Hi Andy, The remuneration report has been voted down for a...

Hi Andy,
The remuneration report has been voted down for a number of years and its not just the instos, retail shareholders have also voted it down. I attended the AGM a couple of years ago, questioned the board over remuneration and came away with the opinion that they were not looking after my best interest as a shareholder. I exited my position. My notes from 2014 AGM:

• I asked the board for further information on their plans for LTI- not a lot of clarity other than they are reviewing it following feedback from instos. The current TSR comparison group is no longer appropriate and they are looking at whether TSR in itself is an appropriate metric
• Ian Ferrier (non-exec director and member of the remuneration committee) defended the payment of LTI to senior execs despite not hitting their targets given the significant changes to the business over the measurable period. The board has exercised their discretion as they did not want to ‘disincentivise’ senior management by not paying the LTI.
• I was disappointed with both the position taken and the explanation given. Senior management have a generous pay base and STI and are themselves significant shareholders. There is therefore plenty of incentive to perform well. In fact by paying out incentives regardless of whether snr management hit their targets or not defeats the purpose of setting an LTI in the first place.
• I voted against the motion on remuneration and it appears so did the instos- the company received a significant no vote of just under 35%- enough to earn a first strike
• The Board have noted the large vote of disapproval and will be reviewing the rem structure