Skip to main content
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Peter Munk, left, and John Thornton, right, sparked outcry when details of their pay packages emerged.

Chris Young/The Globe and Mail

Barrick Gold Corp. will unveil pay packages for outgoing chairman Peter Munk and his successor John Thornton, as well as new executive compensation methods, after shareholder uproar over the incoming chair's signing bonus.

Mr. Thornton's $11.9-million (U.S.) bonus galvanized the traditionally passive Canadian pension funds to demand changes to how Barrick was governed, triggering the company to overhaul its board of directors late last year.

Barrick's management proxy circular, to be filed on Monday, will present a new compensation scheme designed to align management's pay even more closely with the miner's performance.

Story continues below advertisement

The company's plan is expected to require executives to hold their shares until they leave the company.

That would be a departure from the previous arrangements, which allowed management to exercise their stock options at certain dates.

"This is coming after they paid Thornton his big bonus. In some respects it's like shutting the barn door after the horses have left," said Robert Gill, vice-president and portfolio manager at Lincluden Investment Management, which holds $3.3-billion in assets including Barrick.

Mr. Thornton's total pay package was $17-million in the previous year and Mr. Munk's total pay package was $4.3-million.

Nevertheless, compensation experts say Barrick is making progress.

"I suspect that they will also have lower bonuses than they did last year," said Paul Gryglewicz, managing partner with Global Governance Advisors.

Last year has been characterized as the worst in Barrick's 31-year old history.

Story continues below advertisement

The company reported a net loss of $10.4-billion and recorded a staggering $11.5-billion in asset writedowns. Barrick's stock dropped to its lowest level in more than two decades and the miner was forced to suspend construction on its key Pascua Lama gold project in the Andes because of cost overruns.

But Barrick also put the company on sounder financial footing by paying down some of its debt, cutting jobs, divesting non-core assets and reworking expensive mines. The Barrick of today is a much leaner company and has been praised by analysts for improving its balance sheet.

Shareholders, however, are more lukewarm.

The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, which was one of the pension funds that pushed for corporate governance changes, has said it continues to have concerns and has indicated that one option for the Caisse is to sell its shares if there is no progress.

Mr. Munk and two of the miner's longest-serving directors will be leaving when the company holds its annual meeting of shareholders in April.

Two of Barrick independent directors who were in charge of listening to shareholders have since resigned.

Story continues below advertisement

The company has nominated four new independent directors including Bay Street financier Ned Goodman and a coal executive. That leaves Barrick with a 12-person board that includes eight independent directors if there are no further changes before the annual general meeting.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Tickers mentioned in this story
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies