Not that we think this is odd, for we don't think Polly will be happy until we all do what we're damn well told and tug that forelock while you're doing it boy. But still, the internal dissonance in her own piece is quite wondrous:
He is waiting to see whether in her election manifesto, Theresa May will turn out to have meant what she said in her “sacred text”, her single speech pitching for the leadership. She said back then that though the FTSE traded at the same level as 18 years ago, “executive pay has almost trebled” with “an irrational, unhealthy and growing gap” between bosses and workers. She pledged “to make shareholders’ votes on pay not just advisory but binding” with full transparency of “the ratio between the CEO’s pay and the average company worker’s pay”.
We entirely agree, shareholders are the owners of a company. The CEO and other executives are their employees. And employers should indeed decide what to pay their employees. Which is of course exactly what happens today:
This is the comical charade of governance, a half day’s embarrassment. When it comes to voting on top executives’ remuneration, those in the room press little buttons, then up on the screen comes the total of all institutional shareholders: result – 8,885,701,000 votes, or 96%, gifting Gulliver his £8m. It was never in doubt.
Quite why shareholders being able to do what Polly insists shareholders must be able to is a comical charade is beyond us bears of little brain.
But Polly does want us all to know that she's very unhappy about us all doing what she insists we must do, determine the pay of our employees. And don't you forget it.