|
|
|
Notice of 2010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders
2000 Westchester Avenue
Purchase, New York
May 18, 2010, 9:00 a.m., local time
| April 12, 2010
Fellow shareholder:
I cordially invite you to attend Morgan Stanleys 2010 annual meeting
of shareholders to:
| |
|
|
elect members of the Board of Directors; |
| |
|
|
ratify the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as independent auditor; |
| |
|
|
consider a non-binding advisory vote to approve executive compensation; |
| |
|
|
approve the amendment of the 2007 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan; |
| |
|
|
consider five shareholder proposals; and |
| |
|
|
transact such other business as may properly come before the meeting. |
Our Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR the
election of directors, the ratification of the appointment of the auditor, the approval of the compensation of executives as disclosed in this proxy statement and the amendment of the 2007 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan, and
AGAINST the shareholder proposals. We enclose
our letter to shareholders, our proxy statement, our annual report on Form 10-K and a proxy card. Please submit your proxy. Thank you for your support of Morgan Stanley.
Very truly yours,
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
|
| John J. Mack |
|
James P. Gorman |
| Chairman |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
Table of Contents
Morgan Stanley
1585 Broadway
New York, New York 10036
April 12, 2010
Proxy Statement
We are sending you this proxy statement in connection with the solicitation of proxies by our Board of Directors for the 2010 annual meeting of
shareholders. We are mailing this proxy statement and the accompanying form of proxy to shareholders on or about April 13, 2010. In this proxy statement, we refer to Morgan Stanley as the Company, we, our or
us and the Board of Directors as the Board. In December 2008, the Board approved a change in the Companys fiscal year end from November 30 to December 31, beginning January 1, 2009. The period from
December 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008 was a transition period (the December 2008 transition period). Whenever we refer to Morgan Stanleys fiscal year prior to 2009, we mean the twelve-month period ending November 30 of the
stated year. When we refer to 2009, we mean the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2009.
Annual Meeting Information
Date and Location. We will hold the annual meeting on Tuesday, May 18, 2010 at 9:00 a.m., local time, at our offices at
2000 Westchester Avenue, Purchase, New York.
Admission. Only record or beneficial owners of Morgan Stanleys common stock or their proxies may attend the annual
meeting in person. When you arrive at the annual meeting, you must present photo identification, such as a drivers license. Beneficial owners must also provide evidence of stock holdings, such as a recent brokerage account or bank statement.
Electronic Access. You may listen
to the meeting at www.morganstanley.com/about/ir/index.html. Please go to our website prior to the annual meeting to register.
Voting Information
Record Date. The record date for the annual meeting is March 22, 2010. You may vote all shares of Morgan Stanleys
common stock that you owned as of the close of business on that date. Each share of common stock entitles you to one vote on each matter voted on at the annual meeting. On the record date, 1,398,833,922 shares of common stock were outstanding. We
need a majority of the shares of common stock outstanding on the record date represented, in person or by proxy, to hold the annual meeting.
Confidential Voting. Our Amended and Restated Bylaws (Bylaws) provide that your vote is confidential and will not be
disclosed to any officer, director or employee, except in certain limited circumstances such as when you request or consent to disclosure. Voting of the shares held in the Morgan Stanley 401(k) Plan and Morgan Stanley 401(k) Savings Plan
(401(k) Plans) also is confidential. Submitting
Voting Instructions for Shares Held Through a Broker. If you hold shares through a broker, follow the voting instructions you receive from your broker. If you want to vote in person at the annual meeting, you must obtain a
legal proxy from your broker and present it at the annual meeting. If you do not submit voting instructions to your broker, your broker may still be permitted to vote your shares. New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) member brokers may vote your shares as
described below.
| |
|
Discretionary Items. The ratification of the appointment of Morgan Stanleys independent auditor and the
non-binding advisory vote to approve the compensation of executives as disclosed in this proxy statement are discretionary items. NYSE member brokers that do not receive instructions from beneficial owners may vote
|
1
| |
on this proposal in the following manner: (1) Morgan Stanleys subsidiaries, Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated (MS&Co.) and Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC (MSSB LLC), may
vote uninstructed shares only in the same proportion as the votes cast by all other beneficial owners on the proposal; and (2) all other NYSE member brokers may vote uninstructed shares in their discretion. |
| |
|
Non-discretionary Items. The election of directors, the Companys proposal to amend the 2007 Equity Incentive
Compensation Plan and the shareholder proposals are non-discretionary items. Accordingly, absent specific voting instructions from beneficial owners on these proposals, NYSE member brokers, including MS&Co. and MSSB LLC, may not vote
on these proposals. | If you do not submit voting
instructions and your broker does not have discretion to vote your shares on a matter, the broker will return the proxy card without voting (referred to as broker non-votes). Your shares will not be counted in determining the vote on
that matter, but will be counted for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum.
Important Notice Regarding Director Elections. Due to recent rule changes, the election of directors is no longer considered
a discretionary item and your shares will remain unvoted for director elections if your broker does not receive instructions from you. If you hold your shares through a broker, it is critically important that you submit your voting instructions if
you want your shares to count in the election of directors.
Submitting Voting Instructions for Shares Held in Your Name. If you hold shares as a record holder, you may vote by
submitting a proxy for your shares by mail, telephone or Internet as described on the proxy card. If you submit your proxy via the Internet, you may incur Internet access charges. Submitting your proxy will not limit your right to vote in
person at the annual meeting. A properly completed and submitted proxy will be voted in accordance with your instructions, unless you subsequently revoke your proxy. If you submit a signed proxy card without indicating your voting instructions, the
person voting the proxy will vote your shares according to the Boards recommendations.
Submitting Voting Instructions for Shares Held in Employee Plans. If you hold shares in, or have been awarded stock units
under, certain employee plans, you will receive directions on how to submit your voting instructions. Shares held in the following employee plans also are subject to the following rules.
| |
|
401(k) Plans, Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). The Bank of New York Mellon (Mellon), the 401(k) Plans
trustee, and Mellon Investor Services LLC (MIS), the ESPP administrator, as applicable, must receive your voting instructions for the common stock held on your behalf in these plans on or before May 13, 2010. If Mellon or MIS, as applicable,
does not receive your voting instructions by that date, it will vote your shares (in the case of the 401(k) Plans, together with other unvoted, forfeited and unallocated shares in the 401(k) Plans) in the same proportion as the voting instructions
that it receives from other participants in the applicable plan. On March 22, 2010, there were 48,569,945 shares in the 401(k) Plans and 5,995,162 shares in the ESPP. |
| |
|
Other Equity-Based Plans. State Street Bank and Trust Company acts as trustee for a trust (Trust) that holds
shares of common stock underlying stock units awarded to employees under several of Morgan Stanleys equity-based plans. Employees allocated shares held in the Trust must submit their voting instructions for receipt by the trustee on or before
May 13, 2010. If the trustee does not receive your instructions by that date, it will vote your shares, together with shares held in the Trust that are unallocated or held on behalf of former Morgan Stanley employees and employees in certain
jurisdictions outside the United States, in the same proportion as the voting instructions that it receives for shares held in the Trust in connection with such plans. On March 22, 2010, 114,896,152 shares were held in the Trust in connection
with such plans. | Revoking Your
Proxy. You can revoke your proxy at any time before your shares are voted by (1) delivering a written revocation notice prior to the annual meeting to Martin M. Cohen, Secretary, Morgan Stanley, 1585 Broadway, New
York, New York 10036; (2) submitting a later proxy that we receive no later than the conclusion of voting at the annual meeting; or (3) voting in person at the annual meeting. Attending the annual meeting does not revoke your proxy unless
you vote in person at the meeting.
2
Votes Required to Elect Directors. Each director will be elected by a majority
of the votes cast with respect to such director. A majority of the votes cast means that the number of votes cast for a director exceeds the number of votes cast against that director. Under Delaware law, if the
director is not elected at the annual meeting, the director will continue to serve on the Board as a holdover director. As required by the Companys Bylaws, each director has submitted an irrevocable letter of resignation as
director that becomes effective if he or she is not elected by the shareholders and the Board accepts the resignation. If a director is not elected, the Nominating and Governance Committee will consider the directors resignation and recommend
to the Board whether to accept or reject the resignation. The Board will decide whether to accept or reject the resignation and publicly disclose its decision, including the rationale behind the decision if it rejects the resignation, within 90 days
after the election results are certified. Votes Required to
Adopt Other Proposals. The ratification of Deloitte & Touche LLPs appointment as independent auditor, the approval of the compensation of executives as disclosed in this proxy statement and the approval of
the shareholder proposals each require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of common stock represented at the annual meeting and entitled to vote thereon. The approval of the amendment of the 2007 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan
requires a majority of votes cast, provided that the total votes cast must represent a majority of the shares entitled to vote on the proposal.
Abstaining and Broker Non-Votes. You may vote abstain for any nominee in the election of
directors and on the other proposals. Shares voting abstain on any nominee for director will be excluded entirely from the vote and will have no effect on the election of directors. Shares voting abstain on the other
proposals will be counted as present at the annual meeting for purposes of establishing the presence of a quorum and your abstention will have the effect of a vote against the proposal. In addition, failure to cast a vote or a broker non-vote can
have the effect of a vote against the proposal to approve the amendment of the 2007 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan if such failure or broker non-vote results in the total number of votes cast on the proposal not representing over 50% of all
shares of common stock entitled to vote on the proposal.
Item 1Election of Directors
Director Selection and Nomination Process. The Nominating and Governance Committees charter provides that the
Committee is appointed by the Board of Directors to identify individuals qualified to become Board members and to recommend to the Board the director nominees at annual meetings of shareholders. In discharging its duties, the Nominating and
Governance Committees charter provides that the Committee will actively seek and identify nominees for recommendation to the Board consistent with the Board membership criteria set forth in the Corporate Governance Policies. The Corporate
Governance Policies provide that the Board values members who combine a broad spectrum of experience and expertise with a reputation for integrity and that directors should have experience in positions with a high degree of responsibility, be
leaders in the companies or institutions with which they are affiliated and be selected based upon contributions they can make to the Board and management and their ability to represent the interests of shareholders. While the Board has not adopted
a policy regarding diversity, the Corporate Governance Policies provide that the Board will take into account diversity of a director candidates perspectives, background and other relevant demographics. The Nominating and Governance Committee
and Board may also determine specific skills and experience they are seeking in director candidates based on the needs of the Company at a specific time. In considering candidates for the Board, the Nominating and Governance Committee considers the
entirety of each candidates credentials in the context of these criteria.
As set forth in its charter, the Nominating and Governance Committee may consider director candidates proposed by shareholders and the Board has adopted a
policy regarding director candidates recommended by shareholders discussed under Shareholder Nominations for Director Candidates herein. The Nominating and Governance Committee may also retain and terminate, in its sole discretion, a
third party to assist in identifying director candidates or to assist in gathering information regarding a director candidates background and experience and to approve the fee that the Company pays for these services. Members of the Nominating
and Governance
3
Committee, the Lead Director and other members of the Board interview potential director candidates as part of the selection process when evaluating new director candidates.
When the Board nominates directors for election at an annual meeting, it
evaluates the experience, qualifications, attributes and skills that an individual director candidate contributes to the Board as a whole to assist the Board in discharging its duties. As part of the ongoing process to evaluate these attributes, the
Board performs an annual self-evaluation and has adopted a Corporate Governance Policy that provides that the Board expects a director who changes his or her present job responsibility to advise and to offer to tender his or her resignation for
consideration by the Board. Our Board currently has fourteen
(14) directors. The Board stands for election at each annual meeting of shareholders. Each director holds office until his or her successor has been duly elected and qualified or the directors earlier resignation, death or removal.
In connection with its 2008 issuance of Series B Non-Cumulative
Non-Voting Perpetual Convertible Preferred Stock (Series B Preferred Stock) to Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. (MUFG), Morgan Stanley entered into an Investor Agreement with MUFG dated October 13, 2008 and amended as of October 27,
2008 (Investor Agreement), whereby Morgan Stanley agreed to take all lawful action to cause one of MUFGs senior officers or directors to be a member of Morgan Stanleys Board of Directors. Pursuant to the terms of the Investor Agreement,
Mr. Nobuyuki Hirano was elected to the Board, effective March 10, 2009. Mr. Hirano subsequently was elected by shareholders at the 2009 annual meeting of shareholders.
In light of the Companys conversion into a financial holding company,
an executive officer of the Company recommended Mr. James H. Hance, Jr. as a potential director candidate to the Nominating and Governance Committee and to the committees third party director search firm given his extensive financial
services background as described below. The Lead Director and other directors met or spoke with Mr. Hance. The Committee unanimously recommended to the Board that Mr. Hance be elected as a director, and the Board unanimously elected
Mr. Hance, effective July 1, 2009. Mr. Charles E. Phillips, Jr. will not stand for re-election at this annual meeting of shareholders.
2010 Director Nominees. The Board has nominated the thirteen (13) director nominees below for election at the 2010
annual meeting of shareholders in accordance with the Corporate Governance Policies. Each nominee has indicated that he or she will serve if elected. We do not anticipate that any nominee will be unable or unwilling to stand for election, but if
that happens, your proxy will be voted for another person nominated by the Board.
Below are descriptions of the experience, qualifications, attributes and skills of each of the Companys director nominees. The Company believes that
an effective board consists of a diverse group of individuals who bring a variety of complementary skills that the Nominating and Governance Committee and Board consider in the broader context of the Boards overall composition, with a view
toward constituting a board that has the best skill set and experience to oversee the Companys business. As indicated below, our directors have a combined wealth of leadership experience derived from extensive service guiding large, complex
organizations as executive leaders or board members and in government and academia. They have substantive knowledge and skills applicable to our business, including in the regulatory; public accounting and financial reporting; finance; risk
management; business development; operations; strategic planning; management development, succession and compensation; corporate governance; public policy; international; banking; and financial services areas. The Nominating and Governance Committee
regularly reviews the composition of the Board in light of Morgan Stanleys evolving business requirements and its assessment of the Boards performance to ensure that the Board has the appropriate mix of skills needed for the broad set of
challenges that it confronts.
4
|
|
|
|
|
Roy J. Bostock
(69). Mr. Bostock served as Chairman of the Partnership for a Drug-Free America from 2002 until 2010 and Chairman of the Committee for Economic Development from
2002 to 2005. He worked in the advertising agency business for 38 years beginning in 1964. Mr. Bostock was Chairman of B|Com3 Group, Inc., an advertising and marketing services firm that is now part of the Publicis Groupe S.A., from 2000 to 2001. He
also served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of DArcy, Masius Benton & Bowles, an advertising and marketing services firm, and its successor firm, The MacManus Group, Inc., a global communications services holding company, from 1990
to 2000 when The MacManus Group, Inc. merged with the Leo Burnett Company to form B|Com3 Group, Inc. in 2000, and was President from 1986 to 1990 of DArcy, Masius Benton & Bowles.
