RBI/2011-12/349
DBOD No.BC.72/29.67.001/2011-12
DBOD No.BC.72/29.67.001/2011-12
January 13, 2012
All Private Sector and Foreign Banks operating in India
Dear Sir / Madam,
Guidelines on Compensation of Whole Time
Directors / Chief Executive
Officers / Risk takers and Control function staff, etc.
Officers / Risk takers and Control function staff, etc.
The compensation practices, especially of large financial
institutions, were one of the important factors which contributed to the recent
global financial crisis. Employees were too often rewarded for increasing
the short-term profit without adequate recognition of the risks and long-term consequences
that their activities posed to the organizations. These perverse incentives
amplified the excessive risk taking that severely threatened the global
financial system. The compensation issue has, therefore, been at the
centre stage of the regulatory reforms.
2. To address the issues in a coordinated manner across
jurisdictions, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) has brought out a set of
principles and implementation standards on sound compensation practices in
April and September 2009, respectively. The principles are intended to reduce
incentives towards excessive risk taking that may arise from the structure of
compensation schemes. The principles call for effective governance of
compensation, alignment of compensation with prudent risk taking, effective
supervisory oversight and stakeholder engagement. The principles have been
endorsed by the G-20 countries and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision
(BCBS) and are under implementation across jurisdictions.
3. In this background, an announcement was made in the
Second Quarter Review of Monetary Policy 2009-10 that in line with the steps
taken by the global community, Reserve Bank will issue guidelines to Private
Sector Banks and Foreign Banks on sound compensation policy. Accordingly, draft
guidelines on compensation of whole time directors /Chief Executive
Officers/other Risk takers and Control function staff were framed and placed on
the Reserve Bank’s website in July 2010 for public comments. A large number of
comments/ suggestions were received on the draft guidelines and it was proposed
in the Second Quarter Review of Monetary Policy for 2010-11 to issue final
guidelines by end-December 2010. Meanwhile, in October 2010, the BCBS brought
out a consultative paper titled Range of Methodologies for Risk and
Performance Alignment of Remuneration, for public comments. Therefore, the
implementation of the Reserve Bank’s guidelines on compensation policy was
deferred till 2012-13 and banks were advised through a press release on
February 23, 2011 to refer to the BCBS consultative paper and begin preparatory
work.
4. The BCBS has since published in May 2011 the final report
on Range of Methodologies for Risk and Performance Alignment of
Remuneration. The main objectives of the report are to present certain
remuneration practices and methodologies that support sound incentives and also
the elements influencing the effectiveness of risk alignment that should be
considered by banks when developing their methodologies and by supervisors,
when reviewing and assessing banks’ practices.
5. In July 2011, the BCBS in consultation with the FSB has also
published Pillar 3 disclosure requirements for remuneration.
6. Taking into account the stipulations in these documents and the
comments received on the draft guidelines, Reserve Bank has finalized the
compensation guidelines enclosed as Annex for implementation by private sector
and foreign banks from the financial year 2012-13. These guidelines will
supersede the Reserve Bank’s extant guidelines relating to compensation.
7. As hitherto, private sector and foreign banks operating in
India would be required to obtain regulatory approval for grant of remuneration
to WTDs/ CEOs in terms of Section 35B of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (B.R.
Act, 1949). The approval process will involve, inter alia, an assessment
whether the compensation policies and practices are in accordance with the FSB
Principles.
8. Please acknowledge receipt.
Yours faithfully,
(Murli Radhakrishnan)
Chief General Manager
Chief General Manager
Encl: As above
Guidelines on Compensation of Whole Time
Directors /
Chief Executive Officers / Other Risk Takers
Chief Executive Officers / Other Risk Takers
A. The Financial Stability Board (FSB) Principles for Sound
Compensation Practices
1. The Principles for Sound Compensation Practices issued by the
FSB in April 2009 aim to ensure effective governance of compensation, alignment
of compensation with prudent risk taking and effective supervisory oversight
and stakeholder engagement in compensation. The Principles in brief are as
under:
(i) Effective governance of compensation
- The firm’s
board of directors must actively oversee the compensation system’s
design and operation.
- The firm’s
board of directors must monitor and review the compensation system to
ensure the system operates as intended.
- Staff
engaged in financial and risk control must be independent, have
appropriate authority, and be compensated in a manner that is independent
of the business areas they oversee and commensurate with their key role in
the firm.
(ii) Effective alignment of compensation with prudent risk
taking
- Compensation
must be adjusted for all types of risk.
- Compensation
outcomes must be symmetric with risk outcomes.
- Compensation
payout schedules must be sensitive to the time horizon of risks.
- The mix of
cash, equity and other forms of compensation must be consistent with risk
alignment.
