a different name that does not suggest our support or endorsement.