Director since: 2005
Other current directorships: Delta Air Lines
Inc. (Non-Executive Vice Chairman) and Yahoo! Inc. (Non-Executive Chairman)
Mr. Bostocks varied leadership positions, including as chief executive officer of advertising and marketing services firms and in connection with
non-profit organizations and public company boards, brings to the Board the perspective of an experienced leader with strategic planning, operations and business development skills. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Erskine B. Bowles
(64). Mr. Bowles has served as President of the University of North Carolina since 2006. In 2010, he was named Co-Chair of the National Commission on Fiscal
Responsibility and Reform. Mr. Bowles has been a senior advisor since 2001 and was Managing Director from 1999 to 2001 of Carousel Capital LLC, a private investment firm. He was also a partner at the private investment firm of Forstmann Little &
Co. from 1999 to 2001. Mr. Bowles began his career in corporate finance at Morgan Stanley in 1969 and subsequently helped found and ultimately served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Bowles Hollowell Connor & Co., an investment banking
firm. He also was a founder of Kitty Hawk Capital, a venture capital firm. Mr. Bowles served as White House Chief of Staff from 1996 to 1998 and Deputy White House Chief of Staff from 1994 to 1995. He was head of the Small Business Administration
from 1993 to 1994. Mr. Bowles also served as United Nations Under Secretary General, Deputy Special Envoy for Tsunami Recovery in 2005.
Director since: 2005
Other current directorships: Cousins Properties Incorporated
Other directorships in the past five
years: General Motors Corporation Mr.
Bowles brings to the Board his extensive experience in the financial services industry and academia as well as distinguished public service. |
5
|
|
|
|
|
Howard J. Davies
(59). Mr. Davies has served as Director of the London School of Economics and Political Science since 2003. He was Chairman of the U.K. Financial Services
Authority, the U.K.s financial regulator, from 1997 to 2003. Mr. Davies previously served as Deputy Governor of the Bank of England from 1995 to 1997. He was Director General of the Confederation of British Industry from 1992 to 1995 and
Controller of the Audit Commission in the U.K. from 1987 to 1992. Mr. Davies worked at McKinsey & Co. from 1982 to 1987 and was seconded to the Treasurer as Special Advisor to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He previously worked at the U.K.
Treasury and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, including two years as Private Secretary to the British Ambassador in Paris.
Director since: 2004
Mr. Davies brings an international perspective to the Board as well as extensive financial regulatory, accounting and risk management experience from his
years of accomplished public service. |
|
|
|
|
James P. Gorman
(51). Mr. Gorman has served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Morgan Stanley since 2010 and as Chairman of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Holdings LLC since
2009. He was Co-President of Morgan Stanley from 2007 to 2009, Co-Head of Strategic Planning from 2007 to 2009 and President and Chief Operating Officer of the Global Wealth Management Group from 2006 to 2008. Mr. Gorman joined Merrill Lynch &
Co., Inc. in 1999 and served in various positions including Chief Marketing Officer, Head of Corporate Acquisitions Strategy and Research in 2005 and President of the Global Private Client business from 2002 to 2005. Prior to joining Merrill Lynch,
he was a senior partner at McKinsey & Co., serving in the firms financial services practice. Earlier in his career, Mr. Gorman was an attorney in Australia.
Director since: 2010
Other directorships in the past five
years: MSCI Inc. As Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, Mr. Gorman is a proven leader with an established record as a strategic thinker backed by strong operating, business development and execution skills and brings an extensive understanding of Morgan Stanleys businesses
and decades of financial services experience. |
6
|
|
|
|
|
James H. Hance, Jr.
(65). Mr. Hance has served as a Senior Advisor at The Carlyle Group, a global private equity firm, since 2005, and was Chairman of Carlyle Capital Corporation
Limited from 2006 to 2008. He joined Bank of America in 1987 as Executive Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer and served as Vice Chairman of Bank of America Corporation from 2004 to 2005, Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer from 1988
to 2004 and Director from 1999 to 2005. Prior to joining Bank of America, Mr. Hance worked at Price Waterhouse, an accounting firm, for 17 years.
Director since: 2009
Other current directorships: Cousins Properties Incorporated, Duke Energy Corporation, Rayonier Corporation and Sprint
Nextel Corporation (Non-Executive Chairman) Other
directorships in the past five years: EnPro Industries, Inc. and Summit Properties Inc.
As a former senior executive of a commercial bank, Mr. Hance brings to the Board extensive public accounting and financial reporting, commercial banking,
financial services, risk management and bank regulatory experience. |
|
|
|
|
Nobuyuki Hirano
(58). Mr. Hirano has served since 2009 as Managing Officer of MUFG, one of the worlds leading financial groups, and as Deputy President of The Bank of
Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., the core commercial banking unit of MUFG. He served as Senior Managing Director from 2008 to 2009 and Managing Director from 2006 to 2008 of The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. Mr. Hirano has held numerous senior-level
positions in Japan and abroad with the financial group since joining The Mitsubishi Bank, Ltd. in 1974, including in the Corporate Planning Office and Corporate Banking Division of The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Ltd.
Director since: 2009
Other current directorships: The Bank of
Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. Other directorships in the past
five years: Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Ltd.
In his role as a senior officer at MUFG and its associated companies, Mr. Hirano brings to the Board global leadership as well as international banking,
financial services, risk management and regulatory experience. |
7
|
|
|
|
|
C. Robert Kidder
(65). Mr. Kidder has served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of 3Stone Advisors LLC, a private investment firm, since 2006. He was Principal at Stonehenge
Partners, Inc., a private investment firm, from 2004 to 2006. Mr. Kidder served as President of Borden Capital, Inc., a company that provided financial and strategic advice to the Borden family of companies from 2001 to 2003. He was Chairman of the
Board from 1995 to 2004 and Chief Executive Officer from 1995 to 2002 of Borden Chemical, Inc. (formerly Borden, Inc.), a forest products and industrial chemicals company. Mr. Kidder was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from 1991 to 1994 and
President and Chief Executive Officer from 1988 to 1991 of Duracell International Inc. Prior to joining Duracell International Inc. in 1980, Mr. Kidder worked in planning and development at Dart Industries. He previously worked at McKinsey & Co.
as a general management consultant. Director
since: 1993 Other current
directorships: Merck & Co. Inc. (formerly Schering-Plough Corporation) and Chrysler Group LLC (Non-Executive Chairman)
Other directorships in the past five years: Electronic Data Systems Corporation
Mr. Kidder brings to the Board extensive financial and senior executive
experience, including in business development, operations and strategic planning, as well as a deep understanding of our Company, particularly in his capacity as Lead Director appointed by our independent directors. |
|
|
|
|
John J. Mack
(65). Mr. Mack has been Chairman of the Board of Directors of Morgan Stanley since 2005 and was Chief Executive Officer from 2005 to 2009. He was Chairman of Pequot
Capital Management in 2005. Mr. Mack was Co-Chief Executive Officer of Credit Suisse Group from 2003 to 2004 and President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of Credit Suisse First Boston from 2001 to 2004. He became President, Chief Operating
Officer and Director of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. in 1997 and served in that position until 2001. Mr. Mack joined Morgan Stanley in 1972 in the bond department and served as head of the Worldwide Taxable Fixed Income Division from 1985 to
1992, became Chairman of the Operating Committee in 1992 and became President in 1993.
Director since: 2005
As the Companys former Chief Executive Officer and current Chairman, Mr. Macks over 35 years of service to the Company brings to the Board a
unique understanding of Morgan Stanleys businesses and the financial services industry as well as the perspective of an experienced leader. |
8
|
|
|
|
|
Donald T. Nicolaisen
(65). Mr. Nicolaisen was Chief Accountant for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) from 2003 to 2005, where he served as the principal advisor to the
SEC on accounting and auditing matters and was responsible for formulating and administering the accounting program and policies of the SEC. He was a partner of PricewaterhouseCoopers, an accounting firm, from 1978 to 2003 and first joined Price
Waterhouse in 1967. Mr. Nicolaisen led Price Waterhouses national office for accounting and SEC services and its financial services practice and was responsible for auditing and providing risk management advice to large, complex multi-national
corporations. Director since: 2006
Other current
directorships: MGIC Investment Corporation, Verizon Communications Inc. and Zurich Financial Services
Mr. Nicolaisen brings to the Board over 40 years of regulatory, public accounting and financial reporting, risk management and financial experience and
the varied perspectives he has gained in the private sector as well as through distinguished service at the SEC. |
|
|
|
|
Charles H. Noski
(57). Mr. Noski served as Corporate Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from 2003 to 2005 and Director from 2002 to 2005 of Northrop Grumman Corporation. He
was senior advisor to The Blackstone Group in 2003. Mr. Noski was Vice Chairman of the Board and Chief Financial Officer in 2002 and Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from 1999 to 2002 of AT&T Corp. He was President,
Chief Operating Officer and Director of Hughes Electronics Corporation, then a publicly-traded subsidiary of General Motors Corporation in satellite and wireless communications, from 1997 to 1999, Vice Chairman from 1996 to 1999, Corporate Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from 1992 to 1996 and Corporate Vice President and Controller from 1990 to 1992. Previously, Mr. Noski was a partner of Deloitte & Touche LLP, an accounting firm, for 17 years, and worked in audit,
accounting and business consulting roles for clients in various industries, including financial services, and served as National Industry Director for the aerospace and defense industry.
Director since: 2005
Other current directorships: Air Products and
Chemicals, Inc., Automatic Data Processing, Inc. and Microsoft Corporation
Other directorships in the past five years: Northrop Grumman Corporation
Mr. Noskis experience as a chief operating officer and chief financial
officer, and roles in auditing, accounting and business consulting while a partner at a major accounting firm, brings extensive public accounting, financial reporting and risk management experience to the Board that is complemented by his business
and leadership skills. |
9
|
|
|
|
|
Hutham S. Olayan
(56). Ms. Olayan has been a principal and director since 1981 of The Olayan Group, a private multinational enterprise that is a diversified global investor and
operator of commercial and industrial businesses in Saudi Arabia. Ms. Olayan has been President and Chief Executive Officer of The Olayan Groups U.S. operations for more than 20 years, overseeing all investment activity originating in the
Americas. Ms. Olayan is a member of the International Advisory Board of The Blackstone Group, a director of Equity International and a former director of Thermo Electron Corporation.
Director since: 2006
Ms. Olayans extensive financial experience in the U.S. and
internationally, including the Middle East, strengthens the Boards global perspective. |
|
|
|
|
O. Griffith Sexton
(66). Mr. Sexton has served as an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School since 1995 and visiting lecturer at Princeton University since 2000, teaching
courses in corporate finance. He was an Advisory Director of Morgan Stanley from 1995 to 2008. Mr. Sexton joined Morgan Stanley in 1973 and was a Managing Director from 1985 to 1995, ultimately serving as Director of the Corporate Restructuring
Group within the Advisory Services Department. Director
since: 2005 Other current
directorships: Investor AB Mr. Sexton
brings to the Board extensive financial services, accounting and risk experience as well as substantive knowledge of Morgan Stanleys businesses from his nearly 40 years of prior service at the Company. |
|
|
|
|
Laura D. Tyson
(62). Dr. Tyson has served as the S. K. and Angela Chan Professor of Global Management since 2008 and served as Professor of Business Administration and Economics
from 2007 to 2008 at the Walter A. Haas School of Business, University of California at Berkeley. She was Dean of the London Business School from 2002 to 2006. Dr. Tyson was Dean from 1998 to 2001 and Class of 1939 Professor in Economics and
Business Administration from 1997 to 1998 at the Walter A. Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley. She served as National Economic Advisor to the President and Chair of the Presidents National Economic Council from
1995 to 1996 and as Chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisors from 1993 to 1995. Dr. Tyson was appointed in 2009 to the Presidents Economic Recovery Advisory Board.
Director since: 1997
Other current directorships: AT&T Inc.
(formerly SBC Communications Inc.), CB Richard Ellis Group, Inc. and Eastman Kodak Company
Dr. Tyson brings to the Board economics and public policy expertise and leadership skills from her positions in academia and through her distinguished
public service. | Our Board unanimously
recommends a vote FOR the election of all thirteen (13) nominees. Proxies solicited by our Board will be voted FOR these nominees unless otherwise instructed.
10
Corporate Governance
Corporate Governance
Documents. Morgan Stanley has a corporate governance webpage at the Company Information link under the About Morgan Stanley link at www.morganstanley.com
(www.morganstanley.com/about/company/governance/index.html). Our
Corporate Governance Policies (including our Director Independence Standards), Code of Ethics and Business Conduct, Board Committee charters, Policy Regarding Communication by Shareholders and Other Interested Parties with the Board of Directors,
Policy Regarding Director Candidates Recommended by Shareholders, Policy Regarding Corporate Political Contributions, Policy Regarding Shareholder Rights Plan, information regarding the Integrity Hotline and the Equity Ownership Commitment are
available at our corporate governance webpage at www.morganstanley.com/about/company/governance/index.html and are available to any shareholder who requests them by writing to Morgan Stanley, Suite D, 1585 Broadway, New York, New York 10036.
Shareholders and other interested parties may contact any of our
Companys directors, the Lead Director, a committee of the Board, the Boards non-employee directors as a group or the Board generally, by writing to them at Morgan Stanley, Suite D, 1585 Broadway, New York, New York 10036. Shareholder and
interested party communications received in this manner will be handled in accordance with the procedures approved by the Companys independent directors. The Boards Policy Regarding Communication by Shareholders and Other Interested
Parties with the Board of Directors is available at our corporate governance webpage at www.morganstanley.com/about/company/governance/index.html.
Director Independence. The Board has determined that Messrs. Bostock, Bowles, Davies, Hance,
Kidder, Nicolaisen, Noski, Ms. Olayan, Messrs. Phillips and Sexton and Dr. Tyson are independent in accordance with the Director Independence Standards established under our Corporate Governance Policies. To assist the Board with its
determination, the standards follow NYSE rules and establish guidelines as to employment and commercial relationships that affect independence and categories of relationships that are not deemed material for purposes of director independence. Eleven
(11) of fourteen (14) of our current directors are independent. All members of the Audit Committee, the Compensation, Management Development and Succession Committee and the Nominating and Governance Committee satisfy the standards of
independence applicable to members of such committees. All members of the Risk Committee are non-employee directors and a majority of the Risk Committee members satisfy the independence requirements of the Company and the NYSE. In addition, the
Board has determined that all members of the Audit Committee, Messrs. Davies, Hance, Nicolaisen, Noski and Sexton, are audit committee financial experts within the meaning of current SEC rules.
