2. 考研
  3. One reason why shareholder activism has been increasing is that regulators have encouraged it, especially on pay. For a decade B

One reason why shareholder activism has been increasing is that regulators have encouraged it, especially on pay. For a decade B

admin2018-03-01  52
问题     One reason why shareholder activism has been increasing is that regulators have encouraged it, especially on pay. For a decade Britain has required firms to give shareholders a non-binding annual vote on executive pay. The colossal Dodd-Frank act of 2010 gave shareholders in American companies a "say on pay", too.
    Now comes two new moves. On March 3rd the Swiss voted to oblige firms to hold a binding annual vote on director’s pay: in the small print, the referendum also banned golden handshakes and severance packages for board members, and bonuses that encourage the buying or selling of firms. Then on March 5th EU finance ministers (with only Britain objecting) agreed to cap bankers’ bonuses to 100% of their basic salary, or 200% if shareholders vote for it.
    If the Swiss had merely given shareholders an annual vote on pay, it would have been a good thing; but the accompanying bans are not. There are times when a golden handshake to a talented manager can be in shareholders’ interests: far better to let the owners vote on it than restrict the firm from trying it.
    The EU’s proposal has less still to recommend it. The rationale for it is that banking bonuses have encouraged risk taking, because they reward bankers hugely for bets that come off and punish them only slightly for those that don’t. But banks have come a long way since the crisis, by deferring bonuses and making them partly payable in their own debt and equity. Blunt laws could undermine such progress. And bonus caps will either hold pay down, thus sending clever people elsewhere, or push up salaries, thus making pay less responsive to performance. Enpowering shareholders is a good idea; requiring them to channel populist fury is not.
What can be learned from the second paragraph?
选项 A、Executives’ pay and bonuses may be curbed.
B、Employees’ salaries will be lower than before.
C、Directors’ pay will be decided by the government.
D、The new moves will be favored by board members.
答案A
解析 该题答案来源于第二段第二句：On March 3rd the Swiss voted to oblige firms to hold a binding annual vote on director’s pay：in the small print，the referendum also banned golden hand—shakes and severance packages for board members，and bonuses that encourage the buying or selling of firms．其中，“binding annual vote on director’s pay(对高管工资具有约束力的投票)”，“banned...bonuses that encourage the buying or selling of firms(禁止鼓励公司买卖的红利)”，即限制了红利，故A项Executives’ pay and bonuses may be curbed(高管的工资和奖金可能受到限制)是正确的。选项B中的“employees’ salaries”是文章没提到的，故属于无中生有。选项C中的“decided by the government(由政府决定)”与原文提到的“annual vote(每年投票决定)”完全不符，故错误。选项D中的“favored by board members(受到董事会成员的欢迎)”与原文“banned golden handshakes and severance packages for board members(禁止对董事会成员发放解雇费或遣散费)”不符，故错误。综上所述，答案为选项A。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/MABZ777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)