|
Home--News
Coca-Cola Holders Reject Pay, Restricted-Stock Proposals
By BETSY MCKAY
Wall Street Journal
April 18, 2007
WILMINGTON, Del. -- Coca-Cola Co. shareholders rejected proposals
calling for limits on executive compensation, annual publication of
results of product testing, and a study of its water usage in India,
at its annual meeting here.
Coke's annual meeting has become a gathering place for a panoply of
critics and activists who come to press their concerns on the company,
which has faced accusations in recent years that it is ignoring workers'
rights, draining water from poor communities and contributing to obesity,
among other issues.
This year's meeting, in a hotel ballroom here with heavy security,
was no exception, with several groups in attendance. Still, it was
more subdued than in recent years, with only about 200 people.
In a speech to shareholders, Coke Chairman and Chief Executive E.
Neville Isdell said the company is meeting all its long-term operating
objectives. "We are on our way to be a truly great company again"
he said.
He said the global beverage giant has "significant upside potential"
because as big as it is, it is still capturing only 20% of beverage
sales opportunities. Among the company's accomplishments, Mr. Isdell
said, is the rapid growth of its new no-calorie soda, Coca-Cola Zero.
The drink has now sold more than 200 million unit cases world-wide
since its launch in June 2005. A unit case is the equivalent of 24
eight-ounce bottles.
Shareholders rejected five proposals in this year's proxy. The company
said 96% of shares voted were cast against a proposal to cap compensation
of the company's top five executives to $500,000 a year, plus nominal
perks. A proposal for an advisory resolution that would allow shareholders
to ratify compensation of top executives was rejected by 69% of shares
voted, while 68% of shares voted were cast against a proposal to make
restricted stock and performance share units tied to performance --
a step Mr. Isdell said the company had already taken.
Coke also said 93% of shares voted were cast against each of the two
remaining proposals. One called for an annual report publicizing the
results of chemical and biological testing of the company's drinks.
Proponents of the idea said it was necessary after pesticides were
detected in Coke drinks in India and after a recall in 2004 of Dasani
water in Great Britain when excessive levels of bromate were detected.
Coke says it tests its products frequently and its measures are adequate.
The other proposal called for a study and report on the "potential
environmental and public health damage" of each of the company's plants
and ventures that extract water in India.
Despite efforts to establish itself as a leader in global water stewardship,
with water conservation projects in numerous countries, Coke has failed
thus far to satisfy vociferous critics who accuse the company of depleting
groundwater needed by local communities in India.
"The company has not taken care of its problems in India," Amit Srivastava,
director of the India Resource Center, a group pressing for safe water.
"People across India are really fed up with the Coca-Cola Company's
response to the grave crisis in India today."
Mr. Isdell said Coke is "not even close to being the largest user"
of water there, and that the company is nevertheless taking steps
to ease groundwater depletion such as building 350 structures by the
end of this year to harvest rainwater. Coke has also commissioned
an assessment of its water use in India that should be completed by
the middle of this year, he said.
Coke said 2.03 billion shares were used to cast votes, out of 2.32
billion that were eligible to vote.
FAIR USE NOTICE. This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. India Resource Center is making this article available in our efforts to advance the understanding of corporate accountability, human rights, labor rights, social and environmental justice issues. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
|
