IBJNews

WellPoint approves annual 'say on pay' measure

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Shareholders of WellPoint Inc. on Tuesday voted to approve hefty pay for the company’s executives and also for the right to weigh in annually on future executive compensation.

The votes came at the Indianapolis-based health insurer’s annual meeting of shareholders, held at the downtown Hilton hotel. Vote tallies were not immediately available after the meeting.

A year ago, WellPoint shareholders approved a measure that demanded an annual “say on pay” vote, which would not be binding but would allow shareholders to express displeasure with excessive pay to top brass.

Since then, the U.S. Congress required all publicly traded companies to allow “say on pay” votes as part of the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation passed last year.

The law requires a “say on pay” vote every two or three years, but WellPoint’s board recommended an annual vote. And shareholders agreed on Tuesday.

Many other local companies, such as Eli Lilly and Co. and CNO Financial Group Inc., also this year approved annual “say on pay” votes.

The votes don’t require companies to do anything. Only if shareholders register a “significant vote” against the pay of WellPoint’s top five named executives will the company’s board consider "shareholders’ concerns, and the compensation committee will evaluate whether any actions are necessary to address those concerns,” the board members wrote in the company’s proxy statement sent to shareholders.

Angela Braly, WellPoint’s chairwoman and CEO, received total compensation last year of $13.4 million, an increase of 3 percent over the previous year, as WellPoint’s operating and stock performance improved even as enrollment continued to decline in the face of high unemployment. Braly's annual salary remained flat at $1.1 million, but her performance-based bonus rose more than 80 percent, to $2.7 million.

At the meeting, shareholder Karen Green-Stone noted that Braly’s pay is equivalent to the salaries of hundreds of schoolteachers. She then asked, “Would you kindly tell us why you are worth so much more than them?”

Braly, standing at a podium next to a digital clock meant to keep shareholder questions to less than two minutes, defended WellPoint’s compensation as in line with other companies, and vetted by the board, consultants and now the shareholders.

“We consider it important to have competitive [pay] arrangements for the CEO and the named executive officers,” she said, adding that Tuesday’s votes indicate that “our shareholders support it.”

In other votes, more than 75 percent of WellPoint shareholders approved the removal of various anti-takeover provisions in the company's articles of incorporation. The company will no longer require 75-percent shareholder approval to amend the the articles of incorporation and will no longer require a two-thirds majority to remove directors or approve an acquisition of the company.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Compensation
    I always love how the executives and corporate boards fall back on consultant recommendations. The compensation consultants serve at the pleasure of the board - they are just a rubber stamp. They wouldn't be around for long if they didn't give the board the answer they wanted.

    I also wonder how many of the stockholders actually voted as opposed to the company voting for them.
  • WellPoint Exec.
    Well, I wish we'd get a 3 percent drop* in our mortgage payments!! They "forgot Sallie Mae, in the Foreclosure plan; which covers VA loans"!!!! Most got a 3 percent drop or more in their payments.Tell me, did Wells Fargo ever payback their 28 Billion they got from Tax payers? Sincerely, Bonny H. Indpls., IN (Avid watcher of IBJ)
  • How can this be?
    I thought Obamacare was going to destroy everything! Poor Wellpoint execs, only got a 3 percent increase.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. President Obama has referred to the ACA as "Obamacare" any number of times; one thing it is not, if you don't qualify for a subsidy, is "affordable".

    2. One important correction, Indiana does not have an ag-gag law, it was soundly defeated, or at least changed. It was stripped of everything to do with undercover pictures and video on farms. There is NO WAY on earth that ag gag laws will survive a constitutional challenge. None. Period. Also, the reason they are trying to keep you out, isn't so we don't show the blatant abuse like slamming pigs heads into the ground, it's show we don't show you the legal stuf... the anal electroctions, the cutting off of genitals without anesthesia, the tail docking, the cutting off of beaks, the baby male chicks getting thrown alive into a grinder, the deplorable conditions, downed animals, animals sitting in their own excrement, the throat slitting, the bolt guns. It is all deplorable behavior that doesn't belong in a civilized society. The meat, dairy and egg industries are running scared right now, which is why they are trying to pass these ridiculous laws. What a losing battle.

    3. Eating there years ago the food was decent, nothing to write home about. Weird thing was Javier tried to pass off the story the way he ended up in Indy was he took a bus he thought was going to Minneapolis. This seems to be the same story from the founder of Acapulco Joe's. Stopped going as I never really did trust him after that or the quality of what being served.

    4. Indianapolis...the city of cricket, chains, crime and call centers!

    5. "In real life, a farmer wants his livestock as happy and health as possible. Such treatment give the best financial return." I have to disagree. What's in the farmer's best interest is to raise as many animals as possible as quickly as possible as cheaply as possible. There is a reason grass-fed beef is more expensive than corn-fed beef: it costs more to raise. Since consumers often want more food for lower prices, the incentive is for farmers to maximize their production while minimizing their costs. Obviously, having very sick or dead animals does not help the farmer, however, so there is a line somewhere. Where that line is drawn is the question.

    ADVERTISEMENT