In making its determination as to the independent directors, the Board
reviewed relationships between Morgan Stanley and the directors, including commercial relationships in the last three years between Morgan Stanley and entities where the directors are employees or executive officers, or their immediate family
members are executive officers, that did not exceed a certain amount of such other entitys gross revenues in any year (Messrs. Bowles and Davies, Ms. Olayan, Mr. Phillips and Dr. Tyson); ordinary course relationships arising
from transactions on terms and conditions substantially similar to those with unaffiliated third parties between Morgan Stanley and entities where the directors or their immediate family members own equity of 5% or more of that entity (Mr. Bostock
and Ms. Olayan); Morgan Stanleys contributions to charitable organizations where the directors or their immediate family members serve as officers, directors or trustees that did not exceed a certain amount of the organizations
annual charitable receipts in the preceding year (Messrs. Bostock, Bowles, Davies and Kidder, Ms. Olayan, Mr. Phillips and Dr. Tyson); and the directors utilization of Morgan Stanley products and services in the ordinary course
of business on terms and conditions substantially similar to those provided to unaffiliated third parties (Messrs. Bostock, Hance, Kidder, Noski, Phillips and Sexton and Dr. Tyson).
In determining Mr. Bostocks independence, the Board also
considered the employment of Mr. Bostocks son-in-law by the Companys Asset Management segment (see also Other MattersCertain Transactions herein). This year the Board considered, among other things, that
Mr. Bostocks son-in-law has never been a
11
member of the Companys senior management and was awarded compensation in line with his position at Morgan Stanley and in comparison with market standards and that Mr. Bostock has no
influence over the Asset Management business other than that possessed by any other Morgan Stanley non-employee director. The Board (other than Mr. Bostock) determined consistent with NYSE rules and based upon the facts and circumstances, that
the relationship is immaterial to Mr. Bostocks independence.
In determining Mr. Sextons independence, the Board also considered the Companys provision of medical insurance to Mr. Sexton (for
which Mr. Sexton pays the full cost). The Board (other than Mr. Sexton) determined, consistent with NYSE rules and based upon the facts and circumstances, that the relationship is immaterial to Mr. Sextons independence.
Board Leadership Structure and Role
in Risk Oversight. Board
Leadership Structure. The Board is responsible for reviewing the Boards leadership structure. The Board believes that the Company and its shareholders are best served by maintaining the flexibility to have any
individual serve as Chairman of the Board based on what is in the best interests of the Company at a given point in time, rather than mandating a particular leadership structure. In making this decision, the Board considers, among other things, the
composition of the Board, the role of the Companys Lead Director, the Companys strong corporate governance practices, the Chief Executive Officers working relationship with the Board, and the challenges specific to the Company.
Historically, the positions of Chief Executive Officer and Chairman were held by the same individual. As a result of Mr. Macks discussion with the Board about stepping down as Chief Executive Officer and as part of its ongoing review of
the Boards leadership structure and succession planning process, the Board in September 2009 determined that the positions of the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman should be held by two separate individuals. The Board elected John J.
Mack, the Companys former Chief Executive Officer, as Chairman of the Board, and James P. Gorman as the Companys Chief Executive Officer, effective January 1, 2010.
In addition, the Companys Corporate Governance Policies provide for an
independent and active Lead Director with clearly defined leadership authority and responsibilities. Our Lead Director, C. Robert Kidder, was appointed by our other independent directors in 2006 and has responsibilities including: (i) presiding
at all meetings of the Board at which the Chairman is not present; (ii) having the authority to call, and lead, sessions composed only of non-management directors or independent directors; (iii) advising the Chairman of the Boards
informational needs; (iv) approving Board meeting agendas and the schedule of Board meetings and requesting, if necessary, the inclusion of additional agenda items; and (v) making himself available, if requested by major shareholders, for
consultation and direct communication. The Companys
Corporate Governance practices and policies ensure substantial independent oversight of management. For instance:
| |
|
The Board has a substantial majority of independent and non-management directors. Ten out of the thirteen director nominees are independent
as defined by the NYSE listing standards and the Companys more stringent Corporate Governance Policies and eleven out of the thirteen director nominees are non-management directors. All of the Companys directors are elected annually.
|
| |
|
The Boards key standing committees are composed solely of non-management directors. The Audit Committee, the Compensation, Management
Development and Succession Committee, and the Nominating and Governance Committee are each composed solely of independent directors. The Risk Committee is comprised of a substantial majority of independent directors and includes only non-management
directors. The committees provide independent oversight of management. |
| |
|
The Boards non-management directors meet regularly in executive session. At each regularly scheduled Board meeting, the
non-management directors meet in an executive session without Messrs. Gorman or Mack present and, consistent with the NYSE listing standards, at least annually, the independent directors meet in executive session. These sessions are chaired by
the Lead Director. |
12
Board Role in Risk Oversight. The Board has oversight
for the Companys enterprise risk management framework and is responsible for helping to ensure that the Companys risks are managed in a sound manner. Historically, the Board had authorized the Audit Committee, which is comprised
solely of independent directors, to oversee risk management. Effective January 1, 2010, the Board established another standing committee, the Risk Committee, which is comprised solely of non-management directors, to assist the Board in the
oversight of (i) the Companys risk governance structure, (ii) the Companys risk management and risk assessment guidelines and policies regarding market, credit and liquidity and funding risk, (iii) the Companys risk
tolerance, including risk tolerance levels and capital targets and limits, and (iv) the performance of the Chief Risk Officer. The Audit Committee retains responsibility for oversight of certain aspects of risk management, including review of
the major operational, franchise, reputational, legal and compliance risk exposures of the Company and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposure, as well as guidelines and policies that govern the process for risk
assessment and risk management. The Risk Committee, Audit Committee and Chief Risk Officer report to the entire Board on a regular basis.
As discussed herein under Consideration of Risk Matters in Determining Compensation, the Compensation, Management Development and Succession
(CMDS) Committee works with the Chief Risk Officer to evaluate whether the Companys compensation arrangements encourage unnecessary or excessive risk-taking and whether risks arising from the Companys compensation arrangements are
reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company.
The Board has also authorized the Firm Risk Committee (FRC), a management committee appointed and chaired by the Chief Executive Officer that includes the
most senior officers of the Company, including the Chief Risk Officer, Chief Legal Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to oversee the Companys global risk management structure. The FRCs responsibilities include oversight of the
Companys risk management principles, procedures and limits, and the monitoring of capital levels and material market, credit, liquidity and funding, legal, operational, franchise and regulatory risk matters and other risks, as appropriate, and
the steps management has taken to monitor and manage such risks. The Companys risk management is further discussed in Part I, Item 7A of the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 (2009 Form
10-K). * * * * *
The Board has determined that its leadership structure is appropriate for the
Company. Mr. Macks prior role as Chief Executive Officer, his existing relationship with the Board, his understanding of Morgan Stanleys businesses, and his professional experience and leadership skills uniquely position him to
serve as Chairman while the Companys Lead Director, Mr. Kidder, has proven effective at enhancing the overall independent functioning of the Board. The Board believes that the combination of the Chairman, the Lead Director and the
Chairmen of the Audit and Risk Committees provide the appropriate leadership to help ensure effective risk oversight by the Board.
13
Board Meetings and Committees. Our Board met 26
times during the December 2008 transition period and 2009. Each director attended at least 75% of the total number of meetings of the Board and committees on which the director served that were held during the December 2008 transition period and
2009 while the director was a member. The Boards standing committees include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Committee |
|
Current Members |
|
Primary Responsibilities |
|
|
|
# of
Meetings in Dec. 2008 and 2009* |
| Audit |
|
Charles H. Noski (Chair) Howard J. Davies
James H. Hance,
Jr.(1)
Donald T. Nicolaisen O. Griffith
Sexton |
|
Oversees the integrity of the
Companys consolidated financial statements, compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, system of internal controls, and certain aspects of risk management, including review of major operational, franchise, reputational, legal and
compliance risk exposures of the Company. Selects, determines the compensation
of, evaluates and, when appropriate, replaces the independent auditor, and pre-approves audit and permitted non-audit services.
Oversees the qualifications and independence of the independent auditor and performance
of the Companys internal auditor and independent auditor. After review,
recommends to the Board the acceptance and inclusion of the annual audited consolidated financial statements in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K. |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Compensation,
Management
Development and
Succession (CMDS) |
|
Erskine B. Bowles
(Chair)(2)
C. Robert Kidder Donald T. Nicolaisen
Hutham S.
Olayan(3) |
|
Annually reviews and approves
the corporate goals and objectives relevant to the compensation of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and evaluates his performance in light of these goals and objectives.
Determines the compensation of our executive officers and other officers as appropriate.
Administers our equity-based compensation plans.
Oversees plans for management development and succession.
Reviews and discusses the Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management and
recommends to the Board its inclusion in the proxy statement. |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Nominating and
Governance |
|
Laura D. Tyson (Chair)
Roy J. Bostock Charles E. Phillips,
Jr.(4) |
|
Identifies and recommends
candidates for election to the Board. Recommends committee structure and
membership. Establishes procedures for its oversight of the evaluation of the
Board. Recommends director compensation and benefits.
Reviews annually the Companys corporate governance policies.
Reviews and approves related person transactions in accordance with the Companys
Related Person Transaction Policy. |
|
|
|
5 |
| Risk
Committee(5) |
|
Howard J. Davies (Chair)
Roy J. Bostock James H. Hance, Jr.
Nobuyuki Hirano |
|
Oversees the Companys
risk governance structure. Oversees risk management and risk assessment
guidelines and policies regarding market, credit, liquidity and funding risk.
Oversees risk tolerance, including risk tolerance levels and capital targets and limits.
Oversees the performance of the Chief Risk Officer. |
|
|
|
N/A |
14
*
In addition to Board and committee meetings, our directors also discharge their duties through, among other things, informal group communications and discussions with the Chairman, CEO,
members of senior management and others as appropriate regarding matters of interest.
(1)
Mr. Hance joined the Audit Committee, effective January 1, 2010.
(2)
Mr. Bowles was appointed as chair of the CMDS Committee to replace Mr. Kidder, effective January 1, 2010. Mr. Kidder remains on the CMDS Committee.
(3)
Ms. Olayan concluded her service on the Nominating and Governance Committee and joined the CMDS Committee, effective January 1, 2010.
(4)
Mr. Kidder will join the Nominating and Governance Committee to replace Mr. Phillips, effective May 18, 2010.
(5)
The Board established the Risk Committee effective January 1, 2010.
Our Board has adopted a written charter for each of the Audit Committee, CMDS Committee, Nominating and Governance Committee and Risk Committee setting
forth the roles and responsibilities of each committee. The Audit Committee has adopted a written charter for its subcommittee, the Internal Audit Subcommittee, which assists the Audit Committee in the oversight of the Companys internal audit
department. The charters are available at our corporate governance website at www.morganstanley.com/about/company/governance/index.html. The reports of the Audit Committee and the CMDS Committee appear herein.
Non-Management Director
Meetings. The Companys Corporate Governance Policies provide that non-management directors meet in executive sessions and that the Lead Director will preside over these executive sessions. If any non-management
directors are not independent, then the independent directors will meet in executive session at least once annually and the Lead Director will preside over these executive sessions.
Director Attendance at Annual
Meetings. The Companys Corporate Governance Policies state that directors are expected to attend annual meetings of shareholders. All of the current directors who were on the Board of Directors at the time attended
the 2009 annual meeting of shareholders other than Mr. Phillips.
Shareholder Nominations for Director Candidates. The Nominating and Governance Committee will
consider director candidates recommended by shareholders and evaluates such candidates in the same manner as other candidates. The procedures to submit recommendations are described in the Policy Regarding Director Candidates Recommended by
Shareholders, available at our corporate governance webpage at www.morganstanley.com/about/company/governance/index.html.
Shareholders of record complying with the notice procedures set forth below may make director recommendations for consideration by the Nominating and
Governance Committee. Shareholders may make recommendations at any time, but recommendations for consideration as nominees at the annual meeting of shareholders must be received not less than 120 days before the first anniversary of the date that
the proxy statement was released to shareholders in connection with the previous years annual meeting. Therefore, to submit a candidate for consideration for nomination by the Nominating and Governance Committee at the 2011 annual meeting of
shareholders, shareholders must have submitted the recommendation, in writing, by December 14, 2010. The written notice must demonstrate that it is being submitted by a shareholder of record of the Company and include information about each
proposed director candidate, including name, age, business address, principal occupation, principal qualifications and other relevant biographical information. In addition, the shareholder must confirm his or her candidates consent to serve as
a director. Shareholders must send recommendations to the Nominating and Governance Committee, Morgan Stanley, Suite D, 1585 Broadway, New York, New York 10036. See Director Selection and Nomination Process above for more information
regarding Board membership criteria.
Compensation Governance. The CMDS Committee currently consists of four directors, including our
Lead Director, all of whom are independent members of the Board under the NYSE listing standards and the independence requirements of the Company. The CMDS Committee operates under a written charter adopted by
15
the Board. As noted in the table above, the CMDS Committee is responsible for reviewing and approving annually all compensation awarded to the Companys executive officers, including the
Chairman of the Board, the CEO and other executive officers named in the Summary Compensation Table (named executive officers or NEOs). In addition, the CMDS Committee administers the Companys equity incentive plans, including
reviewing and approving equity grants to executive officers. Information on the CMDS Committees processes, procedures and analysis of NEO compensation for 2009 is addressed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A).
The CMDS Committee actively engages in its duties and follows
procedures intended to ensure excellence in compensation governance, including those described below:
| |
|
Retains its own independent compensation consultant to provide advice to the CMDS Committee on executive compensation matters. The independent
consultant generally attends all CMDS Committee meetings, reports directly to the CMDS Committee Chair and regularly meets with the CMDS Committee without management present. In addition, the Chair of the CMDS Committee regularly speaks with the
CMDS Committees compensation consultant, without management, outside of the CMDS Committee meetings. |
| |
|
Regularly reviews the competitive environment and the design and structure of the Companys compensation programs to ensure that they are
consistent with and support our compensation objectives. |
| |
|
Regularly reviews the Companys achievements with respect to predetermined performance priorities and strategic goals and evaluates executive
performance in light of such achievements. |
| |
|
Grants senior executive annual incentive compensation after a comprehensive review and evaluation of Company, business unit and individual performance
for the fiscal year both on a year-over-year basis and as compared to our key competitors. |
| |
|
Oversees plans for management development and succession. |
| |
|
Regularly meets throughout the year and regularly meets in executive session without the presence of management or its compensation consultant.
|
| |
|
Receives materials for meetings in advance and the Chair of the CMDS Committee participates in premeetings with management to review the agendas and
materials. |
| |
|
Regularly reports on its meetings to the Board. |
To perform its duties, the CMDS Committee retains the services of a qualified
and independent compensation consultant that possesses the necessary skill, experience and resources to meet the CMDS Committees needs and that has no relationship with the Company that would interfere with its ability to provide independent
advice. The CMDS Committee has selected Hay Group as its compensation consultant. Hay Group has also been retained by the Nominating and Governance Committee to provide consulting services on Board compensation. Other than the consulting services
that it provides to the CMDS and Nominating and Governance Committees, Hay Group currently provides no services to the Company or its executive officers. Hay Group assists the CMDS Committee in collecting and evaluating external market data
regarding executive compensation and performance and advises the CMDS Committee on developing trends and best practices in executive compensation and equity and incentive plan design.
The Companys Human Resources Department acts as a liaison between the
CMDS Committee and Hay Group and also prepares materials for the CMDS Committees use in making compensation decisions. Separately, Human Resources may itself engage third-party compensation consultants to assist in the development of
compensation data to inform and facilitate the CMDS Committees deliberations.
The principal compensation plans and arrangements applicable to our NEOs are described in the CD&A and the tables in the Executive
Compensation section. The CMDS Committee may delegate the administration of these plans as appropriate, including to executive officers of the Company and members of the Companys Human
16
Resources department. The CMDS Committee may also create subcommittees with authority to act on its behalf. Significant delegations made by the CMDS Committee include the following:
| |
|
The CMDS Committee has delegated to the Equity Awards Committee (which consists of the CEO) the CMDS Committees authority to make special new
hire and retention equity awards; however, this delegation of authority does not extend to awards to our executive officers and certain other senior executives of the Company. Awards granted by the Equity Awards Committee are subject to a share
limit imposed by the CMDS Committee and individual awards are reported to the CMDS Committee on a regular basis. |
| |
|
The CMDS Committee has delegated to the Chief Operating Officer the CMDS Committees authority to administer the Companys cash-based
nonqualified deferred compensation plans, including the Morgan Stanley Compensation Incentive Plan (discussed in the CD&A); however, the CMDS Committee has sole authority relating to grants of cash-based nonqualified deferred compensation plan
awards to, or amendments to such awards held by, executive officers and certain other senior executives, material amendments to any such plans or awards, and the decision to implement certain of these plans in the future.
| Our executive officers do not engage directly
with the CMDS Committee in setting the amount or form of executive officer compensation. However, as discussed in the CD&A, as part of the annual performance review for our executive officers other than the CEO, the CMDS Committee considers our
CEOs assessment of each executive officers individual performance, as well as the performance of the Company and our CEOs compensation recommendations for each executive officer, other than himself.
Annual year-end equity awards are typically granted by the CMDS Committee
after the end of our fiscal year. This schedule coincides with the time when year-end financial results are available and the CMDS Committee can evaluate individual and Company performance as described in the CD&A. Special equity awards are
generally approved on a monthly basis; however, they may be granted at any time, as deemed necessary for new hires, promotions, recognition or retention purposes. We do not coordinate or time the release of material information around our grant
dates in order to affect the value of compensation. On
September 10, 2009, the Company announced that Mr. Gorman would become Chief Executive Officer effective January 1, 2010 and Mr. Mack would continue to serve as Chairman of the Board. This announcement followed a detailed
succession planning process, which occurred during the prior 18 months and was conducted by the CMDS Committee, with oversight by the entire Board. The CMDS Committee, in conjunction with the entire Board, established criteria for the next Chief
Executive Officer and retained a consultant to review potential outside candidates and evaluated accomplished internal candidates. The Board oversaw a thorough, deliberate and successful succession process that led to the election of, and seamless
transition to, our new CEO, Mr. Gorman, a proven leader with an established record as a strategic thinker backed by strong operating, business development and execution skills who brings an extensive understanding of Morgan Stanleys
businesses and decades of financial services experience.
Consideration of Risk Matters in Determining Compensation. The CMDS Committee worked
with the Companys Chief Risk Officer and the CMDS Committees independent consultant to evaluate whether the Companys compensation arrangements encourage unnecessary or excessive risk-taking and whether risks arising from the
Companys compensation arrangements are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company. Morgan Stanley is a financial institution that engages in significant trading and capital market activities that are subject to market
and other risks. The Company employs risk management practices, including trading limits, marking-to-market positions, stress testing and employment of models. The Company believes in pay for performance and as a result also evaluates its
compensation programs to recognize these risks. Prior to meeting
with the CMDS Committee, the Chief Risk Officer had a series of interactive and detailed working sessions with representatives from the Firms Human Resources and Legal departments to evaluate each
17
compensation program across each of the Companys major areas Institutional Securities, Investment Management, Global Wealth Management and Company/Infrastructure. These working
sessions were intended to identify whether there were any material risks to the Company arising from such compensation programs, including those programs in which our NEOs participate. The review covered numerous programs including equity- and
cash-based deferred compensation programs, discretionary bonus programs and performance-based formulaic bonus programs. The working group reviewed a number of factors, including the eligibility; form of payment; applicable performance measures;
vesting; clawback, holdback and cancellation provisions; and governance and oversight aspects of each program.
Following this thorough review, the Chief Risk Officer concluded that Morgan Stanleys current compensation programs do not incent employees to take
unnecessary or excessive risk and that such programs do not create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company. The following are among the factors considered in making his determination:
| |
|
balance of fixed compensation and discretionary compensation; |
| |
|
balance between short-term and long-term incentives; |
| |
|
mandatory deferrals into both equity-based and cash-based long-term incentive programs; |
| |
|
the procedures followed in making compensation decisions; |
| |
|
our equity retention policy; and |
| |
|
risk-mitigating features of awards, such as cancellation, holdback and clawback provisions. |
The Chief Risk Officer and the Global Head of Human Resources then reviewed
these arrangements, along with the analyses and findings of the Chief Risk Officer, with the CMDS Committee and its independent compensation consultant. The Chief Risk Officer again met with the Global Head of Human Resources and the CMDS Committee
before compensation decisions for 2009 were approved, to review the final compensation programs pursuant to which 2009 compensation would be paid. It is the intention that, going forward, the Chief Risk Officer will continue to evaluate any new
incentive arrangements for the NEOs and material arrangements for other employees and report periodically to the CMDS Committee.
Executive Equity Ownership Commitment. Executive officers, including the Chairman of the Board,
and the other members of senior management who are members of the Companys Operating Committee are subject to an Equity Ownership Commitment that requires them to retain at least 75% of common stock and equity awards (less allowances for the
payment of any option exercise price and taxes) made to them while they are on the Operating Committee (or for the Chairman, while he was on the Operating Committee and while Chairman). This commitment ties a portion of their net worth to the
Companys stock price and provides a continuing incentive for them to work towards superior long-term stock price performance. None of our executive officers have prearranged trading plans under SEC Rule 10b5-1.
18
Beneficial Ownership of Company Common Stock
Stock Ownership of Directors and Executive
Officers. We encourage our directors, officers and employees to own our common stock; owning our common stock aligns their interests with your interests as shareholders. All executive officers, including the NEOs, are
subject to the Equity Ownership Commitment described above. Executive officers also may not engage in hedging strategies or sell short or trade derivatives involving Morgan Stanley securities.
The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of common stock as of
December 31, 2009 by each of our directors and NEOs, and by all our directors and executive officers as of December 31, 2009, as a group. As of December 31, 2009, none of the common stock beneficially owned by our directors and NEOs
was pledged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Common Stock Beneficially Owned as of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Name |
|
Shares(1) |
|
|
|
Underlying Stock
Units(2)(3) |
|
|
|
Subject to
Stock
Options Exercisable within 60 days(4) |
|
|
|
Total(3)(5) |
| NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| John J. Mack |
|
1,589,432 |
|
|
|
1,367,342 |
|
|
|
849,154 |
|
|
|
3,805,928 |
| Colm Kelleher |
|
60,558 |
|
|
|
217,283 |
|
|
|
248,057 |
|
|
|
525,898 |
| Walid A. Chammah |
|
5,481 |
|
|
|
664,025 |
|
|
|
700,543 |
|
|
|
1,370,049 |
| Kenneth M. deRegt |
|
343 |
|
|
|
54,086 |
|
|
|
156,788 |
|
|
|
211,217 |
| James P. Gorman |
|
124,203 |
|
|
|
507,237 |
|
|
|
411,758 |
|
|
|
1,043,198 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DIRECTORS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Roy J. Bostock |
|
28,695 |
|
|
|
30,735 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,430 |
| Erskine B. Bowles |
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
39,957 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,957 |
| Howard J. Davies |
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
30,787 |
|
|
|
7,049 |
|
|
|
39,836 |
| James H. Hance, Jr. |
|
23,649 |
|
|
|
3,655 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,304 |
| Nobuyuki
Hirano(6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| C. Robert Kidder |
|
65,776 |
|
|
|
35,300 |
|
|
|
55,832 |
|
|
|
156,908 |
| Donald T. Nicolaisen |
|
|
|
|
|
25,610 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,610 |
| Charles H. Noski |
|
|
|
|
|
42,339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,339 |
| Hutham S. Olayan |
|
|
|
|
|
34,258 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,258 |
| Charles E. Phillips, Jr. |
|
14,420 |
|
|
|
12,740 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,160 |
| O. Griffith Sexton |
|
633,868 |
|
|
|
33,107 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
666,975 |
| Laura D. Tyson |
|
27,478 |
|
|
|
10,267 |
|
|
|
46,090 |
|
|
|
83,835 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ALL DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2009 AS A GROUP (20 PERSONS) |
|
2,719,918 |
|
|
|
3,734,091 |
|
|
|
2,571,736 |
|
|
|
9,025,745 |
(1)
Each director, NEO and executive officer has sole voting and investment power with respect to his or her shares, except as follows: Mr. Macks beneficial ownership includes
536,400 shares held in grantor retained annuity trusts for which his spouse is the sole trustee; Mr. Gormans beneficial ownership includes 20,000 shares held in a grantor retained annuity trust for which he and his spouse are co-trustees;
Mr. Bostocks beneficial ownership includes 1,775 shares held by his spouse; and Mr. Bowles shares are held in a trust revocable by Mr. Bowles on 30 days notice.
(2)
Shares of common stock held in the Trust corresponding to stock units. Directors and executive officers may direct the voting of the shares corresponding to their stock units. Voting by
executive officers is subject to the provisions of the Trust described in Voting Information Submitting Voting Instructions for Shares Held in Your Name.
19
(3)
Excludes stock units granted on January 21, 2010 to the NEOs for services in 2009. The following table lists the number of stock units awarded to each NEO for 2009. These restricted
stock unit (RSU) and performance stock unit (PSU) awards are described in greater detail in the CD&A.
|
|
|
|
|
| Name |
|
January 2010 Stock Unit Awards
(#) |
| |
RSUs |
|
PSUs |
| John J.
Mack |
|
|
|
|
| Colm
Kelleher |
|
103,824 |
|
80,521.00 |
| Walid A.
Chammah |
|
128,335 |
|
96,861.40 |
| Kenneth
M. deRegt |
|
78,757 |
|
63,871.75 |
| James P.
Gorman |
|
194,590 |
|
97,295.47 |
(4)
See the Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End Table for additional information regarding stock options held by the NEOs as of December 31, 2009.
(5)
Each NEO and director beneficially owned less than 1% of the shares of common stock outstanding. All executive officers and directors as a group as of December 31, 2009 beneficially
owned less than 1% of the common stock outstanding.
(6)
Mr. Hirano was elected to the Board pursuant to the Investor Agreement. See Principal Shareholders regarding MUFGs beneficial ownership of Company common stock.
Principal
Shareholders. The following table contains information regarding the only persons we know of that beneficially own more than 5% of our common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Shares of Common Stock
Beneficially Owned |
| Name and Address |
|
Number |
|
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
| Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group,
Inc.(1)
7-1, Marunouchi 2-chome
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8330, Japan |
|
357,017,088 |
|
|
|
20.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| State Street Corporation (State
Street)(2)
225 Franklin Street, Boston, MA 02110 |
|
150,349,759 |
|
|
|
11.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FMR
LLC(3)
82 Devonshire Street, Boston, MA 02109 |
|
89,568,077 |
|
|
|
6.589 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| BlackRock, Inc.
(BlackRock)(4)
40 East
52nd Street
New York, NY 10022 |
|
73,558,367 |
|
|
|
5.41 |
% |
|
|
(1)
Based on the number of outstanding shares of common stock of the Company as of January 31, 2010 (as reported in the 2009 Form 10-K) and MUFGs beneficial ownership (as reported in
a Schedule 13D Information Statement on October 23, 2008, as amended on October 30, 2008, May 22, 2009, June 11, 2009 and April 1, 2010) of 357,017,088 shares of common stock consisting of (1) 310,464,033 shares of
common stock, assuming conversion of 7,839,209 shares of Series B Preferred Stock issued to MUFG on October 13, 2008, based on an initial conversion rate of 39.604 shares of common stock for each share of preferred stock representing an initial
conversion rate of $25.25 per share of common stock; (2) 29,375,000 shares of common stock in connection with the Companys registered public offering announced on May 7, 2009; and (3) 17,178,055 shares of common stock in
connection with the Companys registered public offering announced on June 2, 2009. This information assumes that MUFG has not disposed of any shares of common stock that it purchased in the Companys registered public offerings
during 2009. In addition, this information does not include 16,207,331 shares of common stock held by certain affiliates of MUFG as of March 23, 2010 in a fiduciary capacity as the trustee of trust accounts or as the manager of investment funds,
other investment vehicles and managed accounts; MUFG has disclaimed beneficial ownership of such shares.
20
(2)
Based on a review of the Schedule 13G Information Statement filed on February 12, 2010 by State Street and its subsidiaries, acting in various fiduciary and other capacities. The
Schedule 13G discloses that State Street had shared voting power as to 150,051,005 shares and shared dispositive power as to 150,349,759 shares; that 99,424,373 of the 135,472,888 shares beneficially owned by State Street Bank and Trust Company, a
subsidiary of State Street, are held as trustee and investment manager on behalf of the Trust; and that State Street disclaimed beneficial ownership of all shares reported in the Schedule 13G. The Schedule 13G discloses that the percentage of
ownership reported therein was based upon the shares of common stock reported as issued and outstanding in our Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009.
(3)
Based on a review of the Schedule 13G Information Statement filed on February 16, 2010 by FMR LLC, Edward C. Johnson 3d and Fidelity Management & Research Company (Fidelity), a
wholly-owned subsidiary of FMR LLC. Certain of the shares listed above are beneficially owned by FMR LLC subsidiaries and related entities. The Schedule 13G discloses that members of the Johnson family may be deemed to form a controlling group with
respect to FMR LLC and that FMR LLC, Edward C. Johnson 3d and Fidelity, and their respective affiliates, have had sole voting power as to 12,654,279 shares and sole dispositive power as to 89,568,077 shares.
