KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION | CEO Compensation to Weigh Workforce Pay and Ownership at KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION

Status
0.00% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
KMB
Lead filer
CorpGov.net
Resolution ask
Other ask
ESG theme
  • Governance
ESG sub-theme
  • Remuneration or pay
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Staples
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders request the Management Development and Compensation Committee (Committee) of the Board of Directors take into consideration the pay grades, salary ranges, and stock ownership incentives (such as, but not limited to, stock grants, performance share units, employee stock purchase plans, restricted stock units, and options) of all classifications of Company employees when setting target amounts for CEO compensation. The Committee should describe in the Company’s proxy statements for annual shareholder meetings how it complies with this requested policy. Compliance with this policy is excused where it will result in the violation of any existing contractual obligation or the terms of any existing compensation plan.
Supporting statement
To ensure that our Company’s CEO compensation is reasonable relative to our Company’s overall employee pay philosophy and structure, the Committee should also consider the pay grades, salary ranges, and stock ownership incentives of all Company employees when setting CEO compensation target amounts. This proposal does not require the Committee to use other employee pay data in a specific way to set CEO compensation targets. Under this proposal, the Committee will have discretion to determine how other employee pay and stock incentives should impact CEO compensation targets. The current system of determining CEO compensation without fully considering the pay, including stock ownership, of average company employees has led to glaring inequality between the CEO. The last reported ratio of the CEO’s annual total compensation to that of the median employee’s total annual compensation was 279:1. A similar ratio focused on stock ownership would probably be higher. From 1973 to 2018, inflation—adjusted wages for nonsupervisory American workers were essentially flat.1 Meanwhile, a dollar’s worth of stock grew (in real terms) to $14.09.2 Those working for a living have seen their incomes stagnate, while those with significant income from capital ownership have done very well. Our Company has stock incentive plans for employees but should track and disclose the percentage of employees who participate and at what rates. Our Company should measure and disclose its progress towards an employee ownership culture.3 Employee ownership is correlated with better firm performance, fewer layoffs, better employee compensation and benefits, higher median household wealth, longer median job tenure, and reduced racial and gender wealth gaps.4 Employee engagement and trust are crucial to success. Chief Justice Strine and Kirby M. Smith, wrote that expanding the compensation committee’s perspective beyond executive compensation would make the committee think about the company’s workforce as a whole and result in directors who have a better grasp on how human talent matters for the company’s business strategy and operations.5

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.