0001191638-14-000557.txt : 20140409 0001191638-14-000557.hdr.sgml : 20140409 20140409063443 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0001191638-14-000557 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 6-K PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 1 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 20140409 FILED AS OF DATE: 20140409 DATE AS OF CHANGE: 20140409 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: PEARSON PLC CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000938323 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: BOOKS: PUBLISHING OR PUBLISHING AND PRINTING [2731] IRS NUMBER: 000000000 STATE OF INCORPORATION: X0 FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 6-K SEC ACT: 1934 Act SEC FILE NUMBER: 001-16055 FILM NUMBER: 14752440 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: 80 STRAND CITY: LONDON ENGLAND STATE: X0 ZIP: WC2R 0RL BUSINESS PHONE: 442070102000 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: 80 STRAND CITY: LONDON ENGLAND STATE: X0 ZIP: WC2R 0RL 6-K 1 pson201404096k.htm FURTHER INFORMATION RE REMUNERATION POLICY pson201404096k.htm
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549
 
 
FORM 6-K
 
 
REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16 UNDER

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
 
For the month of April 2014 
 
PEARSON plc
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 
N/A

 
(Translation of registrant's name into English)

 
80 Strand

London, England WC2R 0RL

44-20-7010-2000
(Address of principal executive office)

 
 
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant files or will file annual reports
under cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F:


 
 
Form 20-F X                                                Form 40-F


 
 
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant by furnishing the information
contained in this Form is also thereby furnishing the information to the
Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934


 
 
Yes                                              No X
 
 
 



PEARSON PLC
 
Further information for shareholders in relation to Pearson's directors' remuneration policy report
 
The Directors' Remuneration Report in the 2013 Annual Report and Accounts sets out Pearson's directors' remuneration policy for shareholder approval at the 2014 AGM.
 
Pearson consulted with its major shareholders and their representative bodies on the directors' remuneration policy before publication and sought to reflect their views in the policy.
 
However, following further discussions with shareholder representatives, the remuneration committee (the committee) wishes to clarify the basis on which certain elements of Pearson's policy will apply if approved and, in particular, wishes further to define and limit when and how remuneration arrangements outside the normal terms of the policy and remuneration in excess of the normal limits set out in the policy might be applied.

The policy states on page 81 that the committee "has avoided, where possible, including general discretions in the policy table. However, exceptional or genuinely unforeseen circumstances may arise in the future and in those circumstances it may be in shareholders' interests for Pearson to put in place remuneration arrangements that are outside the terms of the policy set out in this report. If this happens, the committee will be permitted to implement remuneration arrangements that it considers appropriate in the circumstances. In these circumstances, Pearson would consult in advance with major shareholders before it does so and would explain the exercise of this discretion in the following year's directors' remuneration report."
 
The committee considers this discretion, in the context of the safeguards described above, to be in the best interests of Pearson and its shareholders. However, the committee wishes to emphasise that this discretion would only be used in the very narrow circumstances articulated in the policy - that is, in exceptional or genuinely unforeseen circumstances. The committee considers that these circumstances would arise highly infrequently, if at all, in the lifetime of the policy. The committee would regard reliance on this discretion as a matter of utmost seriousness and, in relation to the stated obligation to consult in advance with major shareholders, would not proceed unless there was clear consensus in favour among those consulted. Further, the committee would ensure that the value of the remuneration arrangement put in place in reliance on this discretion would fall within the normal financial limit (as stated in the policy) for the element of remuneration to which the arrangement relates.
 
The policy also states on page 86 that under the long-term incentive plan, restricted shares that are not subject to performance conditions may be made to executive directors, but only in exceptional circumstances on recruitment. The committee wishes to confirm that this discretion will not be used for the benefit of such executive directors other than where it is appropriate to compensate a new director on a 'like-for-like' basis for incentives foregone at a previous employer.
 
The committee confirms that it otherwise expects any new executive directors to be engaged on the same terms and to be awarded variable remuneration within the same normal limits and subject to the same conditions as for the current executive directors outlined in the policy, other than in the circumstances set out on page 89 of the policy where it is appropriate to take account of the terms of the new director's existing employment and/or their personal circumstances.
 
Finally, the committee confirms that Pearson's discretion to award base salary increases, allowances and benefits, and long-term incentive plan awards in excess of the normal maximum limits set out in the policy (on pages 82, 83 and 86 respectively) to current or new directors will only be exercised in exceptional circumstances other than in the case of increases in the cost of benefits that are outside Pearson's control and changes in benefit providers. Again, Pearson would consult with major shareholders before exercising any such discretion and such exercise would be limited by reference to the safeguards described above including only proceeding where there was clear consensus in favour among those consulted. In these circumstances, the committee would ensure that the maximum value of the remuneration arrangement put in place in reliance on this discretion did not exceed a margin of 25 percent over the normal maximum limit for the element in question (as stated in the policy).
 
David Arculus
 
Chairman, remuneration committee
 
9 April 2014

 
 
 
 
PEARSON plc

 
 
 
Date: 09 April 2014 
 
 
 
By: /s/ STEPHEN JONES

 
-----------------------
Stephen Jones
Deputy Secretary