(4)
Based on a review of the Schedule 13G Information Statement filed on January 29, 2010 by BlackRock. The Schedule 13G discloses that BlackRock completed its acquisition of Barclays
Global Investors, NA and certain of its affiliates as of December 1, 2009 and that substantially all of such entities are now included as subsidiaries of BlackRock for purposes of the Schedule 13G. The Schedule 13G discloses that as of
December 31, 2009, BlackRock had sole dispositive and sole voting power with respect to all beneficially owned shares reported therein.
Executive Compensation
Compensation Discussion and Analysis. This Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A)
describes the Companys executive compensation objectives and policies and analyzes the CMDS Committees decisions on NEO compensation in 2009. The CD&A is organized into four sections:
|
|
|
| |
|
Page:
|
| I. Executive Summary |
|
21 |
| II. Compensation Program for 2009 |
|
22 |
| III. Compensation Objectives and Strategy |
|
27 |
| IV. 2009 Compensation Process and Decisions |
|
28 |
The financial services industry and the global economy have experienced an exceptional period of turmoil, shock and change during the recent economic
crisis. The adverse market conditions fundamentally reshaped the competitive landscape and led to unprecedented governmental involvement in support of the financial sector, including the Companys participation in the Troubled Asset Relief
Program (TARP), which obligations the Company repaid in mid-2009.
Morgan Stanley understands evolving concerns in the new environment in which it is operating with respect to compensation and has made significant
changes, including numerous changes to how it pays and seeks to retain and motivate its people. The CMDS Committee evaluated our executive compensation practices considering shareholder input and, in light of recent events, industry
best practices, regulatory guidance, the Companys performance and the wider economic environment, and fundamentally restructured year-end compensation for the Companys employees. This included reducing the portion of bonuses paid in cash
and increasing the portion of compensation that is deferred, creating at-risk performance stock units (PSUs) tied to three-year performance for senior executives and instituting a strengthened clawback provision.
Consistent with its pay-for-performance philosophy, the CMDS Committee in
2009 also moved further away from an executive compensation program focused largely on annual incentive awards toward one that is better
21
balanced between fixed, short-term and long-term compensation. Awards are now more firmly tied to future performance, and risk management is now a more integrated part of compensation
determinations. With a significant portion of executives incentive compensation paid in equity, executives are subject to market risk and their interests are aligned with shareholders.
In 2009, while Morgan Stanley delivered a strong operating performance across
many of its businesses, revenues were significantly reduced by the narrowing of the Companys credit spreads (a positive trend) and the resulting non-cash negative accounting impact. This had the effect of increasing the compensation-to-revenue
ratio for the year to a historically high level, despite the fact that firm-wide per capita compensation was at its lowest level in the past seven years. The Company believes that this ratio was an anomaly in 2009 and does not expect this ratio to
be at this level again.
| II. |
Compensation Program for 2009 |
| A. |
Executive Compensation Strategy for 2009. Morgan Stanley recognized the environment in which it operates, and adopted a number of changes
to its compensation practices in 2009 that build on the compensation reforms announced last year and that are in accordance with the Companys continuing commitment to balanced, long-term performance-based compensation, as highlighted below.
|
| |
|
We reduced the portion of bonuses paid in cash and increased the portion of bonuses paid with deferred long-term awards subject to market and
cancellation risk. In 2009, the portion of NEO compensation paid in cash was substantially reduced and the portion paid in deferred compensation was substantially increased. Mr. Gorman received his entire year-end
bonus in deferred compensation. For other NEOs, the portion of incentive compensation paid in deferred compensation was increased to 72%, up from 36% in fiscal 2008. Of the deferred compensation, 20% was paid in at-risk PSUs and the remainder was
paid in equal parts restricted stock units (RSUs) and deferred cash-based awards under the Morgan Stanley Compensation Incentive Program (MSCIP). A higher portion of the 2009 bonus was paid in equity, compared to 2008, further aligning a significant
portion of our NEOs compensation with shareholders interests by tying it directly to the Companys stock price. These long-term incentive awards continue to be subject to the Companys cancellation and clawback provisions, as
described below. |
| |
|
We introduced new at-risk performance-based stock units. For 2009, the Company for the first time
granted senior executives at-risk PSUs that deliver value only if the Company, after three years, meets objective performance targets. The Company was one of the first of its peers in the U.S. to incorporate performance units as part of their
NEOs year-end bonus, and not as an additional component of compensation. The targets for the at-risk PSUs include return on average common equity over the three-year period and relative stock price performance over the same period. To the
extent the Company does not achieve the performance targets set by the CMDS Committee at the time of grant, the NEOs will not receive shares under this program. The NEOs received 20% of their bonus in these PSUs, except for Mr. Mack. Details of
this new long-term compensation program are outlined below. |
| |
|
Mr. Mack did not receive a 2009 bonus; Mr. Gormans bonus was paid only in deferred
compensation. For 2009, Chairman and former CEO John J. Mack recommended to the CMDS Committee that he receive no year-end bonus, given the unique operating environment and government support for the industry this past
year. Mr. Mack also received no year-end incentive compensation for 2008 or 2007. CEO James P. Gorman recommended to the CMDS Committee that he be paid no cash bonus for 2009, and the CMDS Committee decided that the 2009 year-end
award for Mr. Gorman would be paid only in deferred compensation. Mr. Gorman received no year-end incentive compensation for 2008. |
| |
|
We enhanced our clawback provision. Morgan Stanley was the first major U.S. bank to enact a clawback
that exceeded TARP requirements for a portion of year-end compensation in 2008. This clawback provision was further enhanced in 2009 to explicitly cover situations where there is (i) a substantial loss on a trading position or other holding or
(ii) any loss on a trading position where an employee operated outside the risk parameters applicable to the trading position or other holding if, in either case, such position was a
|
22
| |
factor in that employees compensation determination. This provision applies to the deferred cash-based awards made to the NEOs under MSCIP. |
| |
|
We improved the balance between fixed and variable pay. Base salaries for the NEOs, other than for Mr. Mack,
were increased in 2009 in order to move away from a compensation program dominantly focused on annual incentives and toward one that is balanced between fixed and variable compensation. The adjustments were also designed to raise base salary levels
that were below several of our peer companies. |
| |
|
We increased our focus on risk-adjusted compensation. As described below, the CMDS Committee worked with the
Companys Chief Risk Officer and the CMDS Committees independent consultant in reviewing the Companys compensation arrangements, including for the NEOs, to help ensure that the arrangements do not encourage unnecessary or excessive
risk-taking that threatens the Companys value or gives rise to risk that could have a material adverse effect on the Company. |
| B. |
New At Risk Performance-Based Compensation Program for 2009. The CMDS Committee, in response to shareholder feedback, approved
an at-risk PSU program under the Companys 2007 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan. This program ties executive compensation to the Companys long-term financial performance and further reinforces the NEOs accountability for the
Companys future financial and strategic goals by tying a greater portion of compensation directly to certain of the Companys core financial metrics return on equity and total shareholder return. Under this program, PSUs granted in
2010 will vest and convert to shares of Company common stock in 2013 only if the Company achieves predetermined performance goals over the next three years. Participants will receive no portion of the award if the minimum performance targets
are not met. As with other equity compensation, shares received upon conversion of these PSUs will be subject to the 75% stock ownership commitment for senior executives. Grants under the program were made to the NEOs who received a bonus
for 2009. The amounts granted to the NEOs which constituted 20% of their total bonus are provided below under 2009 Compensation Decisions. The PSUs will not provide for voting rights before they are converted to Company
stock. The awards will receive dividend equivalents in cash which will accumulate and pay out, if at all, when the underlying shares are paid to the NEOs based on the number of underlying shares actually earned. |
The at-risk PSUs will be tied directly to the Companys
long-term core financial metrics specifically:
| |
1. |
One-half of the target PSU award will be based on the Companys return on average common shareholders equity (average ROE) over the three-year
performance period. Average ROE will exclude the impact of debt-related credit spreads representing the change in fair value of certain short-term and long-term borrowings, including structured notes and
subordinated debentures, accounted for under the fair value option that is included in net income and is attributable to changes in the Companys own debt-related credit spreads. The number of at-risk PSUs ultimately
earned will be determined by multiplying one-half of the target award by the multiplier according to the following grid: |
|
|
|
| MS 3-Year Average ROE* |
|
Multiplier |
|
18% or more |
|
2.00 |
|
12% |
|
1.00 |
|
7.5% |
|
0.25 |
|
less than 7.5% |
|
0.00 |
| |
* |
If average ROE is between two of the thresholds noted above, the number of PSUs earned will be determined by straight-line interpolation between the two thresholds.
|
23
| |
2. |
The other half of the award will be based on the Companys total shareholder return (TSR) relative to the TSR of the members of the Comparison Group over the
three-year period. The number of at-risk PSUs ultimately earned will be determined by multiplying one-half of the target award by the multiplier according to the following grid: |
|
|
|
| MS TSR Rank |
|
Multiplier |
| 1
|
|
2.00 |
| 2
|
|
1.75 |
| 3
|
|
1.50 |
| 4
|
|
1.25 |
| 5
|
|
1.00 |
| 6
|
|
0.75 |
| 7
|
|
0.50 |
| 8
|
|
0.25 |
| 9
|
|
0.00 |
| 10
|
|
0.00 |
| |
* |
If the composition of the Comparison Group is affected by a corporate event, the grid will be adjusted based on the number of members of the Comparison Group remaining
at the end of the performance period. |
The Comparison Group for this purpose includes: Bank of America Corp., Barclays Plc, Citigroup Inc., Credit Suisse Group, Deutsche Bank
AG, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., UBS AG and Wells Fargo & Company. This group represents the primary competitors in the Companys lines of business, as well as the companies which compete with the Company
for talent globally. Except as described below,
the at-risk PSUs will vest and convert following the end of the performance period only to the extent the foregoing performance measures are achieved. To the extent that an NEO voluntarily terminates his employment with the Company
prior to January 1, 2013 (the scheduled vesting date), other than due to full career retirement, none of the units will vest and the entire award will be forfeited. If, prior to January 1, 2013, an NEOs employment is
involuntarily terminated (absent a cancellation event) or is terminated due to a disability, a pro rata portion of the at-risk PSUs will vest and convert to shares following the conclusion of the performance period once the CMDS Committee certifies
to the performance. Similarly, if an NEOs employment terminates due to full career retirement (defined in a similar manner as for purposes of the NEOs 2009 year-end equity awards) during the first half of the performance period and the
NEO does not engage in competitive activity (except for Mr. Gorman if he resigns for good reason), a pro rata portion of the at-risk PSUs will vest and convert to shares following the conclusion of the performance period once the CMDS Committee
certifies to the performance. If an NEOs employment terminates due to full career retirement during the second half of the performance period and the NEO does not engage in competitive activity (except in the case of Mr. Gorman if he
resigns for good reason), the full award will vest and convert to shares following the conclusion of the performance period once the CMDS Committee certifies to the performance. In the event of a change in control of the Company, performance
will be measured through the last day of the Companys quarter preceding the change in control.
The at-risk PSUs remain subject to cancellation upon certain events until conversion. If, after payment of the PSUs, the CMDS Committee
determines that the performance certified by the CMDS Committee was based on materially inaccurate financial statements, then such number of shares (or cash equivalent if the shares were transferred) shall be subject to clawback by the Company.
24
| C. |
Compensation Components and Design. The following table outlines the compensation and benefits elements provided to the Companys
NEOs for 2009. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Compensation Element |
|
Description |
|
Other Features and Comments |
| 1. Base Salary |
|
Reflects the executives experience and level of responsibility. Is intended to be competitive with
salaries for comparable positions at competitors. |
|
Reviewed annually and subject to change, if, among other reasons, the executives
responsibilities change materially or there are changes in the competitive market environment. |
|
2. Incentive Compensation |
| General Comments; Mix of Cash and Long-Term
Incentives |
|
For 2009, incentive compensation was comprised of cash bonus (other than for Messrs. Mack and Gorman),
equity and MSCIP long-term incentive awards. The CMDS Committee approved a tiered incentive compensation formula for NEOs weighted toward long-term incentives. NEOs received approximately 72% of incentive compensation as a long-term incentive award,
of which 20% was PSUs and the remainder was in equal parts RSUs and MSCIP awards. |
|
In determining the 2009 formula for long-term incentive awards, the CMDS Committee
considered a number of factors, including the environment and the Companys pay-for-performance philosophy, and substantially increased the share of compensation that is deferred. |
|
a. Equity Awards- PSUs |
|
At-risk PSUs awarded to NEOs are earned if predetermined performance goals are achieved over a three-year
period. Awards are tied directly to the Companys long-term performance. |
|
2009 equity and MSCIP awards
are generally cancelable upon termination of employment if the NEO leaves the Company to join a competitor. As a result, the cost of leaving the Company to go to a competitor can be significant to the NEO. Similarly, a competitor who wants to
recruit the NEO would incur a significant cost if it were to agree to replace the NEOs canceled awards. Other cancellation provisions of 2009 awards include termination for cause, disclosure of proprietary information and solicitation of
employees or clients. NEOs year-end RSUs and MSCIP awards
are considered vested upon grant and are subject to cancellation provisions. Awards are payable, and cancellation provisions lift, 50% two years after the grant and 50% three years after the grant. PSUs vest and pay out after a three-year
performance period, based on achievement of pre-established targets. RSUs accumulate dividend equivalents that only pay if and when the underlying units convert to shares.
Shares received upon conversion are subject to the equity ownership commitment described above. Shares acquired from at-risk PSUs are subject
to clawback if payment is based on materially inaccurate financial statements. MSCIP awards include the clawback provision described above. |
|
b. Equity Awards- RSUs |
|
Other than the PSUs, the balance of the 2009 equity award was awarded in the form of RSUs. |
|
|
c. MSCIP Awards |
|
These awards are cash-based deferred compensation awards, part of our mandatory long-term incentive program
that offer participants the ability to notionally invest their awards in a range of notional investments, including cash-equivalents, funds that track the performance and characteristics of broad fixed income and equity market indices,
passively-managed funds that track the performance of more specialized market segments, and actively-managed funds. Participants are unsecured general creditors of the Company with respect to their MSCIP balances. |
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
| Compensation Element |
|
Description |
|
Other Features and Comments |
| 3. Voluntary Deferred Compensation
Programs |
|
The Company offers voluntary programs intended to provide employees with financial planning opportunities that are generally consistent
with those offered by competitors. No Company contributions are made to these programs. Participants are unsecured general creditors of the Company with respect to their balances. |
|
NEOs may defer a portion of their cash bonus on the same terms and conditions as other eligible employees. The programs in
which the NEOs participate are described under the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table. |
| 4. Pension and Retirement |
|
The Company provides retirement
benefits to its employees based on work jurisdiction. For example, in the U.S., this includes a tax-qualified 401(k) plan, a pension plan for eligible employees hired before July 1, 2007 and a retirement contribution to the 401(k) plan for such
employees not eligible for the pension plan. Long-serving NEOs may also be eligible to participate in the Companys global Supplemental Executive Retirement and Excess Plan (the SEREP).
