View from City Road: Unfair on Laura Ashley shareholders
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.It is a pity that Laura Ashley's reluctance to spend money does not extend to the compensation paid to Jim Maxmin, its former chief executive. A pounds 1.2m pay-off looks a rich reward for falling out with his fellow directors, something that is surely one of the hazards of business life.
Mr Maxmin's two-year contract was below the three-year maximum recommended by Cadbury, so Laura Ashley can argue that the payment was squeaky clean as far as corporate governance guidelines are concerned. But that just underlines the pitfalls of devising such universal rules - particularly when salaries and pensions are already at such generous levels.
Mr Maxmin chose to go because the board would not sanction the level of investment he wanted. It was his decision to leave, or so he claimed; Laura Ashley's shareholders should not be made to pay for it.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments