Should Singapore adopt 'say on pay'?
SoP may require disclosures that could harm a firm's competitive interests.
IN the corporate setting, the remuneration of chief executive officers (CEOs) and senior executives is typically determined by the board of directors. In many countries, corporate governance codes have been developed to provide guidance on such remuneration practices. However, there has been a recent trend of countries adopting regulations which allow shareholders some form of voting rights on executive remuneration. Such voting rights are commonly referred to as Say on Pay (SoP) votes.
While certain aspects of individual SoP regulations may differ - for example, votes can be binding or non-binding - they are generally instituted with the aim of incentivising boards to act in the interests of shareholders and to avoid awarding executives excessive pay packages.
SoP first appeared in the UK in 2002, when the Directors' Remuneration Report Regulations required all UK companies listed on major exchanges to hold non-binding SoP votes on executive compensation annually. In 2013, regulations were updated to give shareholders a binding vote.
BT is now on Telegram!
For daily updates on weekdays and specially selected content for the weekend. Subscribe to t.me/BizTimes
Columns
‘Competition for talent’ a poor excuse to keep key executives’ pay under wraps
OCBC should put its properties into a Reit and distribute the trust’s units to shareholders
Why a stronger US dollar is dangerous
An overstimulated US economy is asking for trouble
Too many property agents? Cap commissions on home sales
Time to study broadening of private market access