Executive Pay Revolt At Trinity Mirror

Published in Company Comment on 3 April 2012

Yet another top boss is paid handsomely while the company burns.

The pay package handed out to Trinity Mirror (LSE: TNI) boss Sly Bailey has had shareholders up in arms of late, and it's easy to see why.

With executive pay becoming increasingly disconnected from the money they actually earn for their employers (that is, their shareholders), disaffection is spreading amongst the ranks of everyday investors, and their voices are becoming increasingly harder to ignore in the country's boardrooms.

In this case, big investors are airing their displeasure too, after chief executive Ms Bailey was paid a total of £1.3m in cash, shares and pension contributions in 2011, despite Trinity Mirror having only last month reported a 40% fall in pre-tax profits, capping a dismal few years of falling profits, suspended dividends, and worrying levels of debt.

Collapsing value

The share price has collapsed too, falling from a 2009 peak of 192p to just 37p today, meaning that Ms Bailey has presided over a slashing of the company's capitalization. When she took over the top job in 2003, Trinity Mirror was valued at £1.1bn -- today it is worth just £97m.

The company's pension fund is suffering too, as the company has had to pursue a deal with its trustees to pare back its contributions in order to pay its dues to some of its creditors.

To answer some of the criticisms, the board of directors has decided to halve the value of any future cash bonuses paid to Ms Bailey, reducing it from a maximum of 110% of her basic salary to 55%.

Investors not calmed

But the move looks unlikely to stem the unrest, as they appear unwilling to budge on the overall levels of the boss's pay package, with share-based incentives boosted to compensate for any potential cash loss.

The board's actions appear to be at least partly aimed at avoiding a shareholder revolt at its upcoming AGM in May -- last year 11% voted against the CEO's pay deal, and a higher level of protest is expected this year.

But will it succeed in heading off the madding crowds? Major investors in Trinity Mirror include Schroders, Aviva, Standard Life, Royal London and Legal & General -- we'll find out next month whether they have the courage to press for shareholders' rights.

> Get the latest on investing and the markets, direct from the desk of David Kuo. You'll also receive a special free report on '10 Steps To Making A Million' if you join The Motley Fool Collective today.

More from Alan Oscroft:

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

Longtermyieldman 04 Apr 2012 , 12:09pm

I used to work with Sly, some years back. Even then I was amazed that anyone deemed her capable of running a quoted company of some size. Seems she has proven me right, by substantially shrinking the scale of that business over time...

Futurefix 04 Apr 2012 , 5:17pm

Sly Bailey's departure is long overdue. More to the point , she was past her sell by date in relation to the job requirements before she started., in my opinion.

The capital destruction on her watch at Trinity Mirror is inexcusable.

Enjoyyourmoney 05 Apr 2012 , 8:03pm

If you think she's rubbish you should have seen that utter idiot John Condron at Yell.

He was the sort of bloke that would soak his company in petrol and start smoking.
I think he did.

HstG 10 Apr 2012 , 12:38pm

I accept that the following is hardly a new idea & is already used extensively - but I am unaware of any other that is equally transparent, simple to follow &, above all, justifiable:
All Co. Board execs. receive their agreed, & publicised, salary. (If they didn't agree to it then they should not have taken the job.)
Second, each exec. accepts that all & every bonus they receive on top of their salary can only be paid in Co. shares ie a specific number & these will become available in tranches over a reasonable period of time (related to the period of their contract - say over 3 years for a 5 year contract). In the case of Ms Bailey this would have the effect of reducing her bonus by 80% over her time at the company; which i would like to think she would consider to be fairly reasonable in the circumstances. As part of this arrangement the shareholders agree the bonus share package, so they cannot subsequently moan about it.
As I say, this would be a transparently fair method & should spike the guns of those who keep prattling on about paying the market rate for the job.
HSTG

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.