A recent merger deal between Anglo American and Teck Resources has sparked controversy over executive pay, with the miner's board initially backing a plan that would have given its CEO, Duncan Wanblad, an $8.5m bonus for securing the £50bn all-share deal.
The proposed resolution, known as "resolution 2," was designed to amend Anglo American's existing long-term bonus schemes and guarantee Wanblad a payout worth 62.5% of the scheme's maximum, simply for completing the merger. Critics argued that this approach was unfair, as it would reward Wanblad for doing a big deal without demonstrating any meaningful performance over an extended period.
Anglo American eventually backtracked on the plan after objections from several large investors, including Legal & General Investment Management, citing concerns about the company's decision to hijack its existing long-term bonus scheme and turn it into a short-term one. The miner has since vowed to drop the resolution and instead announce an updated directors' remuneration policy next year.
While some argue that Wanblad and his senior colleagues should receive larger incentive packages due to their role in overseeing the merger, this issue is separate from the main controversy surrounding the initial proposal. Anglo American will now be required to present a more transparent and accountable approach to executive pay, which could lead to Wanblad ultimately receiving a reward for his efforts.
The recent spat highlights the ongoing debate over executive compensation in the UK, with shareholders and regulators pushing for greater transparency and accountability. As one big investor noted, someone is indeed paying attention to these issues, and Anglo American's decision to back down on the bonus plan may be an important step towards more responsible pay practices in the future.
The proposed resolution, known as "resolution 2," was designed to amend Anglo American's existing long-term bonus schemes and guarantee Wanblad a payout worth 62.5% of the scheme's maximum, simply for completing the merger. Critics argued that this approach was unfair, as it would reward Wanblad for doing a big deal without demonstrating any meaningful performance over an extended period.
Anglo American eventually backtracked on the plan after objections from several large investors, including Legal & General Investment Management, citing concerns about the company's decision to hijack its existing long-term bonus scheme and turn it into a short-term one. The miner has since vowed to drop the resolution and instead announce an updated directors' remuneration policy next year.
While some argue that Wanblad and his senior colleagues should receive larger incentive packages due to their role in overseeing the merger, this issue is separate from the main controversy surrounding the initial proposal. Anglo American will now be required to present a more transparent and accountable approach to executive pay, which could lead to Wanblad ultimately receiving a reward for his efforts.
The recent spat highlights the ongoing debate over executive compensation in the UK, with shareholders and regulators pushing for greater transparency and accountability. As one big investor noted, someone is indeed paying attention to these issues, and Anglo American's decision to back down on the bonus plan may be an important step towards more responsible pay practices in the future.
That's some serious cash right there! And people were all mad about it because they thought it was unfair to just hand him that kind of money without even showing any real results. I get why they'd be upset, but at the same time, Wanblad did play a big role in making this deal happen and securing like 50 billion pounds for the company... 
. Those bonus schemes can get pretty out of hand. It's like, what even is the point of tying a payout to just completing a deal? You'd think you gotta see some actual results or growth for that kinda cash. Glad to see some pressure from investors though 
. Transparency and accountability are key when it comes to executive pay. Can't have CEOs making decisions that benefit themselves over shareholders 
wat was anglo american thinkin? 
It's all very behind-the-scenes, and that's what makes me think there's more to this story than we're being told.
. This whole thing just reeks of corporate greed, and it's not exactly reassuring that Anglo American is already rolling out a new directors' remuneration policy next year 
. Just more lip service to make themselves look good before the real accountability kicks in 
.
and people were all upset because its not fair he didnt do anything special lol but seriously though it raises some important questions about executive pay in the uk.
. I mean, if Wanblad is willing to take on that kind of risk, shouldn't he be rewarded handsomely? The fact that some big investors were up in arms about it just makes me think they're trying to score a cheap hit 
. Maybe Anglo American made the right call by backing down – it's better to have a transparent and accountable approach to executive pay than to risk alienating major shareholders over a single bonus plan 
so yay for that i guess
This whole thing reeks of greed & incompetence - Wanblad's supposed to get a sweet payout for basically doing his job? It's like they expect us to be ok with the company just handing out millions without any real performance metrics. And what really grinds my gears is that they're trying to hide this from shareholders by turning it into a 'long-term' bonus scheme 
Newsflash: long-term means years, not months. Can't trust these guys. Maybe if they spent more time thinking about the company's actual future rather than their own bank balances, we'd see some real progress 
. I think we need more info about how executive pay works, especially when big deals are involved like this one. It's not just about Wanblad getting an $8.5m bonus; it's about setting a precedent for fairness and accountability at all levels of the company.
. It doesn't sit right with me.
.
.
Duncan Wanblad's $8.5m bonus is like finding the golden nugget – but instead of being happy for him, we're all like "wait, isn't that a lot of money?" 