Most shareholders approve top execs' pay

Despite national public displays of anger over executive pay, top corporate officials' 2010 compensation was approved by shareholders at every public company on Long Island that held a vote, documents show.

Thirty-three companies, including CA Technologies, Henry Schein Inc., Nathan's Famous Inc. and Getty Realty Corp., asked investors to weigh in for the first time on top officers' compensation under a 2010 law requiring the nonbinding votes.

At 18 companies pay packages were ratified by more than 90 percent of the shares voted, according to tallies filed with federal securities regulators.

The closest balloting was at Cedar Shopping Centers Inc. of Port Washington, where executives' 2010 pay was approved, 63 percent to 37 percent.

Asked about the results, spokesman Brad Cohen questioned the vote's relevancy. He said the chief executive, board chairman and chief financial officer "weren't here or in place during the proxy season." The company recently changed its name to Cedar Realty Trust.

The blowout vote -- 99.7 percent in favor and 0.3 percent against -- occurred at Systemax Inc., also headquartered in Port Washington. A spokeswoman for the electronics retailer declined to comment.

The universal shareholder approval of top-brass pay at Nassau and Suffolk companies closely parallels the national outcome. Compensation for 2010 was endorsed at more than 98 percent of the largest 500 public companies, according to the Center on Executive Compensation, a think tank of human resources managers.

This outcome refutes the predictions of shareholder revolts with last year's passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Some experts had forecast a slew of defeated "say on pay" resolutions as investors demonstrated their frustration with plummeting share prices, sluggish sales and poor corporate decision-making.

"It shouldn't be a surprise that there was overwhelming support for the pay-for-performance model" at companies, said the center's top attorney, Tim Bartl. "Where resolutions failed it was generally a case of the company failing to communicate."

Bartl and other opponents of "say on pay" said the votes achieve little because companies have already increased communication to large shareholders and more closely tied compensation with profits and stock price.

Supporters of the votes said it was too soon to judge their effectiveness. Carol Bowie, policy director at the research firm Institutional Shareholder Services, said, " 'Say on Pay' gives a regular mechanism for shareholders to communicate to the board either satisfaction or dissatisfaction with compensation practices."