(iii) Effective supervisory oversight and engagement by
stakeholders
- Supervisory
review of compensation practices must be rigorous and sustained, and
deficiencies must be addressed promptly with supervisory action.
- Firms must
disclose clear, comprehensive and timely information about their
compensation practices to facilitate constructive engagement by all
stakeholders.
2. Implementation Standards issued by the FSB in September
2009 focus on areas in which especially rapid progress is needed. They do not
fully cover all aspects of the FSB Principles but prioritise areas that should
be addressed by firms and supervisors to achieve effective global
implementation of the Principles.
3. The guidelines delineated below are based on the above
mentioned Principles and Implementation Standards of the FSB, as well as
current statutory and regulatory framework in India. Banks are required to take
steps immediately to implement the guidelines by putting in place necessary
policy/ infrastructure.
B. Compensation guidelines to Private Sector Banks
1. Effective governance of compensation
1.1 Guideline 1: Compensation Policy
Banks should formulate and adopt a comprehensive compensation
policy covering all their employees and conduct annual review thereof. The
policy should cover all aspects of the compensation structure such as fixed
pay, perquisites, bonus, guaranteed pay, severance package, stock, pension
plan, gratuity, etc., taking into account these guidelines.
The process of framing/reviewing the policy should be completed by
March 2012 for implementation from the financial year 2012-13.
1.2 Guideline 2: Board and Remuneration Committee (RC)
The Board of directors of banks should constitute a Remuneration
Committee (RC) of the Board to oversee the framing, review and implementation
of compensation policy of the bank on behalf of the board. The RC should have a
minimum of three members and should include at least one member from Risk
Management Committee of the Board. The majority of members of the RC should be
independent non-executive directors. The RC should work in close coordination
with Risk Management Committee of the bank, in order to achieve effective
alignment between remuneration and risks. The RC should also ensure that the
cost/income ratio of the bank supports the remuneration package consistent with
maintenance of sound capital adequacy ratio.
2. Effective alignment of compensation with prudent risk
taking
2.1 Guideline 3: For Whole Time Directors / Chief Executive
Officers
Banks should ensure that for the WTDs / CEOs:
- compensation
is adjusted for all types of risk,
- compensation
outcomes are symmetric with risk outcomes, and
- compensation
payouts are sensitive to the time horizon of the risk.
- The mix of
cash, equity and other forms of compensation must be consistent with risk
alignment.
A wide variety of measures of credit, market and liquidity risks
may be used by banks in implementation of risk adjustment. The risk adjustment
methods should preferably have both quantitative and judgmental elements.
The compensation structure for the WTDs/CEOs of the bank may be as
under:
2.1.1 Fixed pay
Banks are required to ensure that the fixed portion of
compensation is reasonable, taking into account all relevant factors including
the industry practice.
2.1.2 Variable pay composition and deferral
While designing the compensation arrangements it should be ensured
that there is a proper balance between fixed pay and variable pay. However,
variable pay should not exceed 70% of the fixed pay in a year. Within this
ceiling, at higher levels of responsibility the proportion of variable pay
should be higher. The variable pay could be in cash, or stock linked
instruments or mix of both. The Employees Stock Option Plan (ESOP) prevalent in
India, may be excluded from the components of variable pay. The deterioration
in the financial performance of the bank should generally lead to a contraction
in the total amount of variable remuneration paid.
Where the variable pay constitutes a substantial portion of the
fixed pay, say 50% or more, an appropriate portion of the variable pay, say 40%
to 60% must be deferred for over a period. The bank may define what is
‘substantial’ in its compensation policy. There should be proper balance
between the cash and stock / share components (other than ESOP) in the variable
pay in case the variable compensation contains stock or share linked
instruments (other than ESOP).
ESOP is kept outside the computation of the total compensation of
an employee for the purpose of this guideline, but since it is used as a
compensation as well as retention tool by banks, the extent of ESOP should be
reasonable. However, norms for grant of ESOP should be framed by banks in
conformity with relevant statutory provisions and SEBI guidelines, and should
form part of the bank’s compensation policy. The details of ESOP granted should
also be disclosed in terms of the disclosure requirements stipulated in this
guideline.
2.1.3 Variable pay –timing
In case of deferral arrangements of variable pay, the deferral
period should not be less than three years. Compensation payable under deferral
arrangements should vest no faster than on a pro rata basis.
2.1.4 Malus / Clawback
In the event of negative contributions of the bank and/or the
relevant line of business in any year, the deferred compensation should be
subjected to malus/clawback arrangements. A malus arrangement permits the bank
to prevent vesting of all or part of the amount of a deferred remuneration.