The SEREP was originally intended to compensate for the limitations imposed
by the Internal Revenue Service on qualified pension plan benefits and eligible pay and to help attract mid-career hires by compensating them for lost defined-benefit pension benefits as a result of leaving another firm.
We believe our current retirement and savings plans serve an important role
in attracting senior executives, and that the grandfathering provisions under the pension plan and SEREP continue to help retain eligible executives. |
|
When it was
determined that SEREP benefits were no longer needed to remain competitive, the SEREP was generally closed to new participants.
Company contributions to defined contribution plans for NEOs are disclosed in the All Other Compensation column in the Summary
Compensation Table. Pension arrangements for NEOs are
described under the Pension Benefits Table. |
| 5.
Health and Insurance Benefits |
|
All NEOs participate in Company-sponsored health and insurance benefit programs available in the relevant
jurisdiction. |
|
In the U.S., higher-paid employees pay more to participate in the Companys medical
plan. |
| 6.
Personal Benefits |
|
The Company provides limited personal benefits to certain of our NEOs. We believe these benefits are
necessary for competitive and security reasons. |
|
Mr. Mack entered into an aircraft
time-share agreement with the Company in 2009 and, since entering into such agreement, has fully reimbursed the Company for the incremental cost of his personal use of the Company aircraft. Mr. Gorman entered into a similar arrangement as of January
1, 2010. The Companys Board-approved policy authorizes the Chairman and the CEO to use Company aircraft when traveling by air.
Any personal benefits provided to NEOs are discussed under the Summary Compensation
Table. |
26
|
|
|
|
|
| Compensation Element |
|
Description |
|
Other Features and Comments |
| 7.
Severance |
|
NEOs are not contractually entitled to cash severance payments upon termination of employment, except with
respect to prorated compensation due upon Mr. Macks death or disability (described in Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control). |
|
Upon retirement, NEOs may be eligible to participate in retiree medical coverage under the
Morgan Stanley Medical Plan on the same basis as other retired employees. |
| III. |
Compensation Objectives and Strategy |
In order to attract and retain the industrys top talent and build long-term value for shareholders, Morgan Stanleys executive compensation
program is designed to meet four key objectives:
| |
|
Attract and Retain Top Talent. The Company competes for talent globally with commercial banks, brokerage firms,
hedge funds and other companies offering financial services. The CMDS Committee determines executive compensation, in part, by monitoring competitive pay levels and structures and making sure our executive compensation programs are competitive
across the industry. As part of the Companys effort to retain top talent, our long-term incentive awards include payment and cancellation provisions to protect the Companys interests and to encourage executives not to leave the Company
for a competitor. |
| |
|
Deliver Pay-for-Performance. The core of our executive compensation program emphasizes variable incentive
compensation that is clearly and appropriately linked to Company and individual performance. This approach encourages executives to balance increasing financial performance and shareholder value over the year with achievement of the Companys
strategic priorities. It is also designed to reward superior individual performance and promote a shared long-term view among our executive team. |
| |
|
Align Executive Compensation with Shareholders Interests. The Company delivers a significant portion of
long-term incentive compensation in equity to align employee interests to increased shareholder value. As an employees compensation and responsibilities increase, a greater percentage of his or her incentive compensation, relative to other
employees, is delivered as long-term incentive awards, rather than as an immediate cash bonus based on annual results. The CMDS Committee believes that linking incentive compensation to Company results over the year and delivering it partially as
long-term awards that are subject to market and cancellation risk over the course of several years helps motivate executives to achieve both short- and long-term financial and strategic goals. In addition, executive officers and members of the
Companys Operating Committee are required to retain at least 75% of the common stock and equity awards received while they serve on the Committee (less allowances for any option exercise price and taxes). Executives are also prohibited from
engaging in hedging strategies, selling short or trading derivatives with Company securities. These policies tie a significant portion of our executive officers compensation directly to the Companys stock price. For 2009, the CMDS
Committee substantially increased the percentage of total NEO compensation paid with long-term incentive awards, as described above. Further, 20% of any above-base compensation paid to the NEOs was in the form of at-risk PSUs, which only deliver
value if the Company, after three years, meets specific performance targets, including average ROE levels and relative stock performance over the three-year period. |
| |
|
Evaluate Risk-taking and Compensation Arrangements. The CMDS Committee works with the Companys Chief Risk
Officer and the CMDS Committees independent consultant to help ensure that the structure and design of compensation arrangements do not encourage unnecessary and excessive risk-taking that threatens the Companys interests or gives rise
to risk that could have a material adverse effect on the Company. The CMDS Committee, together with the Chief Risk Officer, evaluated Morgan Stanleys current compensation programs and considered the Chief Risk Officers determination that
such programs do not encourage this kind of behavior, due in part to our (i) balance of fixed compensation and discretionary short- and long-term incentive compensation, (ii) use of both equity-based and cash-based long-term incentive
programs, (iii) equity retention policy and (iv) awards that include cancellation and clawback provisions. |
27
| |
The CMDS Committee, along with its consultant and the Chief Risk Officer, will continue to review the Companys compensation programs to ensure they are consistent with evolving best
practices, applicable legal standards and the Companys risk policies. |
| IV. |
2009 Compensation Process and Decisions |
| A. |
Factors Considered in 2009 Compensation Decisions |
| |
|
Performance Priorities and Metrics. At the beginning of 2009, in consultation with the full Board, the CMDS Committee
approved specific performance priorities in two key areas: (1) Company financial performance and (2) client, product and business development. |
| |
1. |
Company financial performance. The CMDS Committee established the following Company-wide financial performance criteria which, at
the time they were approved, reflected the measures primarily focused upon in light of the then-current market conditions: |
| |
|
|
Absolute returns, as measured by return on equity; |
| |
|
|
Relative returns, as measured by return on equity and total shareholder return relative to a comparison group; |
| |
|
|
Absolute value, as measured by tangible book value; and |
| |
|
|
Absolute capital efficiency, as measured by the Companys leverage ratio. |
For 2009, the Companys comparison group for purposes
of setting the performance priorities included: Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., State Street Corp. and Wells Fargo & Company. At the time the
performance priorities were established, the Company was one of the original participants in TARP, along with these seven banks and, therefore, determined to use these banks as its core competitor group for this purpose.
| |
2. |
Client, product and business development. The CMDS Committee set qualitative priorities for each of our primary business units. For
Institutional Securities, they were client development as measured by market share data in global mergers and acquisitions, equity and fixed income underwriting and secondary market trading. For Global Wealth Management, they were productivity,
profitability and retention. For Asset Management, they were achievement of asset flows and assets under management. Messrs. Mack, Chammah and Gorman are the NEOs who have responsibilities that directly affect these business units. To the extent the
overall progress made with respect to these priorities was considered in determining their 2009 compensation, it is described under CEO Performance and Other Executive Performance under B. Evaluating Company and
Individual Performance, below. |
| |
|
Market Data and Review. Throughout the year, the CMDS Committee reviewed analyses of competitors pay levels,
including historical compensation data and consultant estimates of competitors 2009 compensation. This information considered by the CMDS Committee was either prepared or validated by its independent compensation consultant. The CMDS Committee
did not target NEO compensation at a certain range compared to any peer group. The CMDS Committee also reviewed and discussed trends regarding executive compensation with its compensation consultant. In part, as a result of the information reviewed,
the base salaries of the NEOs, other than Mr. Mack, were increased and the portion of compensation awarded in the form of long-term incentives was also increased. |
| |
|
Relative Pay Considerations. At year-end, the CMDS Committee reviewed the relative differences between the
compensation for the NEOs and other executive officers of the Company as compared to similar differences in 2008. |
| |
|
Compensation Expense Considerations. Prior to determining individual NEO incentive compensation, the CMDS Committee
reviewed and considered the relationship between Company performance and compensation expense. As discussed above, while the Company delivered a strong operating performance across many of its businesses in 2009, revenues were significantly reduced
by the narrowing of the |
28
| |
Companys credit spreads. This had the effect of increasing the compensation-to-revenue ratio for the year, despite the fact that firm-wide per capita compensation was at its lowest level in
the past seven years. |
| |
|
Input and Recommendations from the CEO, Independent Directors and CMDS Committees Consultant. At the end of the
year, Mr. Mack presented the CMDS Committee with a performance assessment and compensation recommendations for each NEO other than himself. The CMDS Committee reviewed these recommendations with its compensation consultant to assess whether
they were reasonable compared with the market for executive talent and determined year-end compensation for NEOs in executive session. The CMDS Committee also considered input on NEO compensation from the other independent directors. The CMDS
Committee also reviewed a report of Mr. Macks business and individual accomplishments during the year. |
| |
|
Legislative Guidance. Guidance issued in the United States and outside of the United States in respect of compensation,
including with regard to the portion of compensation that should be deferred for certain populations, was considered by the CMDS Committee in making its compensation decisions. For example, the U.K. Financial Services Authority (FSA) required
minimum deferral rates for certain executives and employees working in the United Kingdom. In many cases, particularly at the most senior levels, the deferral rate established by the CMDS Committee for the eligible population was higher than that
prescribed by the FSA. In this case, the higher deferral rate was applied for the impacted employees, including Mr. Chammah. |
| |
|
Applicable Rules. The CMDS Committee considered the impact that the Companys participation in TARP had on its
position relating to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. Section 162(m) limits the deductibility of compensation for certain executive officers (other than the CFO) that is more than $1 million, unless the compensation qualifies
as performance-based. To qualify as performance-based compensation, the award must be based on objective, pre-established performance criteria approved by shareholders. Historically, the Companys formula has imposed a
cap of 0.5% of our adjusted pre-tax earnings on performance-based compensation paid to designated executives who may be subject to the Section 162(m) limit. Early in 2009, prior to repayment of our TARP obligation, when the CMDS
Committee was considering approving the application of the formula to 2009 compensation, it was clear that at least a portion, if not all, of the compensation earned by our senior executive officers, even if performance-based, would not
be deductible due to limitations under TARP. Accordingly, the Company did not approve the application of the formula for 2009 compensation. |
| B. |
Evaluating Company and Individual Performance |
The CMDS Committee evaluated 2009 performance on a year-over-year basis with respect to financial and other factors. For purposes of this evaluation, the
CMDS Committee compared 2009 performance to our performance in 2008 on a calendar year basis. The CMDS Committee reviewed financial metrics such as profitability, absolute and relative returns and growth in revenues. Due to significant improvement
in the Companys credit spreads on certain of its long-term debt (debt-related credit spreads), net revenues in 2009 were reduced substantially by the related non-cash negative accounting impact. That contrasts with 2008 when deteriorating
spreads resulted in the accounting value of our debt being reduced and our revenues increased. The CMDS Committee considered this impact when reviewing performance for both 2008 and 2009.
The CMDS Committee specifically considered the following factors in
determining NEO incentive compensation:
| |
|
Company Financial Performance. In December 2009, the CFO reviewed the Companys year-over-year
estimated financial performance for 2009 with the CMDS Committee. Before finalizing compensation decisions, the CMDS Committee reviewed the Companys final financial results, including the following: |
| |
|
|
The Company ranked second among the comparison group (defined in IV.A. above) with respect to Total Shareholder Return; |
| |
|
|
The Company had revenues for 2009 of $23.3 billion, up 28% from 2008. Core revenues, excluding the negative impact of the debt-related credit spreads,
were up 123% from 2008; |
29
| |
|
|
The Institutional Securities business delivered revenues of $12.8 billion, up 15% from 2008. Revenues, excluding the negative impact of the
debt-related credit spreads, were up over 200% from 2008; and |
| |
|
|
The Global Wealth Management business delivered net revenues of $9.4 billion, up 53% from 2008, primarily reflecting higher net revenues related to the
joint venture with Smith Barney. |
The CMDS Committee considered the financial results, excluding the negative impact of the debt-related credit spreads as appropriate,
since the narrowing of such spreads is a positive factor in our business in the long-term as it reflects the markets increased confidence in the Company. The narrowing of such spreads provides the Company with the ability to access debt
markets at improved economic rates. A detailed
analysis of the Companys financial and operational performance for 2009 is contained in the Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in Part II, Item 7 of the 2009 Form 10-K.
