The promise made yesterday by Nicolas Sarkozy to ban hats and retreats, golden parachutes has a deja vu. The candidate of 2007 there was already risky. The President also, during his tenure. But from words to action, there is a gap … Nicolas Sarkozy Golden Parachute
What he said in 2007: At the time, the future president described the golden parachutes "detestable practices" and announced their removal "summer 2007" in the name of "values that are not (his) ".
What he did: It is clear that five years later the "golden parachutes" still exist. Certainly, there have been few measures of supervision. But they were sometimes taken by the UMP majority against the Government's view.
In August 2007, the TEPA law requires and golden parachutes are subject to a decision of the Board, and is linked to performance criteria. But the announced removal is not requested. In 2008, during the speech of Toulon, the head of state announced that executive compensation "must be indexed to the actual economic performance of the company. They should not be eligible for a golden parachute when they committed mistakes or put their company in difficulty ". No law follows.
In 2009, following the scandal of the golden parachute of the former CEO of Valeo and stock options of Societe Generale, Nicolas Sarkozy puts it: "There should no longer be any golden parachutes, it should not be any bonuses, distribution of free shares or stock options in a company that receives government assistance, which implements a social pronounced or that relies heavily on partial unemployment. " A decree to this effect was taken in April. But this prohibition applies only to companies that received aid from the state (banking and automobile sectors) until end 2010. And it is not retroactive.
Finally, 21 October 2010, MEPs adopted an amendment during consideration of the budget which provides that golden parachutes may not exceed 'twice the highest severance benefits, provided in case of dismissal by the agreements business or industry. " Baroin, then budget minister, has yet attempted to oppose it. He states that "the government has already done much" and argues that "these elements of compensation (that) feed business competitiveness to attract the best subjects."
Pensions hats
Unlike the golden parachutes, Nicolas Sarkozy has never announced the elimination of pensions hats. But he has often denounced the abuse. And his government has taken steps to harden their taxation. That said, in February 2010, matter in full Proglio, Luc Chatel, a spokesman of the government has not asserted that the least critical of retired boss of Veolia's hat fell within "the hard". He even tried to justify it. And as for golden parachutes, the government has sometimes sought to oppose regulatory ambitions of its majority
What he did:
The decree of 20 April 2009 prohibits hats retreats for executives of companies that have benefited from state assistance, but this provision shall be valid only until the end of 2010. Today, they are perfectly legal.
In October 2009, MEPs in the committee adopt a reform of the governing pensions hats … but waive the government's request. Eric Woerth, budget minister then, justifies its position by the fact that this system affects many thousands of frames and not only the great leaders. The government settle a code of ethics established by the employers.
In October 2010, MPs return to the fray and adopt a law to limit pensions hats. The latter will no longer exceed 30% of the remuneration of the last fiscal year. Unusually, the majority supported the opposition. The government opposes it but will eventually bow, relying on "wisdom" of the assembly.
Taxation has for its part, was weighed down twice in 2010 (particularly in the context of pension reform). And surtax has once again undergo a hardening at the end of last year with the introduction of a progressive scale with three slices according to the amount (7%, 14% or 21%) against two previously (6 % or 12%).
The high wages
What he said
Wednesday night on France 2: "From now on, the remuneration of top leaders will be voted on not by the board, where typically there are many friends, but by the general meeting of shareholders. (They) will be published in the legal documents to be published by the company "
What he has said: ……. In June 2006
. at Agen: "At the very least, is that the leaders of large listed companies assume their remuneration to their employees, their shareholders, and that, therefore, remuneration of each officer is not secretly fixed in the closed session of the Board but publicly endorsed for each of them by the general meeting of shareholders, and, of course, nominally published in the annual report. " What he did
:
Actually, not much thing, except the temporary ban on stock options and bonus shares for companies aided by the State until the end of 2010. Otherwise, the government has clearly shown its refusal to regulate comprehensively Wages and Salaries Francois Fillon saying, still in 2009, such a move would have "no real technical, economic, unless you want naturally regulate all remuneration ". And rely on the wisdom of big business and its ethics code. The measures proposed Wednesday to stay elsewhere in this lineage. Existing in the Anglo-Saxon voting remuneration by the general meeting of shareholders does not guarantee the end of excessive compensation. And the principle of transparency on executive compensation has already been included in the New Economic Regulations Act of 2001.