Malus arrangement does not reverse vesting after it has already occurred. A
clawback, on the other hand, is a contractual agreement between the employee
and the bank in which the employee agrees to return previously paid or vested
remuneration to the bank under certain circumstances. Banks may put in place
appropriate modalities to incorporate malus / clawback mechanism in respect of
variable pay, taking into account relevant statutory and regulatory
stipulations as applicable.
2.1.5 Guaranteed bonus
Guaranteed bonuses are not consistent with sound risk management
or the pay-for performance principles and should not be part of compensation
plan. Therefore, joining / sign on bonus should only occur in the context of
hiring new staff and be limited to first year. However, guaranteed bonus
should be in the form of ESOPs only since payments in cash upfront would create
perverse incentives. Further, banks should not grant severance pay other than
accrued benefits (gratuity, pension, etc.) except in cases where it is
mandatory by any statute.
2.1.6 Hedging
Banks should not provide any facility or funds or permit
employees to insure or hedge their compensation structure to offset the
risk alignment effects embedded in their compensation arrangement. To enforce
the same, banks should establish appropriate compliance arrangements.
2.2 Guideline 4: For risk control and compliance staff
2.2.1 Members of staff engaged in financial and risk control
should be compensated in a manner that is independent of the business areas
they oversee and commensurate with their key role in the bank. Effective
independence and appropriate authority of such staff are necessary to preserve
the integrity of financial and risk management’s influence on incentive
compensation. Back office and risk control employees play a key role in
ensuring the integrity of risk measures. If their own compensation is
importantly affected by short-term measures, their independence will be
compromised. If their compensation is too low, the quality of such employees
may be insufficient to their tasks and their authority may be undermined. The
mix of fixed and variable compensation for control function personnel should be
weighted in favour of fixed compensation.
2.2.2 Subject to the above, in devising compensation structure,
banks may adopt principles similar to principles enunciated for WTD/CEO, as
appropriate.
2.3 Guidelines 5: For other categories of staff
For the other categories of staff, banks may devise appropriate
compensation structure. However, in doing so, banks may adopt principles
similar to the principles enunciated for WTD/CEO as appropriate.
2.4 Banks are advised to refer to the BCBS report
entitled Range of Methodologies for Risk and Performance Alignment of
Remuneration published in May 2011 for guidance. A gist of the
methodologies is furnished at the Appendix 1. The report is primarily of a
technical nature and is not intended to be prescriptive. It intends to enhance
the banks’ and supervisors’ understanding of risk-adjusted remuneration. This
report, by providing some clarification on design of risk-adjusted remuneration
schemes, could support and facilitate the greater adoption of sound practices
in the banking sector.
3. Disclosure and engagement by stakeholders
3.1 Guideline 6: Disclosure
Banks are required to make disclosure on remuneration on an annual
basis at the minimum, in their Annual Financial Statements.
3.2 To improve clarity on disclosure, banks may make the
disclosures in table or chart format and make disclosures for previous as well
as the current reporting year (previous year’s disclosure need not be made when
the disclosures are made for the first time). The key disclosures required to
be made by banks have been given in the Appendix 2 to the guidelines.
C. Compensation Guidelines to Foreign Banks
1. At present, foreign banks are operating in India through
branch mode of presence. The compensation policy of these banks is
governed by their respective Head Office policies. In the light of the
initiative taken by the FSB, G-20 and the BCBS endorsement of the FSB
principles, it is expected that Head Offices of most of these banks would align
their compensation policies in line with the FSB principles. Foreign Banks
operating in India will, therefore, be required to submit a declaration to
Reserve Bank annually from their Head Offices to the effect that their
compensation structure in India, including that of CEO’s, is in conformity with
the FSB principles and standards. RBI would take this into account while
according approval of CEOs’ compensation.
2. The compensation proposals for CEOs and other staff of foreign
banks operating in India which have not adopted the FSB principles in their
home country are required to implement the compensation guidelines as
prescribed for private sector banks in India, to the extent applicable to them.
D. Regulatory and Supervisory Approval / Oversight
1. Banks may be aware, that in terms of the Section
10(1)(b)(iii) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (B.R. Act, 1949), no banking
company shall employ or continue the employment of any person whose
remuneration is, in the opinion of the Reserve Bank, excessive.
2. As hitherto, private sector and foreign banks operating
in India would be required to obtain regulatory approval for grant of
remuneration to WTDs/ CEOs in terms of Section 35B of the B.R. Act, 1949.
The approval process will involve an assessment whether the compensation
policies and practices are in accordance with the FSB Principles, including
inter alia, whether there is appropriate balance between fixed and variable
pay, whether adequate deferrals are built in the variable component and whether
cost/ income ratio supports the remuneration package consistent with
maintenance of sound capital adequacy ratio.