| |
|
CEO Performance. The Committee evaluated Mr. Macks strong leadership throughout an
extraordinarily challenging year, as discussed below. Despite Mr. Macks exceptional leadership during the year, he recommended to the CMDS Committee that he not receive a bonus for the third year in a row and the CMDS Committee respected
his decision. Mr. Macks accomplishments included: |
| |
|
|
Substantially Improved Results for 2009: Mr. Macks focus on carefully navigating the challenging market and
strengthening Morgan Stanleys industry-leading client franchise positioned the Company to deliver substantially improved results across many of the Companys businesses. Excluding the impact of debt-related credit spreads, the
Companys revenues at a firm-wide level grew 123% from 2008, and the Institutional Securities and Global Wealth Management business units also showed strong revenue growth in 2009. |
| |
|
|
Successful CEO Succession: Working with the Board of Directors, Mr. Mack helped to drive a very thorough,
deliberate and successful succession process that led to the election of, and seamless transition to, our new CEO, Mr. Gorman. |
| |
|
|
Taking Prudent Steps to Enable Morgan Stanley to Cope with the Financial Crisis: Mr. Mack was instrumental in taking
action to secure necessary capital and liquidity, while repaying TARP funds and positioning the Companys emergence from the financial crisis. Among other things, under Mr. Macks leadership, the Company continued to aggressively
manage its risk exposures and strengthen our risk management function, substantially lower the Companys leverage position and take strategic actions to further diversify our business mix most notably, the Morgan Stanley Smith Barney
joint venture. |
| |
|
|
Forging and Closing the Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Joint Venture: Mr. Mack committed Morgan Stanley to take the
actions necessary to form the new joint venture with Smith Barney, which closed ahead of schedule and which created an industry-leading wealth management franchise with more than 18,000 high-quality financial advisors and $1.6 trillion in client
assets as of the end of 2009. |
| |
|
|
Restructuring and Repositioning the Asset Management Business: Under Mr. Macks leadership, the Company has
made important progress in restructuring and repositioning the asset management business for long-term success, including arranging for the sale of our retail asset management business to Invesco Ltd. Limiting our ownership stake in this transaction
to approximately 10% allows the Company to focus on institutional asset management while still participating to an extent in the upside of a stronger combined retail company. |
| |
|
|
Working Closely with Regulators, Public Officials and Industry Leaders: Throughout the course of the credit crisis,
Mr. Mack was the Companys point person with the federal government, including the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve as well as other regulators. Mr. Mack worked to facilitate transparency and to stabilize Morgan Stanley as it
worked through the crisis. |
| |
|
|
Repayment of TARP: Because of the new capital raised, risk reduction and other strategic measures implemented over the
past year under Mr. Macks leadership, the Company was able to repay its TARP obligations, while strengthening our balance sheet and capital and liquidity positions. |
30
| |
|
Other Executive Performance. The CMDS Committee weighed the Companys overall financial performance
and evaluated each of the other NEOs individual contributions to the Companys accomplishments in determining their compensation, including, for our NEOs with responsibilities that directly affect our primary business units, with regard
to the progress made on the client, product and business development priorities of such units as described below: |
| |
|
|
Mr. Gorman, Co-President: The CMDS Committee considered Mr. Gormans efforts in leading the formation of
the new joint venture with Citigroup, creating an industry-leading wealth management franchise as described above. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney is an important step forward as the Company builds its wealth management franchise, providing Morgan
Stanley with the opportunity to further diversify its overall business mix, expanding its presence in this less capital-intense, higher margin, higher ROE business; realize substantial scale economies and cost synergies; capitalize on our
capabilities of each of the Morgan Stanley and Smith Barney wealth management platforms; and increase its distribution network for capital markets and asset management products. The CMDS Committee also considered several key milestones achieved
in 2009 in the Morgan Stanley Smith Barney integration that exceeded initial targets, including with respect to the identification of more than $1.1 billion in potential cost synergies and a less than 2% attrition rate for the top two quintile
financial advisors. The CMDS Committee also evaluated Mr. Gormans role during 2009 in driving the restructuring of the asset management business. This effort included providing greater clarity and focus on the Companys broad
institutional client base, that included selling the retail asset management business, including Van Kampen, to Invesco Ltd. and implementing a strategic outsourcing partnership with State Street for portions of the Companys operations and
technology platform. Mr. Gorman also played an important role in building relationships with key institutional and corporate clients. |
| |
|
|
Mr. Chammah, Co-President: The CMDS Committee evaluated Mr. Chammahs role in restructuring the
Institutional Securities business to maintain and re-align its industry-leading client franchises consistent with the current environment. Despite challenging market conditions, the Institutional Securities business delivered revenues of $12.8
billion, up 15% from 2008. Revenues, excluding the negative impact of the debt-related credit spreads, were up over 200% from 2008. Strong investment banking results included underwriting revenues that were up 61% from the prior year and a #1
ranking in global announced and completed M&A. Sales & Trading revenues were up 17% from 2008, and excluding the debt-related credit spreads, were up more than five-fold from the prior year. Mr. Chammah also led the effort, along
with Mr. Mack and other members of the Institutional Securities leadership team, to build out the client flow businesses and shift resources to businesses with the potential for more attractive risk-adjusted returns. This included hiring more
than 350 professionals in the Companys sales and trading business, including key senior leaders across fixed income, equities and prime brokerage, to build deeper and broader relationships with Morgan Stanleys clients.
|
| |
|
|
Mr. Kelleher, Chief Financial Officer: The CMDS Committee evaluated Mr. Kellehers role in prudently and
proactively managing the Companys capital and liquidity and overseeing the reduction of risk and its balance sheet, which allowed the Company to repay its TARP obligation and still maintain a strong balance sheet and capital and liquidity
positions. It also noted Mr. Kellehers contribution to the progress on the Companys implementation of enhanced systems to facilitate the allocation of economic capital and measure returns on a risk-adjusted basis. The CMDS Committee
also considered Mr. Kellehers continued and substantial efforts to communicate candidly with analysts and investors throughout the year, particularly during periods of extreme market turbulence. |
| |
|
|
Mr. deRegt, Chief Risk Officer: The CMDS Committee evaluated Mr. deRegts key role in aggressively
managing the Companys risk exposures, including his assistance in helping to reduce legacy exposures, and strengthening our risk management function. Under Mr. deRegts leadership, risk polices, procedures, systems, limits and stress
testing were enhanced and 100 new people were added to the Companys risk management function, further evidencing the critical role of this function to the Company. The CMDS Committee also considered Mr. deRegts critical role with
regulators in connection with the Companys transition to a financial holding company and his increased stature |
31
| |
within the organization, reporting to the CEO (and, effective January 1, 2010, to the Risk Committee) and becoming a member of our new Operating Committee. In addition, the CMDS Committee
considered Mr. deRegts new role in assisting the CMDS Committee with the evaluation of the Companys compensation programs from a risk perspective. |
| C. |
2009 Compensation Decisions |
The CMDS Committees compensation determinations for the NEOs for 2009 were as follows:
| |
|
|
Base Salary. The base salaries, in U.S. dollars, for Messrs. Mack, Kelleher, Chammah, deRegt and Gorman were $800,000,
$628,476, $719,347, $634,932 and $734,247, respectively. Mr. Chammahs base salary was £459,247 and Mr. Kellehers was £401,233. The amount of British pounds sterling was converted to U.S. dollars using the 2009 average
of daily spot rates of £1 to $1.5664. |
| |
|
|
Incentive Compensation. As indicated above, Mr. Mack did not receive any bonus and, therefore, none of the following
components, for 2009. |
| |
|
|
Cash Bonus. Mr. Gorman did not receive a cash bonus for 2009. Messrs. Kelleher, Chammah and deRegt received
$3,355,746, $3,834,922 and $2,873,014, respectively. Mr. Kellehers cash bonus was paid in British pounds sterling in the amount of £2,142,382. Mr. Chammahs cash bonus was paid partly in British pounds sterling in the
amount of £874,287 and partly in U.S. dollars in the amount of $2,465,471. With respect to the portions paid in British pounds sterling, the amount of U.S. dollars was converted to British pounds sterling using the 2009 average of daily spot
rates of $1 to £.6384. |
| |
|
|
At-Risk Performance Stock Units. For the first time, the Company granted senior executives at-risk PSUs that only deliver
value if the Company, after three years, meets objective performance targets, as described above. To the extent the Company does not achieve the minimum performance targets set by the CMDS Committee at the time of grant, the NEOs will not receive
shares under this program. The NEOs received 20% of their bonus in these PSUs. The target at-risk PSU awards for Messrs. Kelleher, Chammah, deRegt and Gorman were $2,361,246, $2,840,422, $1,873,014 and $2,853,151, respectively. These values reflect
the number calculated by multiplying the target number of PSUs awarded by $29.3246, the volume-weighted average price of the Companys common stock on the grant date, January 21, 2010. |
| |
|
|
MSCIP and Restricted Stock Units. The remainder of the NEOs bonus was paid in equal parts cash-based deferred
compensation awards under MSCIP and RSUs, each in an amount of: $3,044,619, $3,763,383, $2,309,520 and $5,706,301, for Messrs. Kelleher, Chammah, deRegt and Gorman, respectively. As stated above, the cash-based deferred compensation awards under
MSCIP are subject to a clawback provision, which was further enhanced in 2009. Among other events, the 2009 clawback provision explicitly covers situations where there is (i) a substantial loss on a trading position or other holding or
(ii) any loss on a trading position or holding where an employee operated outside the risk parameters applicable to the trading position or other holding, if, in either case, such position was a factor in that employees compensation
determination. The RSUs are payable, and subject to cancellation provisions until, two years after the grant for 50% of the award and three years after the grant for the remaining 50% of the award. The number of RSUs awarded was determined by
dividing the dollar value of the award by $29.3246, the volume-weighted average price of the Companys common stock on the grant date, January 21, 2010, and rounding down to the nearest whole number. Fractional shares were paid in cash to
the NEOs. |
32
Compensation, Management Development and Succession Committee Report.
We, the Compensation, Management Development and Succession
Committee of the Board of Directors of Morgan Stanley, have reviewed and discussed with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis contained in this proxy statement. Based on such review and discussions, we have recommended to the Board
that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this proxy statement and incorporated by reference into the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 filed with the SEC.
Respectfully submitted,
C. Robert Kidder, Chair (through December 31, 2009)
Erskine B. Bowles Donald T. Nicolaisen
33
Summary Compensation Table. The following table summarizes the compensation of
our named executive officers in the format specified by the SEC. Our NEOs are our 2009 Chief Executive Officer, 2009 Chief Financial Officer and the three other most highly compensated executive officers as determined by their total compensation for
the year ended December 31, 2009 set forth in the table below, excluding, in accordance with SEC rules, the amount in the column captioned Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings. Pursuant to
recently amended SEC rules, the following table is required to include for a particular year only those stock awards and option awards granted during the year, rather than awards granted after year-end that were awarded for performance
in that year. Our equity awards relating to services in a year are made shortly after year-end. Therefore, compensation in the table includes not only non-equity compensation earned for services in the applicable year but, in the case of
stock awards and option awards, compensation earned for performance in prior years but granted in the years (or during the December 2008 transition period) reported in the table.
2009 Summary Compensation Table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name and Principal Position* |
|
Year(1) |
|
|
Salary
($)(2) |
|
|
Bonus
($)(3) |
|
|
Stock
Awards
($)(4)(5) |
|
|
Option
Awards
($)(4)(6) |
|
|
Change in
Pension Value
and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($)(7) |
|
|
All Other
Compensation
($)(8) |
|
|
Total ($) |
|
John
J. Mack
|
|
2009 |
|
|
800,000 |
(9)
|
|
|
(10)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
310,425 |
|
|
139,241 |
|
|
1,249,666 |
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
|
Dec. 2008 |
|
|
67,945 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
572,953 |
|
|
32,527 |
|
|
673,425 |
| |
2008 |
|
|
800,000 |
|
|
|
(10)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
435,097 |
|
|
1,235,097 |
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
800,000 |
|
|
|
(10) |
|
36,179,923
|
(10)
|
|
4,031,395
|
(10) |
|
391,844 |
|
|
399,153 |
|
|
41,802,315 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colm
Kelleher
|
|
2009 |
|
|
628,476 |
(11)
|
|
6,400,365 |
(12) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56,821 |
|
|
2,411,959 |
|
|
9,497,621 |
| Chief Financial Officer |
|
Dec. 2008 |
|
|
27,775 |
(11)
|
|
|
|
|
706,864 |
|
|
|
|
|
329,578 |
|
|
61,630 |
|
|
1,125,847 |
| |
2008 |
|
|
322,903 |
|
|
3,970,219 |
|
|
4,430,553 |
|
|
|
|
|
176,634 |
|
|
2,200,303 |
|
|
11,100,612 |
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
339,603 |
|
|
6,929,843 |
|
|
2,456,633 |
|
|
2,767,300 |
|
|
170,100 |
|
|
1,780,738 |
|
|
14,444,217 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walid
A. Chammah
|
|
2009 |
|
|
719,347 |
(11)
|
|
7,598,305 |
(13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
482,245 |
|
|
1,222,072 |
|
|
10,021,969 |
| Co-President |
|
Dec. 2008 |
|
|
41,031 |
(11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
242,498 |
|
|
55,457 |
|
|
338,986 |
| |
|
2008 |
|
|
322,903 |
|
|
|
(10) |
|
8,834,808
|
(10)
|
|
|
|
|
12,898 |
|
|
823,608 |
|
|
9,994,217 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kenneth M. deRegt |
|
2009 |
|
|
634,932 |
|
|
5,182,534 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,949 |
|
|
6,100 |
|
|
5,868,515 |
| Chief Risk Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| James P. Gorman |
|
2009 |
|
|
734,247 |
|
|
5,706,301 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,372 |
|
|
6,100 |
|
|
6,496,020 |
| Co-President |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* On January 1, 2010, Mr. Gorman became President and Chief Executive Officer. At such time, Mr. Mack ceased to be Chief
Executive Officer, but continues as Chairman of the Board of the Company. On January 1, 2010, Mr. Kelleher became Co-President of Institutional Securities and Mr. Chammah became Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Morgan Stanley
International.
(1)
For Mr. Chammah, compensation is not shown for fiscal 2007 because he was not a named executive officer in fiscal 2007. For Messrs. deRegt and Gorman, compensation is not shown for
the December 2008 transition period, fiscal 2008 or fiscal 2007 because they were not named executive officers in such periods.
(2)
Includes elective deferrals to the Companys employee benefit plans.
(3)
Includes elective deferrals to the Companys employee benefit plans. For 2009, includes 2009 annual cash bonus amounts paid in February 2010 and amounts awarded in January 2010 under
MSCIP for performance in 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Name |
|
2009 Cash Bonus
($) |
|
2009 MSCIP Award
($) |
|
Total
($) |
| John J.
Mack |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Colm
Kelleher |
|
3,355,746 |
|
3,044,619 |
|
6,400,365 |
| Walid A.
Chammah |
|
3,834,922 |
|
3,763,383 |
|
7,598,305 |
| Kenneth
M. deRegt |
|
2,873,014 |
|
2,309,520 |
|
5,182,534 |
| James P.
Gorman |
|
|
|
5,706,301 |
|
5,706,301 |
34
The 2009 MSCIP awards are scheduled to be distributed according to the following schedule: 50% on
February 2, 2012 and 50% on February 2, 2013, and are subject to cancellation and clawback. For further details on MSCIP awards, see the CD&A.
No cash bonuses were awarded with respect to the December 2008 transition period.
(4)
Represents aggregate grant date fair value for awards granted during the applicable period determined in accordance with the applicable accounting guidance for
equity-based awards. Therefore, values disclosed for RSUs and stock options in the table include the values for awards granted during the applicable period for the prior years service. Also, for this reason, the Option Awards
column for fiscal 2007 includes values, even though no stock options were awarded to the NEOs for performance during fiscal 2007.
(5)
The aggregate grant date fair value of RSUs included in the table is based on the volume-weighted average price of the common stock on the grant date, as determined in accordance with
applicable accounting guidance for equity-based awards. For further information on the valuation of the Companys RSUs, see note 2 to the consolidated financial statements included in the 2009 Form 10-K. No RSUs were awarded to the NEOs
with respect to the December 2008 transition period.
(6)
No stock options were awarded to the NEOs with respect to 2009, the December 2008 transition period, fiscal 2008 or fiscal 2007. Stock options were awarded in fiscal 2007 for
performance in fiscal 2006. The value set forth in the table for Messrs. Mack and Kelleher related to stock options for fiscal 2007 represents:
| |
|
The aggregate grant date fair value of stock options granted in fiscal 2007, as determined in accordance with the applicable accounting guidance for
equity-based awards. |
| |
|
The incremental fair value, computed in accordance with the applicable accounting guidance for equity-based awards, with respect to the equitable
adjustment of outstanding stock options to reflect the spin-off of Discover Financial Services in 2007. |
For further information on the Companys accounting for stock-based compensation and for the assumptions used to value the Companys stock
options, see notes 2 and 18 to the consolidated financial statements included in the 2009 Form 10-K.
As of December 31, 2009, all outstanding Company stock options held by our NEOs had no intrinsic value because the exercise price of each stock
option was greater than $29.60, the closing price of the Companys common stock on December 31, 2009.
(7)
The following table lists the change in pension value and the amount of any above-market earnings on nonqualified deferred compensation plans for the NEOs for 2009 and, as applicable, the
December 2008 transition period. Negative amounts included below are reflected as having zero value in the Summary Compensation Table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Name |
|
2009
Change in Pension Value
($)(a) |
|
December 2008 Change in Pension Value
($)(a) |
|
2009 Above-Market
Earnings on Nonqualifed Deferred Compensation
($)(b) |
|
December 2008 Above- Market Earnings on Nonqualifed Deferred Compensation
($)(b) |
| John J.
Mack |
|
(135,682) |
|
572,953 |
|
310,425 |
|
|
| Colm
Kelleher |
|
(134,267) |
|
329,578 |
|
56,821 |
|
|
|
Walid A. Chammah |
|
193,242 |
|
242,498 |
|
289,003 |
|
|
|
Kenneth M. deRegt |
|
36,209 |
|
(c) |
|
8,740 |
|
(c) |
| James P.
Gorman |
|
11,359 |
|
(c) |
|
38,013 |
|
(c) |
| (a)
|
The 2009 Change in Pension Value and December 2008 Change in Pension Value equals the aggregate increase from December 31,
2008 to December 31, 2009 and November 30, 2008 to December 31, 2008, respectively, in the actuarially determined present value of the accumulated benefit under the Company-sponsored defined benefit pension plans during the
measurement period. Mr. Mack experienced a decrease in the present value of his accumulated benefits from December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2009 primarily due to: (1) the increase in the discount rates described below,
(2) the change in the applicable mortality |
35
| |
tables described below and (3) the loss of the early retirement subsidy as he attained age 65. Mr. Kelleher experienced a decrease in the present value of his accumulated benefits under
the SEREP primarily due to the improved investment performance of his defined contribution account under the U.K. Pension Plan, which offsets the SEREP. See the Pension Benefits Table. Changes in present value also reflect the effect of
an additional month or year, as applicable, of pension accrual. The present value at December 31, 2009 is based on PPA generational annuitant mortality tables and discount rates of 6.05% for the Morgan Stanley Employees Retirement Plan (ERP)
and 6.06% and 5.95% for the SEREP. The present values at December 31, 2008 for ERP and SEREP are based on a 5.87% discount rate and the RP-2000 White Collar Combined Mortality Table projected to 2015 with Scale AA, for Males and
Females. The present values at November 30, 2008 are based on a 7.52% discount rate and the RP-2000 White Collar Combined Mortality Table projected to 2015 with Scale AA, for Males and Females. Present values are determined using an
interest-only discount before retirement. Post-retirement discounts are based on interest and mortality. For each plan, the assumed benefit commencement date is the earliest age at which the executive can receive unreduced benefits under that plan
or current age, if greater. |
| (b)
|
The Above-Market Earnings on Nonqualifed Deferred Compensation for 2009 and the December 2008 transition period equals the aggregate
increase, if any, in the value of the NEOs accounts under the Companys nonqualified deferred compensation plans at December 31, 2009 (without giving effect to any distributions made during 2009) from January 1, 2009 that are
attributable to above-market earnings and at December 31, 2008 (without giving effect to any distributions made during December 2008) from December 1, 2008 that are attributable to above-market earnings, respectively. Above-market earnings
represent the difference between market interest rates determined pursuant to SEC rules and the earnings credited on deferred compensation. |
| (c)
|
Messrs. deRegt and Gorman were not named executive officers in the December 2008 transition period. |
(8)
The All Other Compensation column for 2009 and the December 2008 transition period includes, (a) contributions made by the Company under our qualified defined
contribution plans with respect to each such period and (b) perquisites and other personal benefits, as detailed below. Perquisites are valued based on the aggregate incremental cost to the Company. Any of the perquisites and other personal
benefits listed below but not separately quantified do not individually exceed the greater of $25,000 or 10% of the total amount of all perquisites received by the NEO. In addition, our NEOs may participate on the same terms and conditions as other
investors in investment funds that we may form and manage primarily for client investment, except that we may waive or lower applicable fees and charges for our employees.
| (a)
|
The Company contributions to the Morgan Stanley U.K. Group Pension Plan for Mr. Kelleher during 2009 and the December 2008 transition period
totaled £33,000 ($51,690) and £2,750 ($4,088), respectively. The amount of British pounds sterling was converted to U.S. dollars using the 2009 average of daily spot rates of £1 to $1.5664 and the December 2008 average of daily spot
rates of £1 to $1.4865, respectively. For each of Messrs. Mack, deRegt and Gorman, the Companys 401(k) matching contribution for 2009 was $6,100 and was allocated to the Morgan Stanley stock fund. |
| (b)
|
Mr. Mack entered into an aircraft time-sharing agreement with the Company in 2009 and since entering into such agreement has fully reimbursed the
Company for the cost of his personal use of the Company aircraft up to the maximum amount permitted by federal aviation regulations, which, in 2009, allowed Mr. Mack to reimburse all incremental costs incurred since entering into the
time-sharing agreement. The Companys Board-approved policy authorizes the Chairman to use the Company aircraft when traveling by air whenever feasible. Mr. Macks amounts disclosed in this Summary Compensation Table for 2009 and the
December 2008 transition period include $127,491 and $32,124, respectively, reflecting Mr. Macks personal use of Company aircraft prior to entering into the time-sharing agreement. The value of personal use of Company aircraft includes
variable costs incurred in connection with personal flight activity, and does not include fixed costs of owning and operating the Company aircraft. The value was calculated for 2009 and the December 2008 transition period based on the incremental
cost of personal travel, including: landing, parking and flight planning expenses; crew travel expenses; supplies and catering; aircraft fuel and oil expenses per hour of flight; maintenance, parts and external labor per hour of flight; and customs,
|
36
| |
foreign permits and similar fees. The amounts reported for both 2009 and the December 2008 transition period also include amounts related to security provided to Mr. Mack, based on actual
costs, and personal use of a Company-furnished car. |
Mr. Kelleher is covered by Morgan Stanleys overseas assignment policy, which is designed to eliminate any financial detriment
or gain from the overseas assignment. Mr. Kellehers amounts include $2,360,269 in 2009 and $57,542 in the December 2008 transition period related to his overseas assignment and his entitlements under the policy, including housing
expenses, expatriate equalization payments related to taxes, financial advisory and tax planning services, reimbursement for educational costs and cost-of-living adjustments.
Mr. Chammah is covered by a modified expatriate package
with Morgan Stanley regarding his transfer to the UK. Mr. Chammahs amounts include $684,390 for 2009 (converted from British pounds sterling to U.S. dollars using the 2009 average of daily spot rates of £1 to $1.5664) and $54,930 for
December 2008 (converted from British pounds sterling to U.S. dollars using the December 2008 average of daily spot rates of £1 to $1.4865) related to his modified expatriate package. The amounts reported for both periods also include amounts
related to personal use of a Company-furnished car. The amount reported for 2009 also includes financial advisory and tax planning services, personal use of Company aircraft and an estimated expatriate equalization payment of $487,000 related to
taxes. The estimated expatriate equalization payment is only an estimate based on the most recent information available and the cost to the Company may ultimately differ from the amount disclosed herein.
(9)
Mr. Macks employment agreement provides that his annual base salary cannot be less than $775,000, the base salary provided to our CEO who immediately preceded him.
(10)
Mr. Mack did not receive any bonus for 2009, fiscal 2008 or fiscal 2007 and Messrs. Chammah and Gorman did not receive any bonus for fiscal 2008. For Mr. Mack, the
amounts in the Stock Awards and Option Awards columns for fiscal 2007 relate to equity awards granted with respect to fiscal 2006 performance (and with respect to the Option Awards column, amounts related to an equitable adjustment of outstanding
options as described in footnote 6 above).
(11) Mr. Kellehers base salary was
£401,233 for 2009 and £18,685 for the December 2008 transition period and Mr. Chammahs base salary was £459,247 for 2009 and £27,603 for the December 2008 transition period. The amount of British pounds sterling was
converted to U.S. dollars using the 2009 average of daily spot rates of £1 to $1.5664 and December 2008 daily spot rates of £1 to $1.4865, as applicable.
(12)
Mr. Kellehers 2009 cash bonus paid in February 2010 was $3,355,746, and was paid in British pounds sterling in the amount of £2,142,382. The amount of U.S. dollars was
converted to British pounds sterling using the 2009 average of daily spot rates of $1 to £.6384.
(13)
Mr. Chammahs 2009 cash bonus paid in February 2010 was $3,834,922, a portion of which was paid in British pounds sterling in the amount of £874,287 and a portion of
which was paid in U.S. dollars in the amount of $2,465,471. With respect to the portion paid in British pounds sterling, the amount of U.S. dollars was converted to British pounds sterling using the 2009 average of daily spot rates of $1 to
£.6384.
37
Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table. The following table sets forth information
with respect to the RSUs granted under the Morgan Stanley 2007 Equity Incentive Compensation Plan to the applicable NEOs during the December 2008 transition period for fiscal 2008 performance. No equity awards were granted to our NEOs during 2009.
The table does not include equity awards granted to our NEOs in January 2010 for performance in 2009.
2009 Grants of Plan-Based Awards
Table(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Name |
|
Period |
|
|
Grant Date (mm/dd/yyyy) |
|
|
All Other Stock
Awards: Number of
Shares of Stock or Units
(#)(2) |
|
|
All Other Option
Awards: Number of
Securities Underlying
Options |
|
|
Exercise or Base
Price of
Option Awards
($/Sh) |
|
|
Grant Date Fair
Value of Stock
and Option
Awards
($)(3) |
|
| John J. Mack |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Dec 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Colm Kelleher |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Dec 2008 |
|
|
12/18/2008 |
|
|
41,997 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
706,864 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Walid A. Chammah |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Dec 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kenneth M. deRegt |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| James P. Gorman |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
The award included in this table was previously disclosed in the table that appears in the CD&A of the 2009 proxy statement and is disclosed in the Stock Awards column
of the Summary Compensation Table, the Option Exercises and Stock Vested Table, and the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table in this proxy statement.
(2)
The RSUs are scheduled to convert to shares according to the following schedule: 50% in 2011 and 50% in 2012. The NEO is entitled to receive dividend equivalents on the RSUs, which are
paid currently and may be paid in cash, shares of our common stock, or a combination thereof, at the Companys discretion. The NEO may direct the vote of the shares underlying the RSUs. The NEO is retirement-eligible under the award terms and,
therefore, the awards are considered vested at grant; however, the RSUs are subject to cancellation if a cancellation event occurs at any time prior to the scheduled conversion date. For further details on cancellation of awards, see Potential
Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control.
(3)
Represents the aggregate grant date fair value, in accordance with the applicable accounting guidance for equity-based awards, of the RSUs. The aggregate grant date fair value of the
RSUs is based on $16.8313, the volume-weighted average price of the common stock on the grant date. For further information on the valuation of the Companys RSUs, see note 2 to the consolidated financial statements included in the 2009
Form 10-K.
38
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End Table. The following table
discloses the number of shares covered by unexercised stock options and unvested RSUs held by our NEOs on December 31, 2009. Each NEO is retirement-eligible under his RSU award terms and, therefore, all of his outstanding RSU awards are
considered vested and, in accordance with SEC rules, are not included in this table. Outstanding RSUs held by the NEOs on December 31, 2009 are disclosed in the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table. As of December 31,
2009, the stock options held by the NEOs had no intrinsic value because the exercise price of each stock option was greater than $29.60, the closing price of the Companys common stock on December 31, 2009.
2009 Outstanding Equity Awards at
Fiscal Year End Table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
| |
|
Name |
|
|
|
Number
of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
Exercisable(1) |
|
Number
of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
Unexercisable(1) |
|
Option Exercise Price ($)(2)
|
|
Option Expiration Date
(mm/dd/yyyy) |
|
|
Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#) |
|
Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($) |
|
|
| John J. Mack |
|
325,664 |
|
|
|
51.1836 |
|
1/2/2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
313,238 |
|
|
|
55.6085 |
|
1/2/2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
105,126 |
|
105,126 |
|
66.7260 |
|
12/12/2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Total |
|
|
|
744,028 |
|
105,126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Colm Kelleher |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
13,429 |
|
|
|
55.6085 |
|
12/2/2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
27,101 |
|
|
|
48.5345 |
|
12/2/2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
22,775 |
|
|
|
36.2209 |
|
12/2/2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
40,201 |
|
|
|
47.1909 |
|
12/2/2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
72,275 |
|
72,276 |
|
66.7260 |
|
12/12/2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Total |
|
|
|
175,781 |
|
72,276 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Walid A. Chammah |
|
35,349 |
|
|
|
51.1836 |
|
1/2/2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
27,985 |
|
|
|
55.6085 |
|
1/2/2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
63,355 |
|
|
|
48.5345 |
|
1/2/2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
70,036 |
|
|
|
48.1891 |
|
1/2/2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
276,705 |
|
|
|
40.6569 |
|
1/2/2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
74,542 |
|
|
|
36.2209 |
|
1/2/2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
88,999 |
|
|
|
47.1909 |
|
1/2/2014 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
31,786 |
|
31,786 |
|
66.7260 |
|
12/12/2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Total |
|
|
|
668,757 |
|
31,786 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kenneth M. deRegt |
|
156,788 |
|
|
|
51.1836 |
|
1/2/2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Total |
|
|
|
156,788 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| James P. Gorman |
|
354,986 |
|
|
|
51.7552 |
|
2/17/2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
28,386 |
|
28,386 |
|
66.7260 |
|
12/12/2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Total |
|
|
|
383,372 |
|
28,386 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
(1)
The stock option awards in this table, all of which are vested, became exercisable as shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
Option Expiration Date
(mm/dd/yyyy) |
|
Exercise Schedule |
|
1/2/2010 |
|
75% of the award became exercisable on 1/2/2000. The remaining 25% became exercisable on 1/2/2005. The shares acquired upon exercise were
subject to cancellation and transfer restrictions until 1/2/2005. |
| 12/2/2010 |
|
100% of the award became exercisable on 1/2/2003. The shares acquired upon exercise were subject to cancellation and transfer restrictions until 1/2/2006. |
| 1/2/2011
|
|
|
|
12/2/2011 |
|
100% of the award became exercisable on 1/2/2004. The shares acquired upon exercise were subject to cancellation and transfer restrictions
until 1/2/2007. |
|
1/2/2012 |
|
With respect to Mr. Chammahs award of 63,355 stock options, 100% of the award became
exercisable on 1/2/2004. The shares acquired upon exercise were subject to cancellation and transfer restrictions until 1/2/2007.
With respect to Mr. Chammahs award of 70,036 stock options, 100% of the award became exercisable on 1/2/2005. The shares acquired upon exercise were
subject to cancellation and transfer restrictions until 1/2/2007.
| |