3. Banks’ compensation policies would be subject to
supervisory oversight including review under the Supervisory Review and
Evaluation Process (SREP) under Pillar 2 of Basel II framework.
Deficiencies would have the effect of increasing the risk profile of banks with
attendant consequences including a requirement of additional capital if the
deficiencies are very significant.
Methodologies for risk and performance alignment
of remuneration
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) in consultation
with the FSB has published a report in May 2011 entitledRange of
Methodologies for Risk and Performance Alignment of Remuneration. The main
objectives of the report are to present (i) some remuneration practices
and methodologies that support sound incentives and (ii) the challenges or
elements influencing the effectiveness of risk alignment that should be considered
by banks when developing their methodologies and by supervisors, when reviewing
and assessing banks’ practices.
Some of the key stipulations of the report are as under:
- In order
for incentive-based remuneration to work, the variable part of remuneration
should be truly and effectively variable and can even be reduced to zero
in line with the symmetry principle defined by
the FSB. A key element that supervisors expect is the ability for
banks to demonstrate that the methodologies they developed to adjust
variable remuneration to risk and performance are appropriate to their
specific circumstances.
- The
methodologies for adjusting remuneration to risk and performance should
also be consistent with the general risk management and corporate
governance framework.
- Performance
measures and their relation to remuneration packages should be clearly
defined at the beginning of the performance measurement period to ensure
that the employees perceive the incentives mechanism. The usual annual
determination of bonuses should be based on rules, processes and
objectives known in advance, recognizing that some discretion will always
be needed.
- Banks
should use a combination of financial and non-financial measures to assess
employee performance and adapt the measurement to each employee’s specific
situation. Qualitative factors (like knowledge, skills or abilities),
might play an important role when it comes to judging and rewarding some
activities- particularly when these serve to reinforce the bank’s risk
management goals.
- The nature
and extent to which risk adjustments are needed depends first on the
extent to which performance measures capture risks, but in all cases, some
form of risk adjustment is needed as remuneration is often awarded before
the final outcome of an activity is known. Risks taken need to be
estimated (ex ante), risk outcomes observed (ex post) and both ex ante
estimates and ex post outcomes should affect payoffs.
- Risk
adjustments need to take into account the nature of the risks involved and
the time horizons over which they could emerge. The impact of remuneration
adjustments should be linked to actions taken by employees and / or
business units, and their impact on the level of risk taken on by the
bank.
- The nature
of the award process, which links the variable remuneration of each
individual employee with bonus pools and the total amount of variable
remuneration at a bank’s level, is also an area that should be carefully
considered by banks and supervisors, as it directly influences how and
when performance and risk adjustment are or can be used.
Disclosure requirements for remuneration
Remuneration
|
||
Qualitative disclosures
|
(a)
|
Information relating to the
composition and mandate of the Remuneration Committee.
|
(b)
|
Information relating to the design
and structure of remuneration processes and the key features and objectives
of remuneration policy.
|
|
(c)
|
Description of the ways in which
current and future risks are taken into account in the remuneration
processes. It should include the nature and type of the key measures used to
take account of these risks.
|
|
(d)
|
Description of the ways in which
the bank seeks to link performance during a performance measurement period
with levels of remuneration.
|
|
(e)
|
A discussion of the bank’s policy
on deferral and vesting of variable remuneration and a discussion of the bank’s
policy and criteria for adjusting deferred remuneration before vesting and
after vesting.
|
|
(f)
|
Description of the different forms
of variable remuneration (i.e. cash, shares, ESOPs and other forms) that the
bank utilizes and the rationale for using these different forms.
|
|
Quantitative disclosures
(The quantitative disclosures
should only cover Whole Time Directors / Chief Executive Officer/ Other
Risk Takers)
|
(g)
|
• Number of meetings held by the
Remuneration Committee during the financial year and remuneration paid to its
members.
|
(h)
|
• Number of employees having
received a variable remuneration award during the financial year.
• Number and total amount of
sign-on awards made during the financial year.
• Details of guaranteed bonus, if
any, paid as joining / sign on bonus.
• Details of severance pay, in
addition to accrued benefits, if any.
|
|
(i)
|
• Total amount of outstanding
deferred remuneration, split into cash, shares and share-linked instruments
and other forms.
• Total amount of deferred
remuneration paid out in the financial year.
|
|
(j)
|
• Breakdown of amount of
remuneration awards for the financial year to show fixed and variable,
deferred and non-deferred.
|
|
(k)
|
• Total amount of outstanding
deferred remuneration and retained remuneration exposed to ex post explicit
and / or implicit adjustments.
• Total amount of reductions
during the financial year due to ex- post explicit adjustments.
• Total amount of reductions
during the financial year due to ex- post implicit adjustments.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment