UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

SCHEDULE 14A

 

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.     )

 

Filed by the Registrant  x

 

Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  o

 

Check the appropriate box:

o

Preliminary Proxy Statement

o

Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

x

Definitive Proxy Statement

o

Definitive Additional Materials

o

Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12

 

West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

 

 

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

 

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

x

No fee required.

o

Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

 

(1)

Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

 

 

 

 

(2)

Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:

 

 

 

 

(3)

Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

 

 

 

 

(4)

Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

 

 

 

 

(5)

Total fee paid:

 

 

 

o

Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

o

Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

 

(1)

Amount Previously Paid:

 

 

 

 

(2)

Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

 

 

 

 

(3)

Filing Party:

 

 

 

 

(4)

Date Filed:

 

 

 

 



 

 

101 Gordon Drive
Lionville, Pennsylvania 19341

 


 

NOTICE OF 2012 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

 


 

Dear Shareholder,

 

The 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc. will be held at our headquarters, 101 Gordon Drive, Lionville, Pennsylvania 19341, on Tuesday, May 1, 2012, at 9:30 AM.  The items of business at the meeting are:

 

1.               to elect the ten directors nominated by our Board of Directors and named in the proxy statement;

 

2.               to conduct an advisory vote to approve named executive officer compensation;

 

3.               to ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the 2012 year; and

 

4.               to transact any other business that may properly come before the meeting and any adjournment or postponement.

 

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a vote “FOR” proposals 1, 2 and 3.

 

Only shareholders of record as of the close of business on March 9, 2012 may vote at the meeting.

 

On March 21, 2012, we began mailing a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (“Notice”) to all shareholders of record as of the close of business on March 9, 2012.  The Notice contains instructions on how to access an electronic copy of our proxy materials, including the proxy statement and our Annual Report.  The Notice also contains instructions on how to request a paper copy of the proxy statement.

 

Your vote is important.  Please vote your shares promptly.  You can vote your shares electronically via the Internet or by completing and returning the proxy card or voting instruction card.  You may also vote in person at the Annual Meeting.  You can revoke a proxy at any time prior to its exercise at the Annual Meeting by following the instructions in this proxy statement.

 

 

By Order of the Board of Directors,

 

 

 

JOHN R. GAILEY III

 

Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary

March 21, 2012

 

 

Important Notice Regarding the Internet Availability of Proxy Materials for

the Shareholder Meeting on May 1, 2012:

Our proxy statement and annual report are available at http://www.westpharma.com/na/en/Investors/Pages/ProxyMaterials.aspx

 



 

2012 PROXY STATEMENT

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

PAGE

GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE MEETING

 

1

Proxy Solicitation

 

1

Shareholders Entitled to Vote

 

1

Shareholders of Record and Beneficial Owners

 

1

Voting Methods

 

2

Proxy Card or Voting Instruction Card

 

2

Via the Internet

 

2

In Person at the Meeting

 

2

Voting Shares Held in Qualified Plans

 

2

Quorum and Vote Required

 

2

How Your Shares Will Be Voted

 

3

Changing Your Vote

 

3

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

 

3

Our Director Nominees

 

3

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE MATTERS

 

9

Corporate Governance Principles

 

10

Code of Business Conduct

 

10

Board Leadership Structure

 

11

Chairman, Independent Directors

 

11

The Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

 

11

Director Independence

 

12

Communicating with the Board

 

13

Nomination of Director Candidates

 

13

Related Person Transactions and Procedures

 

14

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD

 

15

Structure of the Board of Directors and Recent Changes in the Board

 

15

Meetings

 

15

Board Committees

 

15

Audit Committee

 

16

Compensation Committee

 

16

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

 

17

Innovation and Technology Committee

 

17

COMPENSATION OF NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS

 

17

Director Compensation for Fiscal 2011

 

17

Director Deferred Compensation Plan

 

19

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF MANAGEMENT AND CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS

 

21

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 

23

Compensation Committee Report

 

23

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

 

23

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

 

39

Risk Considerations in Our Compensation Programs

 

39

2011 Compensation Tables

 

40

2011 Summary Compensation Table

 

40

Stock Awards Grant Date Fair Value (Target) 2009-2011

 

41

Stock Awards PVSU Grant Date Maximum Value 2009-2011

 

41

Option Awards

 

41

Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation

 

42

All Other Compensation

 

42

2011 GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS TABLE

 

43

 

i



 

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT YEAR-END 2011

 

44

2011 OPTION EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED TABLE

 

45

2011 PENSION BENEFITS

 

46

Retirement Plan

 

46

Supplemental Employees’ Retirement Plan

 

46

2011 NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION

 

47

Estimated Severance Payments Table

 

50

Estimated Benefits on Termination Following a Change-in-Control

 

53

PROPOSAL 2 — ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATION

 

54

SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR AND FEES PAID

 

55

Fees Paid to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

55

Audit Committee Policy on Pre-Approval of Audit and Permissible Non-Audit Services

 

55

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

 

56

PROPOSAL 3 — RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR 2012

 

56

Householding

 

57

Costs of Solicitation

 

57

OTHER INFORMATION

 

57

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

 

57

 

ii



 

2012 Proxy Summary

 

This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this proxy statement. This summary does not contain all of the information that you should consider, and you should read the entire proxy statement carefully before voting.

 

Annual Meeting of Shareholders

 

·

 

Time and Date

 

9:30 a.m., May 1, 2012

·

 

Place

 

West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc.

 

 

 

 

101 Gordon Dr.

 

 

 

 

Lionville, PA 19341

·

 

Record date

 

March 9, 2012

·

 

Voting

 

Shareholders as of the close of business on the record date are entitled to vote. Each share of common stock is entitled to one vote for each director nominee and one vote for each of the proposals to be voted on.

 

Meeting Agenda

 

·                  Election of ten directors

·                  Advisory vote on named executive officer compensation

·                  Ratification of PwC as independent auditors for 2012

 

Voting Matters

 

 

 

 

 

Page Reference

 

 

Board Vote Recommendation

 

(for more detail)

Election of Directors

 

FOR Each Director Nominee

 

3

Advisory Vote on Named Executive Officer Compensation

 

FOR

 

54

Ratification of PwC as Independent Auditor for 2012

 

FOR

 

56

 

Board Nominees

 

Each director nominee is elected annually by a majority of votes cast.  The following table provides summary information about each director nominee. Additional detail about directors and their qualifications is included in the proxy statement beginning on page 5.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other Current

 

 

 

 

Director

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Committee Memberships

 

Public Company

Name

 

Age

 

Since

 

Occupation

 

Qualifications

 

Independent

 

AC

 

CC

 

NCGC

 

ITC

 

Boards

Mark A. Buthman

 

51

 

2011

 

CFO, Kimberly-Clark

 

· Financial

· International

· Leadership

 

X

 

C/F

 

 

 

M

 

 

 

 

William F. Feehery

 

41

 

2012

 

Global Business Director, DuPont Photovoltaic Solutions

 

· International

· Leadership

· Technology

 

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thomas W. Hofmann

 

60

 

2007

 

Retired Sr. VP & CFO, Sunoco, Inc.

 

· Financial

· Leadership

 

X

 

F

 

 

 

C

 

 

 

Penn Virginia Resource Partners

L. Robert Johnson

 

70

 

1989

 

Managing Partner, Founders Capital Partners

 

· Financial

· Technology

 

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C

 

 

Paula A. Johnson

 

52

 

2005

 

Cardiologist; Exec. Dir. of Connor’s Center for Women’s Health and Gender Biology Brigham and Women’s Hospital

 

· Healthcare

 

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

 

 

 

iii



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other Current

 

 

 

 

Director

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Committee Memberships

 

Public Company

Name

 

Age

 

Since

 

Occupation

 

Qualifications

 

Independent

 

AC

 

CC

 

NCGC

 

ITC

 

Boards

Douglas A. Michels

 

55

 

2011

 

President & CEO, OraSure Technologies

 

· Healthcare

· International

· Leadership

 

X

 

M

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OraSure Technologies

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

54

 

2002

 

CEO & Chairman, West

 

· International

· Leadership

· Technology

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kensey Nash Corporation

John H. Weiland

 

56

 

2007

 

President & Chief Operating Officer, C. R. Bard

 

· Healthcare

· International

· Leadership

 

X

 

 

 

C

 

 

 

 

 

C. R. Bard, Inc.

Anthony Welters

 

57

 

1997

 

Executive VP, UnitedHealth Group, Inc.

 

· Healthcare

· Leadership

 

X

 

 

 

M

 

 

 

 

 

Qwest Communications; C. R. Bard, Inc.

Patrick J. Zenner

 

65

 

2002

 

Retired Hoffmann-La Roche

 

· Healthcare

· International

· Leadership

 

X

 

 

 

M

 

M

 

 

 

Par Pharmaceuticals; ArQule, Inc.

 

AC

Audit Committee

International

International Operations Experience

C

Chair

ITC

Innovation and Technology Committee

CC

Compensation Committee

Leadership

Public Company Executive Leadership

F

Financial expert

M

Committee Member

Financial

Financial Expertise

NCGC

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

Healthcare

Leadership in Healthcare/Public Health Field

Technology

Science or Technology Background

 

Attendance

 

No director nominee, all of which are current directors, attended fewer than 75% of the Board meetings and committee meetings on which he or she sits.

 

Auditors

 

As a matter of good corporate governance, we are asking our shareholders to ratify the selection of PwC as our independent auditors for 2012. Set forth below is summary information with respect to PwC’s fees for services provided in 2011 and 2010.

 

Type of Fees

 

2011

 

2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Audit Fees

 

$

1,463,205

 

$

1,466,697

 

Audit-Related Fees

 

41,000

 

9,000

 

Tax Fees

 

158,049

 

128,632

 

All Other Fees

 

3,403

 

1,800

 

Total

 

$

1,665,657

 

$

1,606,129

 

 

Advisory Vote on Named Executive Officer Compensation

 

We are asking shareholders to approve on an advisory basis the compensation of our named executive officers. The Board recommends a FOR vote because it believes that our compensation policies and practices are effective in achieving West’s goals of rewarding sustained financial and operating performance and leadership excellence, aligning the executives’ long-term interests with those of our shareholders and motivating the executives to remain with West for long and productive careers.

 

iv



 

Executive Compensation Elements

 

Type

 

Form

 

Terms

Annual Cash

 

Salary

 

-

Held steady or modest increases in 2010 and 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Annual Incentive Plan

 

-

Payouts based solely on achievement against pre-established company financial performance

 

 

 

 

 

 

Equity

 

Performance-Vesting Stock Units

 

-

Payouts based solely on achievement of divisional, regional and corporate goals over three-year period

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stock Options

 

-
-

Vest 25% per year while employed
Exercise period of ten years

 

 

 

 

 

 

Retirement

 

Pension Plan

 

-
-

3 year vesting schedule
Cash balance formula

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other

 

Perquisites

 

-

Life insurance, matching contributions, company car and expatriate benefits

 

Key 2011 and 2012 Compensation-Related Decisions

 

·            Changed the way we calculate expected values of LTI awards so that the values reflected in the SCT align more closely with the expected values approved by the Compensation Committee.

 

·            Increased the weighting of the Adjusted EPS metric under the AIP to emphasize the importance of improving our earnings per share.

 

·            Rebalanced the peer groups to include companies that more closely match our current size and global complexity and against which we compete for talent and business, as well as companies used by third-party advisory firms.

 

·            Conducted annual realizable pay-for-performance alignment analyses for the Chief Executive Officer versus the Company’s peer groups in 2011 and 2012.

 

Other Existing Key Compensation Features

 

·            Clawback of incentive compensation

 

·            No (excise) tax gross ups

 

·            No “single trigger” feature on parachute payments in change-in-control agreements offered to future executives

 

·            No-hedging policy

 

·            Significant executive share ownership requirements

 

·            Independent compensation consultant

 

v



 

2011 Compensation Summary

 

Name and
Principal Position

 

Salary
$

 

Bonus
$

 

Equity
Awards (1)
$

 

Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
$

 

Change in
Pension Value
and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
$

 

All Other
Compensation
$

 

Total
$

 

Total
Without
Change
in
Pension
Value (2)
$

 

Total Realizable
Compensation (3)
$

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.
Chairman of the Board and CEO

 

825,028

 

0

 

2,200,011

 

736,369

 

650,211

 

135,623

 

4,547,242

 

3,897,031

 

2,506,671

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

William J. Federici
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

 

441,267

 

0

 

600,006

 

275,693

 

152,956

 

45,495

 

1,515,417

 

1,362,461

 

974,411

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt
President, Pharmaceutical Packaging Systems

 

371,155

 

0

 

405,149

 

234,291

 

29,704

 

32,520

 

1,072,819

 

1,043,115

 

782,461

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell
President, Pharmaceutical Packaging, Asia-Pacific Region

 

347,005

 

0

 

299,998

 

201,603

 

0

 

211,651

 

1,060,257

 

1,060,257

 

548,608

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz
President, Pharmaceutical Packaging, Europe Region

 

314,917

 

856

 

299,998

 

186,561

 

0

 

43,820

 

846,152

 

846,152

 

631,235

 

 

The table above is not a substitute for our 2011 Summary Compensation Table (which reflects pay opportunity) which is set forth on page 40.  It is intended to supplement and inform that table.

 


(1)          The Equity Awards column is a sum of the stock awards and option awards column of our 2011 Summary Compensation Table.

 

(2)          Total Without Change in Pension Value represents total compensation, as determined under applicable SEC rules, minus the change in pension value reported in the Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings column.  This column shows the impact that change in pension values had on total compensation, as determined under applicable SEC rules, which vary substantially due to actuarial calculations.  The amounts reported in the Total Without Change in Pension Value column differ substantially from the amounts reported in the Total column required under SEC rules and are not a substitute for total compensation under the 2011 Summary Compensation Table.

 

(3)          Realizable pay takes a retrospective look at pay and performance.  It is calculated using actual bonuses earned, end of period stock values and in-the-money value of stock options during the measurement period.  Realizable pay is calculated by adding together: (1) base salary paid, (2) annual incentive plan amounts actually earned for 2011 performance, (3) the in-the-money value of stock option grants made during the applicable year, and (4) the current estimate for payouts for Performance-Vesting Stock Unit Award made in 2011 (92.50% of target).

 

2013 Annual Meeting

 

The deadline for shareholder proposals for the 2013 annual meeting is November 23, 2012.

 

vi



 

 

WEST PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES, INC.

 


 

PROXY STATEMENT

 


 

GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE MEETING

 

Proxy Solicitation

 

Our Board of Directors is soliciting your vote on matters that will be presented at our 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders and at any adjournment or postponement.  This proxy statement, the accompanying proxy card or voting instructions and our 2011 Form 10-K Annual Report, including our annual report wrapper (“2011 Annual Report”), are being made available to you on or about March 21, 2012.  This proxy statement contains information on these matters to assist you in voting your shares.

 

Shareholders Entitled to Vote

 

If you were a shareholder of record of our common stock, par value $.25 per share, at the close of business on March 9, 2012, you can vote.  For each matter presented for vote, you have one vote for each share you own.

 

Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials

 

Pursuant to the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), we are making this proxy statement and our 2011 Annual Report available to our shareholders electronically via the Internet. Accordingly, in compliance with this e-proxy process, on or about March 21, 2012, we made available to our beneficial owners a Notice containing instructions on how to access this proxy statement and our 2011 Annual Report via the Internet and how to vote online. As a result, unless otherwise required, you may not receive a copy of the proxy materials unless you request a copy. All shareholders will be able to access the proxy materials on a website referred to in the Notice and in this proxy statement and to request to receive a set of the proxy materials by mail or electronically, in either case, free of charge. If you would like to receive a printed or electronic copy of our proxy materials, you should follow the instructions for requesting such materials included in the Notice.  By participating in the e-proxy process, we will save money on the cost of printing and mailing documents to you and reduce the impact of our annual meeting of shareholders on the environment.

 

This proxy statement and our 2011 Annual Report are available at:

 

http://www.westpharma.com/na/en/Investors/Pages/ProxyMaterials.aspx

 

Shareholders of Record and Beneficial Owners

 

If your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, Broadridge Corporate Issuer Solutions, Inc., you are considered the “shareholder of record” of those shares.  We have sent the Notice directly to you.  As a shareholder of record, you have the right to grant your voting proxy directly to us or to vote in person at the 2012 Annual Meeting.  We have enclosed a proxy card for you to use.

 

1



 

If your shares are held in a stock brokerage account or by a bank or other holder of record, you are considered the “beneficial owner” of shares held in street name.  The Notice has been forwarded to you by your broker, bank or other holder of record who is considered the shareholder of record of those shares.  As the beneficial owner, you may direct your broker, bank or other holder of record on how to vote your shares by using the proxy card included in the materials made available or by following their instructions for voting on the Internet.

 

Voting Methods

 

You may vote using any of the following methods:

 

Proxy Card or Voting Instruction Card.  Be sure to complete, sign, date the card and return it in the prepaid envelope.

 

Via the Internet.  The Internet voting procedure is designed to authenticate votes cast by use of a personal identification number.  The procedure allows shareholders to appoint a proxy and confirms that your actions have been properly recorded.  The website for Internet voting is www.proxyvote.com.  The enclosed proxy card contains specific instructions on Internet voting and additional instructions are provided on the website.  Please have your proxy card available when you go online.  Internet voting facilities for shareholders of record will be available 24 hours a day and will close at 11:59 PM Eastern Time on April 30, 2012.

 

In Person at the MeetingIf you are a shareholder of record and attend the meeting, you may deliver your completed proxy card in person.  If you are a beneficial owner, you must obtain a proxy card from your broker, bank or other holder of record and present it to the judge of elections with your ballot in order to vote.

 

Voting Shares Held in Qualified Plans.  Any shares you may hold in the West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc. 401(k) Plan or the Tech Group Puerto Rico Savings and Retirement Plan have been added to your other holdings on your proxy card.  Your completed proxy card serves as voting instructions to the trustee of those plans.  You may direct the trustee how to vote your plan shares by submitting your proxy vote for those shares, along with the rest of your shares, by Internet or mail, all as described on the enclosed proxy card.  If you do not instruct the trustee how to vote, your plan shares will be voted by the trustee in the same proportion that it votes shares in other plan accounts for which it received timely voting instructions.

 

Quorum and Vote Required

 

We must have a quorum to conduct business at the 2012 Annual Meeting.  A quorum consists of the presence at the meeting either in person or represented by proxy of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of our common stock entitled to vote.  You are part of the quorum if you have voted by proxy.  As of the record date for the meeting, 33,804,659 shares of our common stock were issued and outstanding.

 

For the purpose of establishing a quorum, abstentions, including brokers holding customers’ shares of record who cause abstentions to be recorded at the meeting, and broker non-votes are considered shareholders who are present and entitled to vote, and count toward the quorum.  A broker non-vote occurs when a broker or other nominee that holds shares for another does not vote on a particular item because the nominee does not have discretionary voting authority for that item and has not received instructions from the owner of the shares.  Although there is no controlling precedent under Pennsylvania law regarding the treatment of broker non-votes in certain circumstances, we intend to apply the following principles:

 

2



 

Proposal

 

Votes Required

 

Treatment of Abstentions and
Broker Non-Votes

 

Broker
Discretionary

Voting

Proposal 1 - Election of Directors

 

Plurality of the votes cast

 

Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be taken into account in determining the outcome of the proposal

 

No

Proposal 2 - Advisory Vote to Approve Named Executive Officer Compensation

 

Majority of the shares present and entitled to vote on the proposal in person or represented by proxy

 

Abstentions will have the effect of negative votes and broker non-votes will not be taken into account in determining the outcome of the proposal

 

No

Proposal 3 - Ratification of Independent Auditors for 2012

 

Majority of the shares present and entitled to vote on the proposal in person or represented by proxy

 

Abstentions and broker non-votes will have the effect of negative votes

 

Yes

 

How Your Shares Will Be Voted

 

In each case, your shares will be voted as you instruct.  If you return a signed card, but do not provide voting instructions, your shares will be voted FOR each of the proposals.

 

Changing Your Vote

 

Even after you have submitted your proxy, you may revoke or change your vote at any time before the proxy is exercised by filing with our Corporate Secretary either a notice of revocation or a duly executed proxy bearing a later date.  You may also vote in person at the meeting, although attendance at the meeting will not by itself revoke a previously granted proxy.

 

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

 

Our Director Nominees

 

Our shareholders will be asked to consider ten nominees for election to our Board to serve for a one-year term until the 2013 annual meeting of shareholders, and until their successors, if any, are elected or appointed, or their earlier death, resignation, retirement, disqualification or removal. The names of the ten nominees for director, their current positions and offices, tenure as a West director and their qualifications are set forth below.  Each of their respective committee memberships are set forth under the heading 2011 Committee Membership and Number of Committee Meetings Held.  All of the nominees are current West directors and, with the exception of Dr. Morel, have been determined by our Board to be independent. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee reviewed the qualifications of each of the nominees and recommended to our Board that each nominee be submitted to a vote of our shareholders at the Annual Meeting. The Board unanimously approved the Committee’s recommendation at its meeting on February 21, 2012.

 

On February 21, 2012, in anticipation of the May 2012 retirement of Dr. Robert C. Young in accordance with the Board’s retirement policy, the Board increased its size to 11 and elected Dr. William F. Feehery to serve until the 2012 Annual Meeting and, if elected by shareholders, until the 2013 Annual Meeting.

 

Each of the nominees has agreed to be named and to serve, and we expect each nominee to be able to serve if elected.  If any nominee is unable to serve, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will recommend to our Board a replacement nominee.  The Board may then designate the other nominee to stand for election.  If you voted for the unavailable nominee, your vote will be cast for

 

3



 

his or her replacement.

 

Director Qualifications and Biographies

 

As a leading manufacturer of pharmaceutical packaging and delivery systems with global operations, we believe that our Board should include a mix of backgrounds and expertise that enhances the ability of the directors collectively to understand the issues facing us and to fulfill the Board’s and its committees’ responsibilities.  Board members should have high standards of integrity and commitment, exhibit independence of judgment, be willing to ask hard questions of management and work well with others.  Directors are expected to devote sufficient time to our affairs and be free of conflicts of interest, engage in constructive discussion with each other and management and demonstrate diligence and faithfulness in attending Board and committee meetings.

 

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee reviews annually with the Board the size and composition of the Board as a whole to determine the qualifications and areas of expertise needed to further enhance the composition of the Board.  As a result of this process, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has identified the following specific criteria as important for potential director candidates: (1) senior level executive leadership at public companies, particularly companies with international operations; (2) leadership in the healthcare or public health fields; (3) science or technology backgrounds; and (4) financial expertise.  The Committee works with management and the other directors to attract candidates with those qualifications.  The goal of the Committee is to achieve a Board that reflects the appropriate balance and diversity of knowledge, experience, skills and expertise.  The following chart shows the current mixture of qualifications of our Board.

 

GRAPHIC

 

The information that follows includes each director’s (1) age and tenure on our Board; (2) experience, qualifications, attributes and skills that the led the Board to conclude that each director and nominee should serve on our Board; and (3) service on the boards of directors of other public companies during the past five years.

 

4



 

 

 

 

 

GRAPHIC

Mark A. Buthman, 51, has served as a director since February 2011.  He has been Chief Financial Officer of Kimberly-Clark since 2003.  He is an active participant in the Standard & Poor Corporate Rating Issuers Council and the Dallas Area CFO Roundtable and serves as a member of the board of directors of K-C de Mexico.

Having served since 2003 as the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Kimberly-Clark, a global producer of branded products for the consumer, professional and healthcare markets, Mr. Buthman provides expertise in the fields of finance and accounting as well as additional experience with real estate, investor relations and information-technology services.  Throughout his tenure at Kimberly-Clark, he has served in a wide range of leadership roles in the areas of analysis, strategy and mergers and acquisitions.

 

 

 

GRAPHIC

William F. Feehery, Ph.D., 41, has served as a director since February 2012.  He is Global Business Director, DuPont Photovoltaic Solutions in DuPont’s Electronics and Communications business segment.  He has been at DuPont since 2002 and has previously served as Global Business Director, Electronics Growth Businesses, and as President of DuPont Displays, Inc.

Dr. Feehery brings extensive global public company leadership experience to the Board, having served in leadership roles throughout the DuPont organization, a provider of innovative products and services for markets including agriculture, nutrition, electronics, communications, safety and protection, home and construction, transportation and apparel.  In addition, Dr. Feehery brings considerable technical experience with a Ph.D. in chemical engineering and over ten years of experience in the technology industry.

 

 

 

GRAPHIC

Thomas W. Hofmann, 60, has served as a director since October 2007.  He is the retired Senior Vice President and CFO of Sunoco, Inc., an oil refining and marketing company, where he served in that capacity from January 2002 until December 2008.  Mr. Hofmann also served Sunoco in various other senior management roles since 1995.  He is a director of Penn Virginia Resource Partners, L.P., Northern Tier Energy, Inc., Fox Chase Cancer Center and Scholar Academies and is a member of the Advisory Board of the Boys & Girls Clubs of Philadelphia.  He previously served as a director of Viasys Healthcare Inc. from 2004 through 2007 and Sunoco Logistics Partners LP from 2002 through 2008.

Mr. Hofmann provides substantial financial, corporate governance and management experience with expertise in all areas of finance, including tax, accounting, auditing, treasury, investor relations and budgeting, and he is well-versed in strategic planning, risk-management and capital-market issues.  Over the course of his distinguished career with Sunoco, Inc., Mr. Hofmann was involved in a number of unique transactions, including significant acquisitions and divestitures.

 

 

5



 

 

 

GRAPHIC

L. Robert Johnson, 70, has served as a director since March 1989. He is Managing Partner of Founders Capital Partners, a venture capital angel group he established in 1988. He is a life member of the Corporation of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a director of the Scholarship Foundation of Santa Barbara, the Santa Barbara Center for the Performing Arts, Affinity Biosensors, LLC and Digifit, Inc.

Mr. Johnson is a seasoned investment and biotechnology business professional, with over 40 years’ experience. He has invested in and operated technology-based companies in a variety of fields, including medical care and genomics.  He brings a wealth of technology, financial and transactional expertise to our Board. Mr. Johnson spent 16 years developing his expertise in research, private equity and venture capital activities through his affiliations with the firms of Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc. and Kidder Peabody & Co., Incorporated, and 22 years in technology investing through Founders Capital Partners. In addition, Mr. Johnson has served on numerous private and public company boards of directors.

 

 

 

GRAPHIC

Paula A. Johnson, M.D., MPH, 52, has served as a director since October 2005. She is a cardiologist and has been the Executive Director of the Connors Center for Women’s Health and Gender Biology and Chief of the Division of Women’s Health at Brigham and Women’s Hospital since January 2002. Dr. Johnson also is an Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School.

Dr. Johnson brings a wealth of leading healthcare expertise to our Board. She is a nationally recognized expert in cardiology and women’s and minority healthcare issues. In her role as Executive Director of the Connors Center for Women’s Health and Gender Biology and as Chief of the Division of Women’s Health at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Dr. Johnson has built a novel, interdisciplinary research, education, clinical and policy program in women’s health whose mission is to improve the health of women and to transform their medical care. Dr. Johnson has extensive experience in developing quality control systems in health care. Dr. Johnson is the recipient of many awards recognizing her contributions to women’s and minority health and is featured as a national leader in medicine by the National Library of Medicine. She has an extensive background in quality and safety in healthcare and in public health systems.

 

 

 

GRAPHIC

Douglas A. Michels, 55, has served as a director since February 2011. Since June 2004, he has served as President and Chief Executive Officer of OraSure Technologies, Inc. and as a member of the OraSure Board of Directors. He also serves as a member of the board of directors of St. Luke’s Hospital and Health Network in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Mr. Michels brings considerable expertise and executive leadership skills in the pharmaceutical, medical device and diagnostic industry having spent seven years with OraSure Technologies, Inc., 19 years with Johnson & Johnson and seven years with Abbott Laboratories. In February 2010, Mr. Michels was appointed to the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS (PACHA). PACHA provides advice, information and recommendations to the President of the United States through the Secretary of Health and Human Services on domestic and global HIV/AIDS policy issues. Mr. Michels previously served on the Board of the National Blood Foundation, the Board of the National Committee for Quality Health Care, and the Coalition to Protect America’s Health Care.

 

 

6



 

 

 

GRAPHIC

Donald E. Morel, Jr., Ph.D., 54, has served as a director since March 2002. He has been our Chief Executive Officer since April 2002 and Chairman of the Board since March 2003. Dr. Morel was our President from April 2002 to June 2005. He serves as a director of Fox Chase Cancer Center and Kensey Nash Corporation and as a member of the board of trustees of The Franklin Institute and of Lafayette College.

Dr. Morel has significant biomedical and pharmaceutical experience with over 20 years’ experience developing and managing programs involving advanced materials for aerospace, biomedical and pharmaceutical applications. In addition, having served with us in a variety of increasingly responsible roles, including Chief Operating Officer, head of our drug-delivery division, and Vice President of Research and Development, Dr. Morel has considerable experience identifying and implementing strategic priorities.

 

 

 

GRAPHIC

John H. Weiland, 56, has served as a director since May 2007. He has been President and Chief Operating Officer of C. R. Bard, Inc., a medical-device company, since August 2003, and served as its Group President from April 1997 to August 2003 and its Group Vice President from March 1996 to April 1997. Mr. Weiland also serves as a director of C. R. Bard, Inc.

Mr. Weiland has considerable expertise in the area of healthcare with over 30 years of experience in the healthcare industry and brings to our Board executive leadership in medical-device company operations with significant international business expertise. As Bard’s President and Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Weiland has responsibility for all of its business operations.

 

 

 

GRAPHIC

Anthony Welters, 57, has served as a director since March 1997. He has been Executive Vice President, UnitedHealth Group Inc., a diversified health and well-being company, since November 2006. In January 2011, he was appointed a Member of the Office of the CEO. From September 2007 to December 2010, he held the position of President of the Public and Senior Markets Group which included UnitedHealthcare Medicare and Retirement (formerly Ovations) and Community and State (formerly AmeriChoice) business units. Mr. Welters was President and Chief Executive Officer of AmeriChoice Corporation, a UnitedHealth Group Company, and its predecessor companies from 1989 until November 2006. Mr. Welters also serves as Vice Chair of New York University, Chairman of Morehouse School of Medicine, a director of C. R. Bard, Inc. and Qwest Communications International, Inc., the Chair of the New York University School of Law Board of Trustees and a trustee of the New York University School of Medicine and the Library of Congress.

Mr. Welters brings to our Board considerable financial and management expertise, having distinguished himself as a visionary yet practical business leader, with demonstrated entrepreneurial, operations and management expertise. As CEO of AmeriChoice Corporation, he directed a highly successful managed care plan while pursuing new market opportunities in the field of managed healthcare. Mr. Welters is the recipient of the prestigious Horatio Alger award and serves as a director of the Horatio Alger Association.

 

 

7



 

 

 

GRAPHIC

Patrick J. Zenner, 65, has served as a director since July 2002. He is retired from Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., North America, the prescription drug unit of the Roche Group, a leading research-based healthcare enterprise, where he served as President and Chief Executive Officer from 1993 to January 2001. He was a director and the Chairman of the Board of Exact Sciences Corporation until July 2010, and from July 2007 until March 2008, served as its Interim CEO. He also served as Interim Chief Executive Officer of CuraGen Corporation from May 2005 through March 2006. In addition, Mr. Zenner serves as Chairman of the Board and a director of ArQule, Inc. and is a director of Par Pharmaceuticals Companies, Inc. He previously served as director of Xoma Corporation from 2002 to 2010.

Mr. Zenner provides to the Board over 40 years of experience and expertise in the pharmaceutical industry. Since retiring from Hoffmann-La Roche, Mr. Zenner has devoted his considerable industry expertise and corporate-governance knowledge to small and early-stage pharmaceutical and technology companies in various capacities, including board member, chairman and interim CEO.

 

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a vote FOR the election of each of the nominated directors.

 

8



 

 

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE MATTERS

 

Development and implementation of best practices throughout our corporate governance structure is fundamental to our strategy to enhance performance by creating an environment that increases operational efficiency and ensure long-term productivity and growth.  Sound corporate governance practices also ensure alignment with shareholder interests by promoting fairness, transparency and accountability in business activities among employees, management and the Board.

 

2011 Corporate Governance Developments

 

Because our Board is committed to strong and effective corporate governance, our corporate governance practices and policies are established, monitored and regularly assessed by our Board with assistance and guidance from our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee to ensure we meet or exceed the requirements of applicable laws, regulations and rules and the NYSE’s listing standards.

 

During 2011, our Board took the following actions concerning our corporate governance policies and practices:

 

·                  implemented declassification of our Board, after receipt of shareholder approval of a declassification amendment to our Articles of Incorporation at the 2011 Annual Meeting;

 

·                  revised our director retirement policy to be consistent with a declassified board; and

 

·                  recommended that an advisory vote on executive compensation be held annually.

 

The changes made to our corporate governance policies and practices build upon our solid corporate governance structure, which is exemplified by:

 

·                  a strong Chairman, Independent Directors, who is elected annually by the Board;

 

·                  our committee charters, which clearly establish the roles and responsibilities of each of the committees;

 

·                  Board committees that are comprised and chaired solely by independent directors;

 

·                  regular executive sessions of our independent directors;

 

·                  a “no-hedging” policy in our insider trading policy, which prohibits all employees, including our named executive officers and our non-employee directors, from hedging the economic risk in the West shares they own;

 

·                  a strong risk management program with specific responsibilities assigned to management, the Board, and the Board’s committees;

 

·                  a director orientation and continuing education program;

 

·                  our clear Code of Business Conduct;

 

·                  our Corporate Governance Principles; and

 

·                  our Compensation Committee’s engagement of an independent compensation consultant.

 

9



 

Additional information regarding the above aspects of our corporate governance is provided in this proxy statement in this section and the sections entitled “Board of Directors and Committees of the Board” and “Executive Compensation—Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”

 

Corporate Governance Documents

 

Our principal governance documents are our Corporate Governance Principles (“Principles”), Board Committee Charters, Independence Standards and Code of Business Conduct.  These documents are available in the “Investors— Corporate Governance” section of our website at www.westpharma.com and copies of these documents may be requested by writing to our Corporate Secretary, West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc., 101 Gordon Drive, Lionville, PA 19341.

 

Aspects of our governance documents are summarized below.  We encourage our shareholders to read our governance documents, as they present a comprehensive picture of how the Board addresses its governance responsibilities to ensure our vitality and success.

 

Corporate Governance Principles

 

Our Board has adopted Corporate Governance Principles to provide guidance to our Board and its committees on their respective roles, director qualifications and responsibilities, Board and committee composition, organization and leadership.  The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee assesses the Principles in light of corporate governance developments and makes recommendations to the Board on any changes to implement.  Our Principles address, among other things:

 

·                  director qualifications, including our Independence Standards;

 

·                  the requirement to hold separate executive sessions of the independent directors;

 

·                  the role of independent directors in executive succession planning;

 

·                  the Board’s policy on setting director compensation and director stock-ownership guidelines;

 

·                  guidelines on Board organization and leadership, including the number and structure of committees and qualifications of committee members;

 

·                  policies on access to management;

 

·                  director orientation and continuing education; and

 

·                  the annual self-assessment of board and committee performance to determine their effectiveness.

 

Code of Business Conduct

 

All of our employees, officers and directors are required to comply with our Code of Business Conduct.  The Code of Business Conduct covers fundamental ethical and compliance-related principles and practices such as accurate accounting records and financial reporting, avoiding conflicts of interest, the protection and use of our property and information and compliance with legal and regulatory requirements.  The Board has adopted a comprehensive Corporate Compliance and Ethics Program and has named John R. Gailey III our Chief Compliance Officer.  Mr. Gailey delivers semi-annual reports on the corporate compliance and ethics program to the Audit Committee.

 

10



 

Board Leadership Structure

 

The Board has determined that combining the CEO and Chairman positions is currently the best leadership structure for the Company.  The Board believes that our CEO is best situated to serve as Chairman because, given his day-to-day involvement with and intimate understanding of our business, industry and management team, he is the director most capable of effectively identifying and implementing strategic priorities.

 

Independent directors and management have different perspectives and roles in strategy development.  Our independent directors bring experience, oversight skills and expertise from outside our organization and industry, while our CEO brings Company-specific experience and expertise.  The Board believes that the combined role of Chairman and CEO promotes strategy development and implementation, and facilitates information flow between management and the Board, which are essential to effective governance.  The Board further believes that combining these roles fosters clear accountability, effective decision-making and alignment on the development and execution of corporate strategy.

 

One of the key responsibilities of the Board is to develop strategic direction and hold management accountable for implementing the strategy once it is developed.  The Board also believes the combined role of Chairman and CEO is an effective structure for the Board to understand the risks associated with the Company’s strategic plans and objectives.  Combining these positions places the Company’s senior-most executive in a position to guide the Board’s agenda in setting priorities for the Company and addressing the risks and challenges the Company faces.  Additionally, maintaining an independent board with a Chairman, Independent Directors permits open discussion and assessment of the Company’s ability to manage these risks and provides the appropriate balance between strategy development and independent oversight of management.

 

Chairman, Independent Directors

 

Thomas W. Hofmann, an independent director who serves as Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, was selected by the Board in 2010 and re-appointed in 2011 to serve as the Chairman, Independent Directors for all meetings of non-management directors held in executive session.  The Chairman, Independent Directors confers with the CEO on Board agenda items, meeting schedules, presentations and other communications, acts as chairman for Board discussions on any subject where the CEO would not be the appropriate person to chair such discussion, and serves as principal liaison between the CEO and the independent directors.

 

The CEO and the Chairman, Independent Directors create the agenda for each Board meeting.  Each independent director may add items to the agenda.  Independent directors meet in regularly scheduled executive sessions and in special executive sessions called by the Chairman, Independent Directors.

 

The Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

 

The Board’s role in risk oversight is consistent with the Company’s leadership structure, with management having day-to-day responsibility for assessing and managing the Company’s risk exposure and the Board taking an active role in overseeing management of our risks—both at the Board and committee level.

 

The Board regularly reviews and monitors the risks associated with our financial condition and operations and specifically reviews the enterprise risks associated with the Company’s five-year plan.  In particular, the Board reviews the Company’s risk portfolio, confirms that management has established risk management processes that are functioning effectively and efficiently and are consistent with the Company’s corporate strategy, reviews the most significant risks and determines whether management is responding appropriately.

 

The Board performs its risk oversight role by using several different levels of review.  Each Board meeting begins with a strategic overview by the CEO that describes the most significant issues, including risks, affecting the Company and also includes business

 

11



 

updates from each reporting segment.  In addition, at least quarterly, the Board reviews in detail the business and operations of each of the Company’s reporting segments, including the primary risks associated with that segment.

 

The Board focuses on the overall risks affecting the Company.  Each committee has been delegated the responsibility for the oversight of specific risks that fall within its areas of responsibility.  For example:

 

·                  The Compensation Committee is responsible for overseeing the management of risks relating to our executive compensation policies, plans and arrangements and the extent to which those policies or practices increase or decrease risk for the Company.

 

·                  The Audit Committee oversees management of financial reporting, compliance and litigation risks as well as the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures.

 

·                  The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee manages risks associated with the independence of the Board, potential conflicts of interest and the effectiveness of the Board.

 

·                  The Innovation and Technology Committee reviews risks associated with intellectual property, innovation efforts and our technology strategy.

 

Although each committee is responsible for evaluating certain risks and overseeing the management of those risks, the full Board is regularly informed about those risks through committee reports.

 

Director Independence

 

Our Board has adopted a formal set of categorical director qualification standards used to determine director independence.  The standards meet or exceed the independence requirements of the NYSE corporate governance listing standards.  Under the standards, a director must be determined to have no material relationship with us other than as a director.  The standards specify the criteria for determining director independence, including strict guidelines for directors and their immediate families regarding employment or affiliation with us or our independent registered public accounting firm.  The standards also prohibit the Audit Committee members from having any direct or indirect financial relationship with us.  The full text of our standards may be found under the “Investors—Corporate Governance” caption on our website at www.westpharma.com.

 

With the assistance of our General Counsel, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has reviewed the applicable legal standards for Board and committee member independence, our standards of independence and the criteria applied to determine “audit committee financial expert” status.  The Committee has also reviewed a summary of the answers to annual questionnaires completed by each director.  On the basis of this review, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has reported its findings to the full Board, and the Board has affirmatively determined that each of its non-employee directors is independent of us and our management under our standard of independence.  In making its determination, the Board considered relevant facts and circumstances, including direct and indirect transactions and relationships between each director and us.

 

Director Mandatory Retirement

 

Non-employee directors must retire on the date of the annual meeting of shareholders immediately following his or her 72nd birthday.  Employee directors must submit their resignation upon the date he or she ceases to be an executive of the Company.

 

12



 

Stock Ownership Goal for Directors and Executive Management

 

To encourage significant stock ownership by our directors, and to further align their interests with the interest of our shareholders, directors are expected to acquire within three years of appointment, and to retain during their tenure on the Board, shares of our common stock equal in value to at least five times the amount of the annual retainer.  In 2011, the annual retainer was $40,000.  The Board has set stock ownership goals for senior executive management, which are set forth in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Other Compensation Policies.”

 

Executive Sessions of Independent Directors

 

Our Board also holds regular executive sessions of only independent directors to conduct a self-assessment of its performance and to review management’s strategy and operating plans, the criteria by which our CEO and other senior executives are measured, management’s performance against those criteria and other relevant topics.  Last year, our independent directors held three executive sessions.

 

Communicating with the Board

 

Interested parties may communicate with the Chairman, Independent Directors or the independent directors as a group by sending a letter addressed to our Board of Directors, c/o Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc., 101 Gordon Drive, Lionville, PA 19341.  Communications to a particular director should be addressed to that director at the same address.

 

Our Corporate Secretary maintains a log of all communications received through this process.  Communications to specific directors are forwarded to those directors.  All other communications are transmitted directly to the Chairman, Independent Directors who decides whether they should be forwarded to a particular Board committee or to management for further handling.

 

Nomination of Director Candidates

 

Candidates for nomination to our Board are selected by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee in accordance with the Committee’s charter, our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, our Bylaws and our Principles.  All persons recommended for nomination to our Board, regardless of the source of the recommendation, are evaluated in the same manner by the Committee.

 

The Board and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee consider, at a minimum, the following factors in recommending potential new Board members or the continued service of existing members:

 

·                  A director is nominated based on his or her professional experience.  A director’s traits, expertise and experience add to the skill-set of the Board as a whole and provide added value in areas needed for the Board to operate effectively.

 

·                  A director must have high standards of integrity and commitment, and exhibit independence of judgment, a willingness to ask hard questions of management and the ability to work well with others.

 

·                  A director should be willing and able to devote sufficient time to the affairs of the Company and be free of any disabling conflict.

 

·                  All of the directors, except for the Chief Executive Officer, should be “independent” as outlined in our Independence Standards.

 

·                  A director should exhibit confidence and a willingness to express ideas and engage in constructive discussion with other Board members, Company management and all relevant persons.

 

13



 

·                  A director should actively participate in the decision-making process, be willing to make difficult decisions, and demonstrate diligence and faithfulness in attending Board and committee meetings.

 

·                  The Board generally seeks active or former senior level executives of public companies, particularly companies with international operations, leaders in the healthcare or public health fields, science or technology backgrounds and individuals with financial expertise.

 

When considering nominees, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee may also consider whether the candidate possesses the qualifications, experience and skills it considers appropriate in the context of the Board’s overall composition and needs.  In addition, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee considers the value of diversity on the Board in the director nominee identification and nomination process.  Accordingly, the Committee’s evaluation of director nominees includes consideration of their ability to contribute to the diversity of personal and professional experiences, opinions, perspectives and backgrounds on the Board.  The Committee regularly assesses the effectiveness of this approach as part of its review of the Board’s composition.

 

To assist it with its evaluation of the director nominees for election at the 2012 Annual Meeting, the Committee took into account the factors listed above and used a skills matrix highlighting the experience of our directors in areas such as pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical services, medical device components, leadership, financial literacy, risk management expertise, and independence.  Under the heading “Director Qualifications and Biographies,” we provide an overview of each nominee’s principal occupation, business experience and other directorships of publicly-traded companies, together with the qualifications, experience, key attributes and skills the Committee and the Board believes will best serve the interests of the Board, the Company and our shareholders.

 

Shareholders who wish to recommend or nominate director candidates must provide information about themselves and their candidates and comply with procedures and timelines contained in our Bylaws.  These procedures are described under “Other Information—2013 Shareholder Proposals or Nominations” in this proxy statement.

 

Related Person Transactions and Procedures

 

The Board has adopted a written policy and procedures relating to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee’s review and approval of transactions with related persons that are required to be disclosed in proxy statements under SEC regulations.  A “related person” includes our directors, officers, 5% shareholders and immediate family members of these persons.  Under the policy, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee reviews the material facts of all related person transactions, determines whether the related person has a material interest in the transaction and may approve, ratify, rescind or take other action with respect to the transaction.  In approving the transactions, the Committee will take into account, among other factors, whether the transaction is on terms no less favorable than terms generally available to an unaffiliated third party under the same or similar circumstances and the extent of the related person’s interest in the transactions.

 

The Committee reviews and pre-approves certain types of related person transactions, including (1) director and executive officer compensation that is otherwise required to be reported in our proxy statement under SEC regulations; (2) certain transactions with companies at which the related person is an employee only; and (3) charitable contributions that would not disqualify a director’s independent status.  The policy and procedures can be found in the “Investors—Corporate Governance—Related Party Transaction Policies and Procedures” section of our website www.westpharma.com.

 

We do not have any related person transactions required to be reported under applicable SEC rules.

 

14



 

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND COMMITTEES OF THE BOARD

 

Structure of the Board of Directors and Recent Changes in the Board

 

At the 2011 Annual Meeting, our shareholders approved an amendment to our Articles of Incorporation to declassify the Board.  As a result, all of our directors are elected annually and will hold office until the next annual meeting of shareholders or until their successors, if any, are duly elected and qualified, or until their earlier death, resignation, retirement, disqualification or removal.

 

During 2011, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and our Board decreased the size of the Board to ten after the retirement of two directors under the Board’s retirement policy.  On February 21, 2012, the Board increased the size of the Board to 11 and elected Dr. Feehery to serve until the 2012 Annual Meeting and, if elected by shareholders, until the 2013 Annual Meeting.  The Board took this action in anticipation of Dr. Young’s retirement at the 2012 Annual Meeting under the Board’s retirement policy.

 

Meetings

 

During 2011, our Board met six times.  Each director attended at least 75% of the Board meetings and the meetings of the Board committees on which he or she served.  All directors are expected to attend the 2012 Annual Meeting, and all of our directors with the exception of Mr. Weiland attended the 2011 Annual Meeting.  Last year, our independent directors held three executive sessions.

 

Board Committees

 

The Board has four standing committees: the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and the Innovation and Technology Committee, each of which consists solely of independent directors.  Each of our committees has a written charter, which is posted in the “Investors—Corporate Governance” section of our website at www.westpharma.com.  You may request a printed copy of each committee’s charter from our Corporate Secretary.  The following table sets forth the members of our board committees as of December 31, 2011 and the number of meetings held last year.

 

2011 Committee Membership and Number of Committee Meetings Held

 

Name

 

Audit

 

Compensation

 

Nominating and
Corporate

Governance

 

Innovation and
Technology

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mark A. Buthman

 

C

 

 

 

M

 

 

 

Thomas W. Hofmann

 

M

 

 

 

C

 

 

 

L. Robert Johnson

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C

 

Paula A. Johnson

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

 

Douglas A. Michels

 

M

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John H. Weiland

 

 

 

C

 

 

 

 

 

Anthony Welters

 

 

 

M

 

 

 

 

 

Robert C. Young

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M

 

Patrick J. Zenner

 

 

 

M

 

M

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of 2011 Meetings

 

8

 

5

 

4

 

3

 

 

M = Member         C = Chair

 

Our committee membership changed in May 2011. Mr. Buthman and Mr. Michels were appointed to the Audit Committee, and Mr. Buthman was appointed as Audit Committee chairman.  Following the July 2011 committee meetings, John P. Neafsey retired from the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and the Audit Committee and Geoffrey F. Worden retired from the Audit

 

15



 

Committee in anticipation of their August retirements from the Board.

 

Audit Committee

 

The Audit Committee assists our Board in its oversight of (1) the integrity of our financial statements; (2) the independence and qualifications of our independent auditors; (3) the performance of our internal audit function and independent auditors; and (4) our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements.  In carrying out these responsibilities, the Audit Committee, among other things:

 

·                  Reviews and discusses our annual and quarterly financial statements with management and the independent auditors;

 

·                  Manages our relationship with the independent auditors, including having sole authority for their appointment, retention and compensation; reviewing the scope of their work; approving non-audit and audit services; and confirming the independence of the independent auditors; and

 

·                  Oversees management’s implementation and maintenance of disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting.

 

Audit Committee Financial Experts.  The Board has determined that Mr. Buthman and Mr. Hofmann are each an “audit committee financial expert” within the meaning of SEC regulations.

 

Compensation Committee

 

The purpose of the Compensation Committee is to discharge the Board’s responsibilities relating to compensation of the Company’s executive officers.  In discharging its duties, the Committee monitors the effectiveness of our executive compensation programs in realizing our compensation philosophy, reviews and approves corporate goals and objectives relevant to the compensation of our executive officers, and evaluates their performance against those goals and objectives.

 

In addition, the Compensation Committee develops our overall compensation philosophy, and, either as a committee or together with the other independent directors, determines and approves our executive compensation programs, makes all decisions about the compensation of our executive officers, including the named executive officers, and oversees our cash and equity-based incentive compensation plans.  The Compensation Committee reviews and discusses our CEO’s compensation with the independent directors in executive session before making a final decision on his compensation.  Each year, the Compensation Committee reviews the nature and amounts of all elements of the named executive officers’ compensation, both separately and in total, to ensure that compensation levels continue to support our pay-for-performance philosophy and accomplish the Committee’s goals of linking compensation with shareholder value.

 

The Compensation Committee approves guidelines for grants of equity-based awards under our incentive plans and has adopted policy and procedures that govern equity grants.  Under that policy, the Compensation Committee makes all equity awards once per year at a committee meeting in February following the release of earnings for the prior year.  The Compensation Committee has delegated limited authority to a plan committee comprised of the CEO, Vice President, Human Resources, General Counsel and Corporate Controller to grant equity awards in connection with the hiring or promotion of employees or for retention purposes.  The policy also confirms that the grant date of any equity award is the date the award is approved at a meeting of the Compensation Committee or plan committee and that the exercise price of any stock option is determined as of the grant date in compliance with the terms of the applicable incentive plan. Additional information about the processes and procedures the Compensation Committee follows in

 

16



 

considering and setting executive compensation is provided under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”

 

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

 

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee identifies qualified individuals to serve as board members; recommends nominees for director and officer positions; determines the appropriate size and composition of our Board and its committees; monitors a process to assess Board effectiveness; reviews related-party transactions; and considers matters of corporate governance.  When necessary, after review by the Chairman, Independent Directors, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee formally recommends to our Board a successor to our CEO.  The committee also reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding compensation and benefits for non-employee directors.  The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee administers director equity-based compensation awards.

 

Innovation and Technology Committee

 

The Innovation and Technology Committee provides guidance to our Board on technical and commercial innovation strategies, reviews emerging technology trends that may affect our business, reviews our major innovation and technological programs and overall patent strategies, and assists our Board in making well-informed choices about investments in new technology.

 

COMPENSATION OF NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS

 

Director Compensation for Fiscal 2011

 

Our non-employee directors receive annual grants of deferred stock and cash compensation, in the form of an annual retainer, meeting and committee fees.  In 2011, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee reviewed director compensation and recommended no increase in director compensation.  As a result, our director compensation has not changed since 2010.  The following table shows the meeting fees and retainers we paid to non-employee directors for 2011:

 

Compensation Item

 

Amount

 

Annual Retainers

 

 

 

Board

 

$

40,000

 

Audit Committee Chair

 

$

15,000

 

Compensation Committee Chair

 

$

7,500

 

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chair

 

$

7,500

 

Innovation and Technology Committee Chair

 

$

7,500

 

Chairman, Independent Directors

 

$

20,000

 

Per-Meeting Fees

 

 

 

Board

 

$

1,500

 

Committee

 

$

1,000

 

 

17



 

The total 2011 compensation of our non-employee directors is shown in the following table:

 

Name

 

Fees Earned
or Paid
in Cash

($)

 

Stock Awards
($)

 

All Other
Compensation

($)

 

Total
($)

 

Mark A. Buthman

 

58,180

 

110,000

 

419

 

168,599

 

Thomas W. Hofmann

 

88,500

 

110,000

 

7,339

 

205,839

 

L. Robert Johnson

 

59,500

 

110,000

 

21,277

 

190,777

 

Paula A. Johnson

 

50,500

 

110,000

 

9,969

 

170,469

 

Douglas A. Michels

 

47,222

 

110,000

 

634

 

157,856

 

John P. Neafsey*

 

42,472

 

110,000

 

2,689,873

 

2,842,345

 

John H. Weiland

 

60,000

 

110,000

 

11,383

 

181,383

 

Anthony Welters

 

54,000

 

110,000

 

24,261

 

188,261

 

Geoffrey F. Worden*

 

34,722

 

110,000

 

2,167,872

 

2,312,594

 

Robert C. Young

 

59,750

 

110,000

 

19,143

 

188,893

 

Patrick J. Zenner

 

58,000

 

110,000

 

12,638

 

180,638

 

 


*                 Mr. Neafsey and Mr. Worden retired from the Board under the Board’s retirement policy on August 4, 2011 and August 7, 2011, respectively.

 

Fees Earned or Paid in Cash.  The amounts in the “Fees Earned or Paid in Cash” column are retainers and meeting fees earned for serving on our Board, its committees and as committee chairs and Chairman, Independent Directors.  All annual retainers and meeting fees are paid quarterly.  The amounts are not reduced to reflect elections to defer fees under the Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors (“Director Deferred Compensation Plan”).  Mr. Michels, Mr. Welters, and Mr. Weiland deferred 100% of their cash compensation during 2011.  Dr. Young deferred 50% of his cash compensation during 2011.

 

Stock Awards.  The amounts in the “Stock Awards” column reflect the grant date fair value for deferred stock awards made in 2011.  The grant date fair value is determined under Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification (“FASB ASC”) Topic 718.  In 2011, each non-employee director was awarded 2,325 shares of deferred stock.  The 2011 deferred stock had a grant date fair market value of $47.31 per share based on the closing price of our common stock on the award date, May 3, 2011.  For a more detailed discussion on the grant date fair value for our deferred stock awards, refer to Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements included in our 2011 Form 10-K.  Deferred stock awards are made on the date of our annual meeting and vest pro rata on a monthly basis through the date of the next annual meeting when the awards become fully vested.  Vesting ceases upon termination for any reason, and the entire award is forfeited immediately if a director is removed from the Board for cause.

 

Messrs. Worden and Neafsey forfeited 75% of their Deferred Stock award upon their retirement under the terms of the grant.  The value of the forfeiture on their respective retirement dates were: Mr. Neafsey - $71,877 and Mr. Worden - $72,401.

 

All deferred stock is credited to an account under the Director Deferred Compensation Plan and is distributed as shares of common stock according to the terms of that plan, as described below.  When dividends are paid on common stock, additional shares of deferred stock are credited to each director’s deferred stock account as if those dividends were used to purchase additional shares.

 

All Other Compensation.  The amounts in the “All Other Compensation” column are the sum of the: (1) dividend equivalents credited to accounts under the Director Deferred Compensation Plan;, (2) with respect to Mr. Hofmann, Dr. Paula Johnson, Mr. Neafsey, Mr. Weiland, Mr. Welters, Mr. Worden and Mr. Zenner, charitable contributions of $1,000 each made under our charitable contribution matching program, which is available to our employees, retirees and directors on a non-discriminatory basis; (3) with respect to Mr.

 

18



 

Neafsey, distribution of all of his account balance under the Director Deferred Compensation Plan, which he accrued during his 24-year tenure as a director; and, (4) with respect to Mr. Worden, distribution of a significant portion of his account balance under the Director Deferred Compensation Plan, which he accrued during his 18-year tenure as a director.

 

Stock Options.  Prior to 2007, non-employee directors received annual grants of stock options, which vested on the first anniversary of the grant date.  After benchmarking this practice, our Board stopped granting stock options to directors.  All stock options are vested and expire ten years after the original date of grant.

 

The following table presents information on stock awards and stock options as of December 31, 2011 for each person who served as a non-employee director last year.

 

Outstanding Director Stock Awards and Stock Options at Year-End 2011

 

Name

 

Vested Deferred Stock
Awards

(#)

 

Unvested Deferred
Stock Awards

(#)

 

Total Deferred
Stock Awards

(#)

 

Stock Options
Outstanding

(#)

 

Mark A. Buthman

 

1,557

 

779

 

2,336

 

 

Thomas W. Hofmann

 

10,228

 

779

 

11,007

 

 

L. Robert Johnson

 

10,905

 

779

 

11,684

 

19,200

 

Paula A. Johnson

 

10,905

 

779

 

11,684

 

3,900

 

Douglas A. Michels

 

1,557

 

779

 

2,336

 

 

John P. Neafsey*

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

6,400

 

John H. Weiland

 

10,905

 

779

 

11,684

 

 

Anthony Welters

 

10,905

 

779

 

11,684

 

28,200

 

Geoffrey F. Worden*

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

23,700

 

Robert C. Young

 

10,905

 

779

 

11,684

 

12,800

 

Patrick J. Zenner

 

10,905

 

779

 

11,684

 

23,950

 

 


*                 Mr. Neafsey and Mr. Worden retired from the Board under the Board’s retirement policy on August 4, 2011 and August 7, 2011, respectively, and received distributions of their vested deferred stock awards.

 

Director Deferred Compensation Plan

 

All non-employee directors may participate in the Director Deferred Compensation Plan, which permits participants to defer all or a part of their annual cash retainers and meeting fees until their Board service terminates.  Deferred fees may be credited to a “stock-unit” account that is deemed invested in our common stock or to an account that earns interest at the prime rate of our principal commercial bank.  The stock-unit accounts also are credited with dividend equivalents based on the number of stock units credited to the account as of the dividend record date.

 

The value of a director’s account balance is distributed on termination of Board service.  The value of a director’s stock-unit account is determined by multiplying the number of stock units credited to the account by the fair market value of our common stock on the termination date.

 

Directors may receive their distribution as a lump sum or in up to ten annual installments.  Separate elections apply to amounts earned and vested before 2005 and amounts earned and vested after December 31, 2004.  Deferred stock is distributed in shares of stock and deferred stock units are distributed in cash.  If a director elects the installment option, any cash-account balances during the distribution period will earn interest at the prime rate of our principal commercial bank and deferred stock will be credited with dividends until paid.  Partial shares are distributed in cash.

 

19



 

The following table summarizes the amounts credited to each Director Deferred Compensation Plan account as of December 31, 2011:

 

Name

 

Stock Units
Value(1)
($)

 

Deferred Stock
Value (1)

($)

 

Amount Invested in
Cash Account (2)
($)

 

Total Account
Balance

($)

 

Mark A. Buthman

 

-0-

 

88,651

 

-0-

 

88,651

 

Thomas W. Hofmann

 

-0-

 

417,716

 

-0-

 

417,716

 

L. Robert Johnson

 

881,275

 

443,408

 

-0-

 

1,324,683

 

Paula A. Johnson

 

131,990

 

443,408

 

-0-

 

575,398

 

Douglas A. Michels

 

45,274

 

88,651

 

-0-

 

133,925

 

John P. Neafsey (3)

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

John H. Weiland

 

255,100

 

443,408

 

-0-

 

698,508

 

Anthony Welters

 

1,035,200

 

443,408

 

-0-

 

1,478,608

 

Geoffrey F. Worden (4)

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

72,926

 

72,926

 

Robert C. Young

 

759,531

 

443,408

 

-0-

 

1,202,939

 

Patrick J. Zenner

 

294,454

 

443,408

 

-0-

 

737,862

 

 


(1)          Value is determined by multiplying the number of stock units or shares of deferred stock, as applicable, times $37.95, the fair market value of a share of stock on December 31, 2011.  Stock units relate to deferred compensation that has previously been reported in the “Fees Earned or Paid in Cash” column for the year the compensation was earned.

 

(2)          Mr. Worden was the only director with amounts invested in the interest-bearing account.  This account earned interest at a rate of 3.25%, compounded quarterly, which resulted in $2,317 being credited to his account in 2011.  This amount will be distributed in 2012 and 2013.

 

(3)          Mr. Neafsey retired from the Board on August 4, 2011.  His account balance was distributed on October 3, 2011 under the terms of the Director Deferred Compensation Plan and his elections.

 

(4)          Mr. Worden retired from the Board on August 7, 2011.  Substantially all of his account balance was distributed on October 3, 2011 under the terms of the Director Deferred Compensation Plan and his elections.

 

20



 

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF MANAGEMENT AND CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS

 

The following table shows the number of shares of our common stock beneficially owned by (a) each of our directors; (b) each named executive officer (as defined in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this proxy statement); (c) all current directors and executive officers as a group; and (d) each person or group known by us to own more than five percent of the outstanding shares of our common stock.  The information is stated as of March 1, 2012.  Unless otherwise noted, the beneficial owners exercise sole voting and/or dispositive power over their shares.

 

Name

 

Common Stock (1)

 

Options
Exercisable
Within 60 Days

 

Percent of Class

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

-0-

 

7,432

 

*

 

Mark A. Buthman

 

1,557

 

 

*

 

William J. Federici

 

89,010

 

162,596

 

*

 

William F. Feehery

 

-0-

 

 

*

 

Thomas W. Hofmann

 

10,228

 

 

*

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

2,233

 

8,859

 

*

 

L. Robert Johnson

 

23,669

(2)

16,000

 

*

 

Paula A. Johnson

 

10,905

 

3,900

 

*

 

Heino Lennartz

 

640

 

18,738

 

*

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

411,201

 

678,590

 

3.2

%

Douglas A. Michels

 

1,557

 

 

*

 

John H. Weiland

 

10,905

 

 

*

 

Anthony Welters

 

13,831

 

19,200

 

*

 

Robert C. Young

 

19,019

 

12,800

 

*

 

Patrick J. Zenner

 

13,655

 

23,950

 

*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All directors and executive officers as a group (21)

 

839,414

(3)

1,286,939

 

6.3

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Franklin Advisory Services, LLC
One Parker Plaza, Ninth Floor
Fort Lee, NJ 07024

 

3,391,516

(4)

 

10.1

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BlackRock, Inc.
40 East 52nd Street
New York, NY 10022

 

2,474,663

(5)

 

 

7.3

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Neuberger Berman Group LLC
605 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10158

 

2,257,094

(6)

 

6.7

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Vanguard Group, Inc.
100 Vanguard Blvd.
Malvern, PA 19355

 

2,007,074

(7)

 

5.9

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NFJ Investment Group LLC
2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 700
Dallas, TX 75201

 

1,737,049

(8)

 

5.2

%

 


* Less than one percent of the outstanding shares of our common stock.

 

21



 

(1)          For executive officers, the common stock column includes (a) vested shares held in employee participant accounts under our 401(k) plan, Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan for Designated Employees and Employee Stock Purchase Plan and (b) incentive shares (time-vested restricted stock held in various incentive plan accounts), unless those shares have been deferred under the Employee Deferred Compensation Plan.  For non-employee directors, the common stock column includes vested deferred stock awarded under the Director Deferred Compensation Plan, which are distributed in shares of common stock upon termination of Board service.  The following table shows how these shares are held:

 

Name

 

Deferred Stock

 

401(k) Plan

 

Employee Deferred
Compensation Plan

 

Employee Stock
Purchase Plan

 

Incentive Shares
(Restricted Stock)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

 

 

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

Mark A. Buthman

 

1,557

 

 

 

 

 

William J. Federici

 

 

498

 

7,012

 

6,226

 

 

William F. Feehery

 

-0-

 

 

 

 

 

Thomas W. Hofmann

 

10,228

 

 

 

 

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

411

 

362

 

L. Robert Johnson

 

10,905

 

 

 

 

 

Paula A. Johnson

 

10,905

 

 

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz

 

 

 

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

 

1,319

 

19,761

 

4,050

 

 

Douglas A. Michels

 

1,557

 

 

 

 

 

John H. Weiland

 

10,905

 

 

 

 

 

Anthony Welters

 

10,905

 

 

 

 

 

Robert C. Young

 

10,905

 

 

 

 

 

Patrick J. Zenner

 

10,905

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All directors and executive officers as a group (21)

 

78,772

 

11,849

 

60,166

 

29,591

 

1,994

 

 

(2)          Includes 5,763 shares jointly owned with spouse.

 

(3)          Includes 34,803 shares held by our charitable foundation.  Paula A. Johnson, a member of our Board, and Richard D. Luzzi, one of our executive officers, are trustees of the foundation and, in that capacity, are each deemed to be the beneficial owner of the shares held by the foundation because they share voting and dispositive power over those shares.  Dr. Johnson and Mr. Luzzi disclaim any economic interest in shares held by the foundation.

 

(4)          Based on information contained in a Schedule 13G filing on February 9, 2012 made by Franklin Resources, Inc. (“FRI”), Charles B. Johnson, Rupert H. Johnson, Jr. and Franklin Advisory Services, LLC (“FAS”).  Represents shares beneficially owned by one or more open or closed-end investment companies or other managed accounts, which are advised by direct and indirect investment advisory subsidiaries of FRI.  Charles B. Johnson and Rupert H. Johnson, Jr. are principal owners of FRI, and they, along with FRI and each of FRI’s advisory subsidiaries, including FAS, disclaim any economic interest or beneficial ownership in any of the shares covered by the Schedule.  They disclaim the existence of a group.  FAS has sole dispositive power with respect to 3,391,516 of the shares and sole voting power with respect to 3,359,516 of the shares.

 

(5)          Based on information contained in a Schedule 13G filing on February 10, 2012 made by BlackRock, Inc.

 

(6)          Based on information contained in a Schedule 13G filing on February 14, 2012 made by Neuberger Berman Group LLC and Neuberger Berman LLC.  Neuberger Berman LLC and Neuberger Berman Management LLC serve as a sub-advisor and investment manager of Neuberger Berman Group LLC’s various registered mutual funds. Neuberger Berman Group LLC has shared dispositive power with respect to 2,257,094 of the shares and shared voting power with respect to 2,023,935. Neuberger Berman Group LLC does not have sole power to vote or dispose of the shares.

 

(7)          Based on information contained in a Schedule 13G filing on February 10, 2012 made by The Vanguard Group, Inc.  Vanguard has sole dispositive power with respect to 1,958,387 of the shares, shared dispositive power with respect to 48,687 and sole voting power with respect to 48,687 of the shares.

 

(8)          Based on information contained in a Schedule 13G filing on February 13, 2012 made by Allianz Global Investors Capital LLC and its wholly owned subsidiary NFJ Investment Group LLC.  Allianz Global Investors Capital LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Allianz Global Investors of America L.P.  Represents shares held by investment advisory clients or discretionary accounts of which Allianz Global Investors Capital LLC or NFJ is the investment adviser.  They disclaim the existence of a group.  NFJ has sole dispositive power with respect to 1,737,049 of the shares and sole voting power with respect to 1,719,749 of the shares.

 

22



 

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 

Compensation Committee Report

 

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis.  Based on its review and discussions with management, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board, and the Board approved, that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this proxy statement and in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

 

Compensation Committee

 

John H. Weiland, Chairman

Anthony Welters

Patrick J. Zenner

 

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

 

This section discusses and analyzes our executive compensation philosophy and programs, the compensation decisions made under those programs and the factors that were considered in making those decisions.  It focuses on the compensation for each of our named executive officers for 2011:

 

Donald E. Morel — Chairman and Chief Executive Officer;

William J. Federici —Vice President and Chief Financial Officer;

Jeffrey C. Hunt — President, Packaging Systems Division;

Warwick Bedwell — President, Packaging Systems, Asia Pacific Region; and

Heino Lennartz — President, Packaging Systems, Europe Region.

 

Executive Summary

 

Company and Performance Overview

 

We manufacture components and systems for the packaging and delivery of injectable drugs and delivery system components for the pharmaceutical, healthcare and consumer-products industries.  Our core pharmaceutical packaging products include stoppers and seals for vials, prefillable syringe components and systems and components for infusion and intravenous systems.  We also develop and sell devices and components to enhance safe drug administration and to aid drug reconstitution, mixing and transfer and multi-component systems for drug administration and a variety of custom contract-manufactured products for the healthcare and consumer-products industries.

 

In 2011, we delivered solid year-over-year financial results as net sales of just under $1.2 billion increased 7.9% and gross profit of $339 million increased 6.7%.  Net income for 2011 was $75.5 million, or $2.16 per diluted share, compared to $65.3 million, or $1.89 per diluted share, in 2010, an increase of 14.2%.  In 2011, we continued to focus on improving profitability by implementing pricing measures to help offset increased raw material costs, increasing capacity for certain products, reducing costs through restructuring and lean savings efforts, and continuing our expansion efforts in emerging markets.  Please see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for a more detailed description of our 2011 financial results.

 

Compensation Philosophy and Goals

 

We believe that our long-term success is directly related to our ability to attract, motivate and retain highly-talented individuals committed to improving financial performance, achieving profitable growth and enhancing shareholder interests.  To that end, our Compensation Committee has developed a pay-for-performance compensation philosophy that closely aligns our executive’s incentive compensation with Company performance and shareholder interests on a short- and long-term basis without promoting excessive risk.

 

23



 

This philosophy is evident in our annual compensation opportunities that due aligned with the median of our peers.  When we deliver expected performance, our pay should approximate the market median; actual compensation, however, varies with our performance.

 

Our Compensation Programs

 

Consistent with our philosophy of aligning executive and shareholder interests, our compensation programs are largely performance-based and/or equity-linked and designed to promote our long-term success.  Our combined incentive programs reward the achievement of annual operating targets, profitable growth and effective use of capital. Increased shareholder value is also rewarded through the use of stock options, which only have value to the extent the share price exceeds the exercise price on the date of grant.

 

Our executive compensation programs consist of base salary, a cash Annual Incentive Plan (“AIP”) and a long-term incentive (“LTI”) program.  The AIP is based primarily on adjusted earnings-per-share (“Adjusted EPS”), and also includes an adjusted operating cash flow (“Adjusted Operating Cash Flow”) component.  Performance standards for regional heads, including Mr. Bedwell and Mr. Lennartz, also include targets for both regional and divisional sales, operating profit and cash flow.

 

Our LTI program consists of performance-vesting share units (“PVSUs”) and time-vested stock options.  PVSUs entitle the recipient to receive common shares based on achievement of three-year compound annual revenue growth (“CAGR”) and return on invested capital (“ROIC”) targets.  In July 2009, in recognition of extraordinarily difficult market conditions, we developed a supplemental cash plan focused on achieving annual operating-margin percentage improvements over the 2.5-year period ended December 31, 2011.

 

AIP and annual LTI award opportunities represent a significant portion of our executive compensation program, as shown by the chart below; this performance based compensation is “at risk” and directly dependent upon the achievement of pre-established corporate goals and stock price appreciation.  We believe that long-term performance is the most important measure of our success and, as shown below, we have weighted our performance based compensation accordingly to emphasize longer-term measurement periods.

 

Average 2011 Mix of Key Compensation Components for Named Executive Officers

 

Fixed versus Performance-Based

 

Performance-Based
Short-Term versus Long-Term

 

 

 

 

 

Pay for Performance

 

Actual compensation earned under each of our incentive-compensation programs is directly linked to our financial results and stock price and, for certain executives, regional and divisional performance.  For 2011, each of Adjusted EPS and Adjusted Operating Cash Flow fell short of our targets, resulting in reduced payments under the AIP.  Over the last three years, the continuing effects of the global economic recession, increased raw material prices and consolidation in the pharmaceutical industry depressed revenue growth

 

24



 

and negatively impacted stock-price performance.  As a result, LTI payouts during 2011 were substantially below targets and no payout was made under the one-time supplemental plan for the 2011 performance period.  These partial payouts, as detailed below, demonstrate the link between pay and performance.

 

·                  AIP.  The 2011 AIP award payout was 89.3% of AIP target for Dr. Morel, Mr. Federici and Mr. Hunt, whose performance is measured based on corporate-wide performance.  Mr. Bedwell received a payout of 99.7% of target and Mr. Lennartz received a payout of 106.1% of target as a result of higher regional and divisional performance.

 

·                  PVSUs.  For the 2009-2011 performance period, actual CAGR and ROIC performance fell short of target, though ROIC exceeded the payout threshold.  As a result, only 39.17% of the target number of PVSUs were earned for the 2009-2011 performance period.  ROIC and CAGR were both significantly impacted during this period as a result of increased investment of capital in projects that had lower than expected return and will take longer to come to fruition.

 

·                  Option Awards.  As of December 31, 2011, stock options awarded under the LTI plan in four out of the last five years were “out-of-the-money,” because our stock price was less than the exercise price of the applicable options.

 

·                  Supplemental Plan.  We fell short of the threshold operating-margin percentage improvement goal for 2011, and, therefore, there was no payout with respect to 2011 performance under the supplemental plan.

 

Realizable Pay Analysis

 

Our Compensation Committee conducted an analysis of our named executive officers’ “realizable pay” over the past three years.  Realizable pay is different from pay opportunity because realizable pay takes a retrospective look at pay and performance.  It is calculated using actual bonuses earned, end of period stock values and in-the-money value of stock options during the measurement period.  Although not a substitute for pay information contained in the Summary Compensation Table (which reflects pay opportunity), we believe realizable pay provides a useful tool for measuring how we pay for performance.  Please see “Shareholder Advisory Vote and Realizable Pay Analysis” below for additional information.

 

Realizable pay for 2011 is calculated by adding together the: (1) base salary paid, (2) annual incentive plan amounts actually earned for 2011 performance, (3) in-the-money value of stock option grants made during 2011, (4) actual payout for PVSUs to be paid with respect to 2009-11 (39.17% of target) and the current estimates for payouts for the 2010-12 (78.71% of target) and 2011-13 (92.50% of target) awards (reflected in the year of grant), and (5) actual payout for the supplemental long-term incentive plan award made in July 2009 (37.54% of target) (reflected in the year of grant).   Realizable pay does not include the amounts contained in the “Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings” and “All Other Compensation” columns of the Summary Compensation Table.

 

25



 

The following table shows the 2011 realizable pay of each named executive officer compared to the total compensation contained in the Summary Compensation Table in the prior three years (or shorter period for which they were a named executive officer):

 

 

 

Year

 

SCT Total
Compensation
($)

 

Total Realizable
Pay

($)

 

Comparison to SCT
Total Compensation

 

Donald E.  Morel, Jr.

 

2011

 

4,547,242

 

2,506,671

 

55.2

%

 

 

2010

 

4,945,985

 

2,466,338

 

49.9

%

 

 

2009

 

3,728,907

 

2,750,279

 

73.8

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

William J. Federici

 

2011

 

1,515,417

 

974,411

 

64.3

%

 

 

2010

 

1,684,078

 

996,885

 

59.2

%

 

 

2009

 

1,274,556

 

1,061,258

 

83.3

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeffery C. Hunt

 

2011

 

1,072,819

 

782,461

 

72.9

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz

 

2011

 

846,152

 

631,235

 

74.6

%

 

 

2010

 

904,362

 

585,616

 

64.8

%

 

 

2009

 

652,925

 

491,051

 

75.2

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

2011

 

1,060,257

 

548,608

 

51.7

%

 

As shown in the table above, realizable pay for our named executive officers averages 63.2% of the target opportunity over the past three years.  This is a direct reflection of the challenging environment and Company performance that has not met expectations.

 

Continued Refinement of Our Compensation Programs in 2011 and 2012

 

The essential features of our compensation design and program elements have remained substantially the same over the last four years, and we believe the program successfully links executive pay with performance and provides appropriate incentives to achieve financial and strategic goals.  Nonetheless, we review our programs annually and modify them, as appropriate, to further align our executive compensation structure with shareholder interests and current practices.  In 2011 and 2012, we:

 

·                  Changed the way we calculate expected values of LTI awards so that the grants align more closely with the expected values approved by the Compensation Committee;

 

·                  Increased the weighting of the Adjusted EPS metric under the AIP to emphasize the importance of improving our earnings per share;

 

·                  Rebalanced the peer groups to include companies that more closely match our current size and global complexity, as well as companies used by third-party advisory firms; and

 

·                  Conducted annual realizable pay-for-performance alignment analyses for the Chief Executive Officer versus the Company’s peer groups in 2011 and 2012.

 

Other Compensation Program Highlights

 

The enhancements discussed above supplement existing elements of our compensation programs, including:

 

·                  A broad Clawback Policy to allow us to cancel or recoup incentive awards paid to any employee who engages in conduct materially harmful to us or whose fraud or misconduct gives rise to a significant or material restatement of financial results.  It also permits us to seek repayment of award amounts that were overpaid due to mathematical errors, fraud, misconduct or gross negligence.

 

26



 

·                  A “no-hedging” policy that prohibits all directors and employees, including our named executive officers, from engaging in hedging or monetization transactions, such as zero-cost collars and forward sale contracts, that would allow them to continue to own the securities, but without the full risks and rewards of ownership.  The policy also prohibits engaging in short sales or other short-position transactions in our common stock.

 

·                  No income-tax gross-ups for imputed income on all executive perquisites.

 

·                  No “single-trigger” feature or golden-parachute excise-tax gross-ups in any change-in-control agreements offered to future executives.

 

·                  The Compensation Committee’s engagement of its own independent consultant that does not provide any services to management and had no prior relationship with any of our named executive officers.

 


 

Compensation Philosophy and Objectives

 

Our compensation philosophy is to provide competitive executive pay opportunities tied to our short-term and longer-term success.  This overriding pay-for-performance approach enables us to attract, motivate and retain the type of executive leadership that will help us achieve our strategic objectives and realize increased shareholder value.  To reach these goals, we have adopted the following program objectives:

 

·                  Have a strong pay-for-performance element with a major portion of executive pay “at risk” based on achievement of financial performance goals.

 

·                  Support achievement of both operating performance and strategic objectives.

 

·                  Link management compensation with the interests of shareholders.

 

·                  Be fair and market-competitive to assure access to needed talent and encourage retention.

 

·                  Provide compensation opportunities that are consistent with each executive’s responsibilities, experience and performance.

 

·                  Offer compensation opportunities that promote a sensible risk/reward balance, and that do not encourage unnecessary or unreasonable risk-taking.

 

Determining the Competitiveness of our Executive Compensation

 

Our position in the broader healthcare and pharmaceutical packaging industries puts us in a highly competitive talent market.  We believe it is important to provide competitive compensation packages to ensure that we attract and retain executives who will achieve our financial and strategic objectives.  Therefore, the Compensation Committee structures executive compensation so that base salaries, bonuses and LTI opportunities fall within the median of market with higher payouts approaching the 75th percentile if maximum performance is achieved.  Secondary considerations include internal factors such as the time between salary increases, promotion, expansion of responsibilities and advancement potential.

 

We look at the referenced compensation data by salary plus AIP payout (at 100% of target), which we call total cash compensation (“TCC”), and total cash compensation plus expected values of stock options and PVSUs awards (assuming achievement at the 100% of target level), which we call total direct compensation (“TDC”).  Stock options are valued using the Black-Scholes methodology and PVSUs are valued based on the closing price of our common stock on the grant date.

 

27



 

The TCC and TDC formulas are illustrated below:

 

Annual Compensation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Long-Term Compensation

 

 

 

 

Base
Salary

 

+

 

AIP
(Financial
Performance
Targets)

 

=

 

TCC

 

+

 

PVSUs
(3-year CAGR and
ROIC Goals)

 

+

 

Stock Options
(Annual Grant with
4-year Vesting)

 

=

 

TDC

 

 

Other components of executive compensation, such as perquisites and retirement benefits, are not included in TDC, consistent with the compensation data from the comparator groups.  Although these other components are reviewed and approved by the Compensation Committee, they do not influence TDC decisions.

 

The Compensation Committee uses two comparator groups to benchmark our executive compensation levels and practices.  The primary reference, referred to as the “Talent Market Group,”  is a size-appropriate sample of companies that participate in the Towers Watson annual executive compensation database with revenues between $500 million and $3 billion and that operate in the chemicals, electronics and scientific equipment, healthcare/medical products, industrial manufacturing or pharmaceuticals industries.  The Talent Market Group provides us with a robust, consistent set of market data for all of our executive positions, representing a sample of companies with which we broadly compete for talent.  The specific companies in the Talent Market Group change each year based on survey participation.

 

The second reference group, referred to as the “Business Segment Group,” is a specific list of business and industry comparator companies with operational and customer characteristics similar to our own.  The Business Segment Group is used primarily to determine competitive pay practices and design details and for pay-for-performance comparisons.  Because most of the Business Segment Group companies disclose compensation data in SEC filings each year, this group also serves as a secondary pay-level reference for select executives, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer.

 

The companies in the Business Segment Group are identified by the consultant and approved by the Compensation Committee based on the following criteria: (1) size (one-half to two times our revenues); (2) industry (healthcare equipment/supplies, industrial machinery and life sciences tools /services); and (3) operating structure (global footprint, manufacturing capabilities, raw materials and products, similar intellectual property profile and customer characteristics).

 

We believe that using a balance of market references that reflect companies with which West competes for business and capital, but more broadly, those with which West competes for talent, provides the Compensation Committee with decision-quality data and context, and is a reasonable representation of our labor market for executive talent.

 

28



 

The Talent Market Group and Business Segment Group used in 2011 consisted of the following companies:

 

2011 Talent Market Group — Primary Comparator Group

 

A.O. Smith Corporation

 

GAF Corporation

 

Polymer Group, Inc.

Ameron International

 

Graco

 

PolyOne

Ametek

 

Greif

 

Quintiles

Barnes Group

 

H. B. Fuller

 

Sensata Technologies

Brady Corporation

 

Herman Miller

 

ShawCor

C.R. Bard

 

Husky Injection Molding Systems

 

Simpson Manufacturing Company

Cabot Creamery

 

IDEXX Laboratories

 

Snap-on

Catalent Pharma Solutions

 

International Flavors & Fragrances

 

Solutia

Celgene Corporation

 

International Specialty Products

 

Swagelok

Cephalon

 

King Pharmaceuticals

 

Texas Petrochemicals

CF Industries

 

KLA-Tencor Corporation

 

The Toro Company

Chemtura

 

Lundbeck

 

Thomas & Betts

ConvaTec

 

MAG Industrial Automation Systems

 

Trinity Industries

Covance

 

Matthews International

 

Tronox Incorporated

Cubic Corporation

 

Milacron

 

Unifi Companies

Cytec Industries

 

Millipore

 

Wabtec

DENTSPLY International

 

Mine Safety Appliances

 

Warner Chilcott

Donaldson Company

 

PerkinElmer

 

Watson Pharmaceuticals

Endo Pharmaceuticals

 

Plexus Corp.

 

Watts Water Technologies

FANUC Robotics America

 

 

 

 

 

2011 Business Segment Group — Secondary Comparator Group

 

American Medical Systems

 

DENTSPLY International

 

Invacare

Aptar Group

 

Edwards Lifesciences

 

Kinetic Concepts

Beckman Coulter

 

Gerresheimer

 

Millipore

C.R. Bard

 

Greatbatch

 

Pall Corp.

CONMED Corporation

 

Haemonetics

 

Steris Group

The Cooper Companies

 

IDEXX Laboratories

 

Varian Medical Systems

 

The Compensation Committee annually evaluates and, if appropriate, updates the composition of the Business Segment Group.  In response to observations by proxy advisory firms last year, the Committee conducted an additional detailed review of the Business Segment Group companies in July 2010.  As a result of the review, the Committee eliminated four companies that fell outside the revenue criteria and added a total of seven companies based on management’s recommendations following a review and discussion with its consultant.  The Committee believes that the comparator groups selected most accurately reflect those companies that compete with us for talent and business.

 

We do not compare our AIP and LTI targets with our selected comparator groups, but rather use our comparator group to assist in the determination of appropriate compensation levels.  Performance is measured under our AIP and LTI plans using a risk-sensitized and Board-approved annual budget and the first three years of our five-year strategic plan, which represent aggressive but reasonably achievable goals.

 

Use of Tally Sheets

 

The Compensation Committee annually reviews tally sheets for each of our executive officers as one of the tools to help assess the alignment of their pay with our performance and compensation philosophy.  The tally sheets help the Committee to understand the different components of our compensation programs and how those amounts are interrelated.  The tally sheets include salary, equity and non-equity incentive compensation, perquisites and the value of compensation that would be paid in various termination scenarios.

 

29



 

Role of the Compensation Consultant and Executive Officer Compensation

 

The Compensation Committee approves all compensation decisions for our named executive officers, discusses our CEO’s compensation with the independent directors in executive session before making a final decision on his compensation.  The Committee has engaged Pay Governance LLC (the “consultant”) as its independent consultant to assist the Committee in evaluating our executive compensation.  During 2011, the consultant prepared competitive market data with respect to the compensation of the executive officer group and provided input on compensation program design and philosophy, incentive-pay mix and comparator groups against which executive pay is benchmarked.  The consultant also provided input on the Committee’s pay recommendations for the Chief Executive Officer.

 

Our consultant provides no services to the Company other than its advice to the Committee on executive and director compensation matters.  Accordingly, the Committee determined the firm to be independent from the Company.

 

Our Chief Executive Officer annually reviews the performance of each executive officer (other than his own performance, which is reviewed by the Compensation Committee).  He then makes annual merit salary recommendations, and may propose changes in annual or LTI opportunities, for other executives.  The Committee considers the Chief Executive Officer’s recommendations in addition to data and recommendations presented by the consultant.  The Chief Executive Officer and other members of management also work with the Committee and consultant in developing the companies to be included in the Business Segment Group.

 

Executive Compensation Components and 2011 Amounts

 

The Compensation Committee generally targets total compensation at or near (i.e., +/- 15%) median pay levels of the market as represented by peer-group pay practices.  The Compensation Committee may adjust individual components to take into account such factors as an executive’s role in overall corporate policy-making, potential for advancement and/or development, relative experience and the length of time in his position.

 

30



 

The following table summarizes the basic elements, objectives and key features of our compensation program for our named executive officers.

 

Compensation
Component

 

Objectives

 

Key Features

Base Salary

 

Fair and competitive compensation to attract, retain and reward executive officers by providing a fixed level of cash compensation tied to experience, skills and capability relative to the market

 

Annual cash compensation that is not at risk

 

Targeted to the 50th percentile of our compensation peer groups, with variations based on experience, skills and other factors

Adjustments considered annually based on level of pay relative to the market, individual and company performance

 

 

 

 

 

Annual Incentive Award

 

Focuses named executive officers on annual results by rewarding them for achieving key budgeted financial targets

 

Links named executive officer’s interests with those of shareholders by promoting strong profitable growth

 

Helps retain named executive officers by providing market-competitive compensation

 

At-risk cash awards based on EPS and Operating Cash Flow, calculated at budgeted exchange rates and adjusted for unusual or non-recurring items

 

Annual awards vary from 0% to 150% of the targeted amount

 

 

 

 

 

Long-Term Incentive Award (PVSUs and Stock Options)

 

Aligns named executive officers’ interests with those of shareholders by linking compensation with long-term corporate performance that benefits our shareholders

 

Retains named executive officers through multi-year PVSU performance period and stock option vesting

 

Promotes a sensible balance of risk and reward, without encouraging unnecessary or unreasonable risk-taking

 

At-risk long-term compensation

 

Targeted at a level that will provide TDC between the 50th and 75th percentiles of our peer groups’ total direct TDC

 

Uses performance vesting share units and stock options to balance financial performance goals and increased stock price

 

PVSUs have a three-year performance period; stock options vest in annual increments over a four-year period

 

Shares earned under PVSU awards vary from 0% to 200% of targeted amount

 

 

 

 

 

Retirement Plan and Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan

 

Attracts and retains named executive officers by providing a level of retirement income and retirement savings in a tax-efficient manner

 

Provides a defined-benefit plan that transitioned to a cash-balance plan formula in 2007

 

Named executive officers may elect to defer up to 100% of their annual cash compensation

 

Base Salary

 

Base salary represents the only fixed component of the three main elements of our executive compensation program.  It is intended to provide a baseline, minimum amount of annual compensation for our executives that is fair and market-competitive.  When reviewing salaries of the named executive officers, the Compensation Committee begins by collecting and analyzing base salary data for similar positions within the Talent Market and Business Segment Comparator Groups.  The Committee then considers the Chief Executive Officer’s input and recommendations with respect to executives other than himself.

 

We generally held executive salaries flat last year, except for adjustments to reflect changes in position and responsibilities.  In 2011, Dr. Morel and Mr. Federici declined a salary increase, and their base salaries remained at $825,000 and $441,267, respectively.  Mr. Hunt’s salary was increased to $375,000 from $275,000 as a result of his promotion to President, Pharmaceutical Packaging Systems Division on January 1, 2011, an amount that is slightly below the median salary for a president of a division of a similar size

 

31



 

within the Business Segment Comparator Group.

 

Mr. Bedwell was appointed President, Pharmaceutical Packaging Systems, Asia Pacific Region on January 1, 2011.  As with Mr. Hunt, the Committee conducted a market analysis of similar positions within the Business Segment Group in setting his salary at $339,523.  The Compensation Committee kept Mr. Lennartz’s base salary of $300,557 flat in 2011, following significant increases in 2010 and 2009 to reflect his growing maturity in his role and regional financial performance that exceeded goals in those years.  Mr. Bedwell is paid in Singapore dollars and Mr. Lennartz is paid in euros.  The dollar amounts approved by the Compensation Committee use budgeted exchange rates.  These amounts will differ from the amounts reported in the Summary Compensation Table, which are based upon the 2011 monthly average exchange rates.

 

Cash Payments Under the Annual Incentive Plan

 

The primary objective of the AIP is to motivate our senior executives to achieve or exceed annual financial performance targets and reward them accordingly.  The AIP contains multiple financial targets, weighted to emphasize the importance of the financial target and operates as illustrated below:

 

Target Award
(% of Salary at
Year-End)

x

Actual Performance
(% of Performance Target)

x

Payout Factor
(%)

x

Performance-
Target
Weighting
(%)

=

AIP Payout
($)

 

Target awards are set as a percentage of base salary for the named executive officers as of the end of the plan year.  Payouts above target are based on the Company’s performance, and, therefore, the executive officer receives above-target payouts only if the Company exceeds the annual AIP target financial performance objectives.  AIP payouts are capped at 150% of the target award and executives receive no payout if actual financial performance falls below the 85% performance target level.  All targets are adjusted to budgeted foreign-exchange rates and may exclude the impact of certain items such as acquisitions and restructuring gains or losses.

 

The payout curve is structured to reflect our philosophy that management should be rewarded for exceeding goals and penalized when targets are missed.  The payout factor is a pre-established multiplier that corresponds, on a sliding scale, to the percentage achievement of the AIP target objective so that if actual performance is less than target, the multiplier decreases on a sliding scale based on the percentage achievement.  Thus, for example, at the 85% achievement level, executives would receive 50% of their target award.  If the Company exceeds the AIP target, the multiplier increases on a sliding scale up to the 150% of target award level for achievement of 115% of the performance target level.  Achievement between the threshold and maximum levels is straight-line interpolated.

 

AIP performance targets are based on our Board-approved budget, which we believe represents appropriately aggressive, yet reasonably attainable targets.  Targets consist of a combination of consolidated results and regional results, weighted to emphasize their relative importance from an operational perspective, depending on the plan unit.  Plan targets for corporate-level executives are based on consolidated operating results.  Targets for executives at the regional level are a mix of regional, divisional and corporate measures to reward regional performance, collaboration within their division and their contribution to overall results.

 

The Compensation Committee determines the target incentive opportunity for our named executive officers based on market pay levels, position and our overall compensation philosophy, which emphasizes performance-based compensation and higher incentive opportunities for executives in positions that make the most impact on our performance.

 

32



 

AIP Performance Measures for 2011

 

The Compensation Committee selected Adjusted EPS (weighted 80%) and Adjusted Operating Cash Flow (weighted 20%) as corporate performance measures for the 2011 AIP.  The weighting reflects the Board’s emphasis on improving earnings during a period of intense investment in longer-term capital projects.  Performance against these two measures determines the AIP payouts for Dr. Morel, Mr. Federici and Mr. Hunt.

 

To account for the globalization of the Pharmaceutical Packaging business, the Compensation Committee selected a balanced weighting between Adjusted EPS (40%), Regional (30%) and Divisional (30%) metrics for our regional presidents Mr. Bedwell and Mr. Lennartz.  This mix reflects the Compensation Committee’s decision to increase Adjusted EPS to 40% from 30% and reducing regional performance measures from 40% to 30%. The Regional metric consists of regional net sales, regional operating profit and regional cash flow adjusted for budgeted exchange rates.  The Division metric consists of division net sales and division operating profit, adjusted for budgeted exchange rates.

 

The performance goals for the Corporate unit (which included Dr. Morel, Mr. Federici, and Mr. Hunt), Packaging Systems Division, Asia Pacific Region (Mr. Bedwell) and Packaging Systems Division, Europe Region (Mr. Lennartz) at target, threshold and maximum, and the actual level of performance achieved for 2011 are shown in the following table:

 

2011 AIP Corporate and Regional

Performance Metrics, Weight and Achievement

(In U.S. dollar millions, except per-share data)

 

AIP Metric, Weighting and Performance Target

 

Actual Performance and Earned Incentive Calculation

 

Plan Unit and Metric

 

Metric
Weighting

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

Actual

 

Performance
as % of Target

 

Payout
Factor

 

x
Weighting

 

Earned
Incentive

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corporate:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjusted EPS

 

80

%

1.96

 

2.30

 

2.65

 

2.26

 

98.3

%

94.3

%

.80

 

75.5

%

Adj. Operating Cash Flow

 

20

%

130.9

 

154.0

 

177.1

 

139.7

 

90.7

%

69.0

%

.20

 

13.8

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corporate Total Earned Incentive:

 

89.3

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asia-Pacific Region:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjusted EPS

 

40

%

1.96

 

2.30

 

2.65

 

2.26

 

98.3

%

94.3

%

.40

 

37.7

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Region Metrics —

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjusted Net Sales

 

7.50

%

71.9

 

84.6

 

97.3

 

85.7

 

101.3

%

104.3

%

.075

 

7.8

%

Adjusted Operating Profit

 

15.00

%

10.3

 

12.1

 

13.9

 

12.1

 

100.4

%

101.3

%

.15

 

15.2

%

Adjusted Cash Flow

 

7.50

%

13.2

 

15.5

 

17.8

 

15.0

 

96.7

%

89.0

%

.075

 

6.7

%

 

 

30.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29.7

%

Division Metrics —

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjusted Net Sales

 

10.05

%

693.2

 

815.5

 

937.8

 

839.1

 

102.9

%

109.7

%

.1005

 

11.0

%

Adjusted Operating Profit

 

19.95

%

126.3

 

148.6

 

170.9

 

151.4

 

101.9

%

106.3

%

.1995

 

21.2

%

 

 

30.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

32.2

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asia-Pacific Region Total Earned Incentive:

 

99.7

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Europe Region:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjusted EPS

 

40

%

1.96

 

2.30

 

2.65

 

2.26

 

98.3

%

94.3

%

.40

 

37.7

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Region Metrics —

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjusted Net Sales

 

7.50

%

356.1

 

418.9

 

481.7

 

447.8

 

106.9

%

123.0

%

.075

 

9.2

%

Adjusted Operating Profit

 

15.00

%

72.0

 

84.7

 

97.4

 

89.8

 

106.0

%

120.0

%

.15

 

18.0

%

Adjusted Cash Flow

 

7.50

%

81.3

 

95.6

 

109.9

 

100.9

 

105.6

%

118.7

%

.075

 

8.9

%

 

 

30.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

36.1

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Division Metrics —

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjusted Net Sales

 

10.05

%

693.2

 

815.5

 

937.8

 

839.1

 

102.9

%

109.7

%

.1005

 

11.0

%

Adjusted Operating Profit

 

19.95

%

126.3

 

148.6

 

170.9

 

151.4

 

101.9

%

106.3

%

.1995

 

21.2

%

 

 

30.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

32.2

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Europe Region Total Earned Incentive:

 

106.1

%

 

33



 

2011 Annual Incentive Plan Results

 

For purposes of the AIP payout in 2011, all AIP payout calculations were made at our 2011 budgeted exchange rate of $1.35 per one euro.  Adjusted EPS of $2.26 was determined by excluding from as-reported consolidated diluted earnings per share in our Annual Report on Form 10-K special separation benefits to a retiring executive of $0.05, restructuring and related charges of $0.09 and acquisition-related contingencies of $(0.01).  Applying the Payout Factor resulted in a payout percentage of 94.3%.

 

Adjusted Operating Cash Flow was computed by excluding from as-reported operating cash flow in our Form 10-K the same special separation benefits ($2.2 million) and restructuring ($9.1 million).  Applying the Payout Factor resulted in a payout percentage of 69.0%.  The same Payout Factor interpolations were used to calculate the payout percentages of Region and Division results.

 

The table below sets forth 2011 target annual incentive opportunities as a percentage of salary for our named executive officers and the target and actual payout amounts.  The actual payout amounts are computed based on the actual performance, as outlined above, under the 2011 AIP.  The amounts for Mr. Bedwell and Mr. Lennartz reflect the U.S. dollar equivalent of the award as of the time the award is approved by the Committee.

 

 

 

2011 Target
Award

(% of Base Salary)

 

2011 Threshold
Award (50% of
Target Award)

($)

 

2011 Target
Award (100% of
Target Award)

($)

 

2011 Maximum
Award (150% of
Target Award)

($)

 

2011 Actual
Award

($)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

100

%

412,500

 

825,028

 

1,237,500

 

736,369

 

William J. Federici

 

70

%

154,444

 

308,887

 

463,330

 

275,693

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

70

%

131,250

 

262,500

 

393,750

 

234,291

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

60

%

101,138

 

202,275

 

303,413

 

201,603

 

Heino Lennartz

 

60

%

87,919

 

175,837

 

263,755

 

186,561

 

 

Summary of Total Cash Compensation for 2011

 

The TCC for each of our named executive officers for 2011 is the sum of each officer’s salary and AIP award and reflects the scope of his responsibility and the business he leads.  The following table shows the TCC of each named executive officer and a comparison to total cash consideration paid to similar executives within the peer groups. The comparisons are based on target awards and not actual payouts.

 

 

 

Salary
($)

 

Target AIP
Award
($)

 

Actual AIP
Award
($)

 

Target TCC
($)

 

Actual TCC
($)

 

Target TCC Variance
From Comparator
Group Median
(%)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

825,028

 

825,028

 

736,369

 

1,650,056

 

1,561,397

 

4

%

William J. Federici

 

441,267

 

308,887

 

275,693

 

750,154

 

716,960

 

11

%

Jeffery C. Hunt

 

375,000

 

262,500

 

234,291

 

637,500

 

609,291

 

-6

%

Warwick Bedwell

 

347,005

 

202,275

 

201,603

 

549,280

 

548,608

 

29

%

Heino Lennartz

 

314,917

 

175,837

 

186,561

 

490,754

 

501,478

 

-2

%

 

Dr. Morel’s target TCC was below the median of Chief Executive Officers in the Business Segment and Talent Market comparator groups.  Dr. Morel’s actual TCC was even lower due to Dr. Morel’s AIP bonus paying below target.  All AIP payouts reflects the results delivered by the Company versus defined performance targets, highlighting the link between pay and performance.

 

The other named executive officers were within our targeted range of +/- 15% of the median, except Mr. Bedwell.  Mr. Bedwell’s compensation is generally higher due to the fact that he is an experienced expatriate who was recently hired from a large pharmaceutical company.  Additionally, Mr. Bedwell’s TCC reflects our commitment to significantly expand our Asia-Pacific region to promote our long-term success.

 

34



 

Long-Term Incentive Compensation

 

Long-term incentive compensation makes up a significant portion of the total compensation for senior executives (58% for our CEO and averages 39% for our other named executive officers) and is awarded in the form of PVSUs and stock options.  The Compensation Committee establishes an annual target expected value for total long-term compensation consistent with the target median total long-term compensation of comparable positions at the Business Segment Group.  Financial performance using our selected measurements and stock-price appreciation are considered equally important goals.  Therefore, the target values of long-term incentive awards are divided equally between PVSUs and stock options.  Expected values for awards are calculated using the grant date Black-Scholes value for options and the closing price for PVSUs.  This valuation method aligns with the reported values in the Summary Compensation Table.

 

In determining the form and amount of the awards, the Compensation Committee considers the practices of the companies in our compensation comparator groups.  In addition, the Committee considers each officer’s importance to the overall operations of the Company, experience and the performance of the named executive officers.  For executives other than the Chief Executive Officer, the Compensation Committee also takes into consideration his assessment of each executive’s performance.

 

PVSUs

 

We believe our shareholders place a premium on growing our business while carefully managing capital.  To help further these objectives, we use CAGR and ROIC as the performance measures for determining PVSU payouts.  We believe CAGR and ROIC are equally important in creating shareholder value, and, therefore, each metric is weighted equally.

 

Each PVSU award agreement contains a target payout for the recipient.  For PVSU awards granted to our named executive officers, the Committee generally selects a targeted payout that would deliver shares with an expected value at the market median (as represented by the Business or Talent Market Groups) if 100% of the performance target is achieved.  The number of shares an executive earns at the end of a performance period is calculated by multiplying the target number of PVSUs awarded at the beginning of the period times the applicable “payout factor” for each performance metric times the weighting for that performance metric.  The following formula illustrates the calculation of the PVSU payout for each performance measure:

 

Target PVSUs

(i.e., number of shares to be
earned if performance equals
100% target)

x

Payout Factor

(based on
achievement against
target)

x

Weighting

(50% for
each metric)

=

Number of
Shares Earned

 

As in our AIP, the PVSU program includes a “payout factor” based on the actual performance versus the performance targets.  If actual performance matches 100% of the performance metric targeted level, the payout factor for that metric is 100%.  If actual performance exceeds target performance, the payout factor is greater than 100%.  The PVSU payout opportunity is capped at 200% and actual payouts may range from 0% to 200% based on actual results.  Executives receive a 50% payout for achieving 70% of both the CAGR and ROIC targets and no payouts are made if actual performance falls below the 70% level.  Performance between points is straight-line interpolated.

 

Stock Option Grants

 

Our goal in awarding stock options to executive officers is to further align their interests with those of our shareholders because stock options only have value to the extent our stock price increases from the grant date.  In addition, stock options facilitate significant stock ownership of West by our executive officers.  The options vest annually over four years, have a ten year exercise period and expire 90 days after most terminations, except retirement.  These features help us retain key executives and encourage our executives to focus on the long-term performance on the Company.

 

35



 

Long-Term Incentive Awards Granted in 2011

 

After reviewing comparator group data, the Compensation Committee approved annual equity awards to the named executive officers in 2011.  The expected values that the Committee used were based on the recommendation of the consultant and the input of the Chief Executive Officer for executives other than himself.  In comparison to 2010, the Committee did not change the target total expected value for any executive officers in 2011, except Mr. Hunt whose increase from $300,000 to $400,000 resulted from his promotion and increased responsibilities.  However, the Committee revised our long-term incentive expected value process to more closely match the approved values with the actual grant date fair values that are reported in our annual proxy statement.  As a result of this process, expected values decreased by approximately 19% compared to 2010.

 

The total expected value of the LTI plan awards granted in 2011 and the number of options and PVSUs are shown below.  The total value is split equally between the Black-Scholes value of the options granted at the grant date fair market value of the PVSUs granted.

 

 

 

Total Expected
Value of LTI Awards
($)

 

Options
Granted
(#)

 

Target PVSUs
Granted
(#)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

2,200,000

 

125,571

 

26,928

 

William J. Federici

 

600,000

 

34,237

 

7,334

 

Jeffery C. Hunt

 

400,000

 

22,831

 

4,896

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

300,000

 

17,123

 

3,672

 

Heino Lennartz

 

300,000

 

17,123

 

3,672

 

 

2009-2011 PVSU Achievement

 

For PVSUs awarded for the three-year performance period ended December 31, 2011, the Compensation Committee set a target CAGR and ROIC goal of 10% each.  Management achieved 8.7% ROIC, or 87% of the ROIC target, and 4.9% CAGR, or 49% of CAGR target.  In setting the 2009-2011 CAGR and ROIC targets, the Committee considered past performance, our weighted average cost of capital and sales growth expectations in the markets in which we operate.  The following table shows the PVSU targets, performance and payouts for the three-year performance period ended December 31, 2011.

 

Metric

 

Metric
Weighting

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

Result

 

Performance
as % of Target

 

Payout
Factor

 

x
Weighting

 

Payout as %
of Target

 

ROIC

 

50

%

7.0

%

10.0

%

15.0

%

8.7

%

87

%

78.33

%

.50

 

39.17

%

CAGR

 

50

%

7.0

%

10.0

%

15.0

%

4.9

%

49

%

0

%

.50

 

0

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Final Payout Result as a % of Target:

 

39.17

%

 

Based on this final payout result, each named executive officer earned shares equal to 39.17% of the target number awarded.  Dr. Morel earned 12,143, Mr. Federici earned 3,134 shares and Mr. Lennartz earned 1,488 shares.  Mr. Hunt and Mr. Bedwell did not receive awards because they were appointed after 2009.

 

Supplemental Plan

 

The Compensation Committee made a supplemental award in July 2009 designed to reward year-over-year increases in operating margin during a time when it was apparent under then-current market conditions that it would be extraordinarily difficult to attain the aggressive 10% CAGR target contained in the PVSU award covering the 2009-2011 period.  This supplemental award is equal to 25% of the expected value of their total LTI plan award.  The supplemental LTI plan award contained three operating profit margin (“OPM”) thresholds.  The award payouts are structured on the same payout curve as PVSUs, but the award measures annual performance.  To conserve shares, the supplemental award is paid in cash to executives who remain through the February 2012 payment date.  We did not achieve the threshold in 2011, and, therefore, as shown below, no portion of the total payout of 37.54%

 

36



 

relates to that segment of the 2011 performance period.

 

The chart below represents the supplemental LTI plan targets, achievement, and payout.

 

Period

 

OPM Target

 

Achievement

 

Attainment %

 

Payout %

 

Weight

 

Payout Factor

 

7/2009 - 12/2009

 

10.5

%

9.67

%

92.1

%

71.1

%

20

%

14.22

%

2010

 

11.2

%

9.83

%

87.8

%

58.3

%

40

%

23.32

%

2011

 

12.2

%

9.76

%

80.0

%

0.0

%

40

%

0.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Payout:

 

37.54

%

 

Summary of Total Direct Compensation for 2011

 

The TDC for each of our named executive officers for 2011 is the sum of each officer’s TCC plus his LTI plan awards and reflects the scope of his responsibility and the business he leads.  The following table shows the TCC of each named executive officer and a comparison to total cash consideration paid to similar executives within the peer groups. The comparisons are based on target awards and not actual payouts.

 

Named Executive
Officer

 

TCC
($)

 

LTI Plan Awards
($)

 

TDC
($)

 

TDC Variance From
Comparator Group
Target Median

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

1,561,397

 

2,200,000

 

3,761,397

 

-7

%

William J. Federici

 

716,960

 

600,000

 

1,316,960

 

5

%

Jeffery C. Hunt

 

609,291

 

400,000

 

1,009,291

 

-24

%

Warwick Bedwell

 

548,608

 

300,000

 

848,608

 

26

%

Heino Lennartz

 

501,478

 

300,000

 

801,478

 

-3

%

 

Dr. Morel’s TDC was below the median of chief executive officers in the Business Segment Groups.  Mr. Federici and Mr. Lennartz are both within our targeted range for TDC compared to the Talent Market Group.  Mr. Hunt’s TDC is outside the range and below the median, which reflects that he was recently hired and promoted to a more senior position.  It is expected that as he gains experience and performs well, his LTI award expected value will increase, and, consequently so will his TDC.  Mr. Bedwell’s TDC is above the median for the reasons discussed above under “Summary of Total Cash Compensation for 2011.

 

2011 Compensation Comparisons to 2010

 

Except as discussed above, all named executive officers were paid within our targeted range compared to the median of the applicable comparator groups. The chart below sets forth the change in compensation levels year-over-year for the three named executive officers who appeared in our proxy statement last year and did not receive a promotion during 2011.

 

Named Executive Officer

 

Change in
Summary
Compensation
Table Total

 

Change in
TCC

 

Change in
TDC

 

Change in # of
Options Awarded

 

Change in # of
PVSUs Awarded

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

-8

%

-2

%

-13

%

-9

%

-9

%

William J. Federici

 

-10

%

-1

%

-10

%

-9

%

-9

%

Heino Lennartz

 

-6

%

+7

%

-4

%

-9

%

-9

%

 

With one exception, the data above reflects decreases across the board for all continuing executives with respect to several important compensation measurements, including value awarded, value paid and number of shares of equity awarded.  Mr. Lennartz’s TCC increased from 2010 to 2011 primarily due to the superior performance of the Pharmaceutical Packaging Systems, Europe Region under the AIP.  In 2010 the AIP was 92.2% versus a 106.1% payout in 2011.  Additionally, the decreases in compensation resulted from our revised process for determining LTI award expected values.  The decreases in compensation amounts reflect our pay-for-performance philosophy.

 

37



 

With respect to Mr. Hunt and Mr. Bedwell, each executive received a promotion and greater responsibility in 2011, and their compensation increased to reflect their new positions and a full year of employment.  Therefore, we are not presenting comparisons to 2010.  As discussed above, their compensation levels were established by comparing their pay to our comparator groups.

 

Shareholder Advisory Vote and Realizable Pay Analysis

 

During 2011, the Company received a 72.6% shareholder advisory vote in favor of its compensation practices.  The Committee believed this to be a confirmation that the Company’s pay accurately and appropriately rewards performance.  The Committee also examined the reports created by third-party advisory firms and attempted to address the issues raised by those firms.  To that end, the Committee adjusted its Business Segment Group as described above under “Determining the Competitiveness of our Executive Compensation.”

 

In addition, on the recommendation of the consultant, the Committee reviewed a comparison of the realizable pay amounts for Dr. Morel against chief executive officer compensation data from the peer groups expected to be used by the third party advisory firms and the Company’s Business Segment Comparator Group.

 

The Committee reviewed our one-year and three-year performance and compared that to Dr. Morel’s TCC and realizable pay.  Based on this analysis, for operating cash flow, revenue growth and return-on-invested-capital and in the lower quartile for earnings-per-share and total shareholder return, the Company performed between the 25th and 50th percentiles on a one-year basis and at approximately the 25th percentile on a three-year basis.  Compared to the Company’s peers, Dr. Morel’s TCC was at the 52nd percentile on a one-year basis and his realizable pay was at the 24th percentile on a three-year basis.  The Committee concluded that there was a reasonable alignment between Dr. Morel’s compensation and Company performance on a one-year basis and significant alignment on a three-year basis.

 

Post-Employment Compensation Arrangements

 

Retirement Plans.  Dr. Morel, Mr. Federici, and Mr. Hunt participate in our defined benefit and defined contribution retirement programs for U.S.-based employees.  In addition to the standard benefits available to all eligible U.S.-based employees, we maintain non-qualified defined benefit plans in which these three executives participate.  All tax-qualified defined benefit plans have a maximum compensation limit and a maximum annual benefit, which restrict the benefit to participants whose compensation exceeds these limits.  The non-qualified plans provide benefits to key salaried employees, including those three named executives, using the same benefit formulas as the tax-qualified plans but without regard to the compensation limits and maximum benefit accruals for tax-qualified plans.

 

Mr. Lennartz participates in defined contribution plans maintained for our German employees.  One of those plans is broad-based for all of our German employees and the other plan, established in 2009, is maintained for the benefit of regional senior management employees paid by our European headquarters in Eschweiler, Germany.

 

Under Mr. Bedwell’s employment agreement, we make a contribution to his defined contribution superannuation account.  This plan is maintained in Australia by him and is payable upon his retirement, death or disability.

 

Termination Payments.  We also provide our named executive officers with benefits upon termination in various circumstances, as described under “Estimated Payments Following Severance—Current Named Executive Officers” and “Payments on Termination in Connection with a Change-in-Control” sections below.  We believe that our existing arrangements are an important element in ensuring that the executives remain focused on our business in the event of a threat or occurrence of a change-in-control; encourage executives to act in the best interests of the shareholders in assessing a transaction; and protect our value by retaining key talent.  Beginning with agreements entered into after 2010, the Company has eliminated excise tax gross ups and single-triggers

 

38



 

under these agreements.  Therefore, Mr. Hunt’s agreement does not include these features.

 

Other Compensation Policies

 

Personal Benefits.  We provide our named executive officers with other benefits that we believe are reasonable and competitive so that we may attract and retain talented senior executives.  In total, they represent a small percentage of the named executive officers’ overall compensation, and the Committee has reduced many of them in recent years.  All perquisite gross-ups were eliminated effective January 1, 2011.  These benefits are reflected in the “All Other Compensation” column of the 2011 Summary Compensation Table.

 

Stock Ownership RequirementsStock-ownership goals align executives with the interests of shareholders and encourage a longer-term focus.  First established in 1994, our policy is that executive officers must acquire a value equal to particular multiples of the executive’s base salary.  The CEO’s goal is five times base salary and the goal for all other executive officers is two times base salary.  The Compensation Committee reviews progress against these goals every year.  Mr. Hunt and Mr. Bedwell still have three years to accumulate stock necessary to meet these guidelines and all other executives currently meet the guidelines.

 

Our Policy Regarding Hedging and Short Sales.  We prohibit directors, officers and employees from engaging in hedging or monetization transactions, such as zero-cost collars and forward sale contracts, that would allow them to continue to own the securities, but without the full risks and rewards of ownership.  We also prohibit directors, named executive officers and other senior employees from engaging in short sales or other short-position transactions in our common stock.  There are limited exceptions from the restrictions on derivative securities for company-granted awards.

 

Accounting Impact on Executive Compensation.  We consider the accounting implications of our compensation decisions in the design of our compensation and benefit programs.  We seek to deliver cost-effective compensation and benefit programs that meet our needs while ensuring an appropriate impact on reported earnings and other financial measures that we deem important.

 

Deductibility of Executive Compensation.  Under section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, a publicly held corporation is denied a federal tax deduction for compensation in excess of $1,000,000, which is paid to its chief executive officer, chief financial officer and its three most-highly compensated executive officers other than those officers.  “Qualified performance-based compensation” and certain other compensation are not subject to the deduction limitation.  Our Board has taken action to cause cash bonus awards and grants of stock options, PVSUs and other stock awards to be treated as qualified performance-based compensation and, therefore, not limited by section 162(m).

 

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

 

During 2011, the Compensation Committee consisted of John H. Weiland, Anthony Welters and Patrick J. Zenner.  All members of the Committee were independent directors, and no member was an employee or former employee of West.  During 2011, none of our executive officers served on the compensation committee (or its equivalent) or board of directors of another entity whose executive officer served on our Compensation Committee.

 

Risk Considerations in Our Compensation Programs

 

The Compensation Committee has reviewed our compensation policies and practices for our employees and concluded that any risks arising from our policies and programs are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect.  The Compensation Committee believes that the mix and design of the elements of our compensation program are appropriate and encourage executive officers and key employees to strive to achieve goals that benefit over the long term.  Our compensation policies and procedures are applied

 

39



 

uniformly to all eligible participants.  By targeting both company-wide and business-unit performance goals in our annual bonus plans and long-term compensation, we believe we have allocated our compensation between base salary and short- and long-term target opportunities in a way that does not encourage excessive risk-taking by our employees.

 

2011 Compensation Tables

 

In this section we provide tabular and narrative information about the compensation of our named executive officers for 2011 and for each of the previous two years (except as noted).  For additional information see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis.

 

2011 Summary Compensation Table

 

Name and Principal
Position 

 

Year

 

Salary
($)

 

Bonus (1)
($)

 

Stock Awards
($)

 

Option
Awards

($)

 

Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation

($)

 

Change in
Pension
Value and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings (2)

($)

 

All Other
Compensation

($)

 

Total
($)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

2011

 

825,028

 

-0-

 

1,100,009

 

1,100,002

 

736,369

 

650,191

 

135,623

 

4,547,222

 

Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

 

2010

 

825,028

 

-0-

 

1,256,627

 

1,457,922

 

890,091

 

387,180

 

129,137

 

4,945,985

 

 

2009

 

809,162

 

-0-

 

994,790

 

695,000

 

766,042

 

398,218

 

65,695

 

3,728,907

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

William J. Federici

 

2011

 

441,267

 

-0-

 

300,002

 

300,004

 

275,693

 

152,956

 

45,495

 

1,515,417

 

Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

 

2010

 

436,818

 

-0-

 

342,720

 

397,614

 

320,207

 

118,969

 

67,750

 

1,684,078

 

 

2009

 

420,176

 

-0-

 

256,720

 

180,700

 

253,492

 

119,408

 

44,060

 

1,274,556

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

2011

 

371,155

 

-0-

 

205,149

 

200,000

 

234,291

 

29,704

 

32,520

 

1,072,819

 

President, Pharmaceutical Packaging Systems

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell (3)

 

2011

 

347,005

 

-0-

 

150,001

 

149,997

 

201,603

 

 

211,651

 

1,060,257

 

President, Pharmaceutical Packaging Systems, Asia Pacific Region

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz (4)

 

2011

 

314,917

 

856

 

150,001

 

149,997

 

186,561

 

 

43,820

 

846,152

 

President, Pharmaceutical Packaging Systems, Europe Region

 

2010
2009

 

293,509
247,965

 

817
857

 

171,360
123,412

 

198,812
91,275

 

183,839
142,633

 


 

56,025
46,783

 

904,362
652,925

 

 


(1)

The amount reported in this column for Mr. Lennartz is his winter holiday bonus.

 

 

(2)

These amounts are an estimate of the increase in actuarial present value of our named executive officers’ age-65 accrued benefit under our retirement plans for 2011. Amounts are payable only when a participant’s employment terminates, and may be reduced if benefits are commenced prior to retirement. Assumptions underlying the estimates are described under the 2011 Pension Benefits Table.

 

 

(3)

Amounts in the Salary, Bonus and All Other Compensation columns for Mr. Bedwell have been converted from Singapore dollars to U.S. dollars at a rate of 0.7957 U.S. dollars per Singapore dollar. This is an average of the daily-average monthly rates for the year.

 

 

(4)

Amounts in the Salary, Bonus and All Other Compensation columns for Mr. Lennartz have been converted from euros to U.S. dollars at a rate of 1.3923 U.S. dollars per euro in 2011, 1.328 U.S. dollars per euro in 2010 and 1.3941 U.S. dollars per euro in 2009. This is an average of the daily-average monthly rates for each year.

 

40



 

Stock Awards

 

The amounts in the “Stock Awards” column reflect the aggregate grant date fair value of PVSUs and “incentive shares” granted to the named executive officer during each year computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718.  These amounts reflect our calculation of the value of these awards on the grant date and do not necessarily correspond to the actual value that ultimately may be realized by the officer.

 

An executive may elect to receive a portion of his AIP award in common stock instead of cash.  For each four shares received, executives are granted one additional time-vested restricted share, referred to as an “incentive share.”  As an inducement to acquire and hold stock, incentive shares vest four years from the grant date, and only vest if the executive retains the underlying bonus share.  We pay dividends on incentive shares during the four-year vesting period.  Participants may receive dividends in cash or reinvest them in additional shares if the recipient participates in our dividend reinvestment plan.

 

The following table summarizes the grant date fair value for PVSU awards and incentive shares granted to each named executive officer for each year included on the table.

 

Stock Awards Grant Date Fair Value (Target) 2009-2011

 

 

 

2011

 

2010

 

2009

 

 

 

PVSU
Awards

 

Incentive
Shares

 

PVSU
Awards

 

Incentive
Shares

 

PVSU
Awards

 

Incentive
Shares

 

Name

 

($)

 

($)

 

($)

 

($)

 

($)

 

($)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

1,100,009

 

-0-

 

1,256,627

 

-0-

 

994,790

 

-0-

 

William J. Federici

 

300,002

 

-0-

 

342,720

 

-0-

 

256,720

 

-0-

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

200,002

 

5,147

 

 

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

150,001

 

-0-

 

 

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz

 

150,001

 

-0-

 

171,360

 

-0-

 

123,412

 

-0-

 

 

The table below shows the maximum payout for PVSU awards made in 2011, 2010 and 2009.

 

Stock Awards PVSU Grant Date Maximum Value 2009-2011

 

 

 

2011

 

2010

 

2009

 

Name

 

($)

 

($)

 

($)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

2,200,018

 

2,513,254

 

1,989,580

 

William J. Federici

 

600,004

 

685,440

 

513,440

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

400,004

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

300,002

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz

 

300,002

 

342,720

 

246,824

 

 

Option Awards

 

The amounts in the “Option Awards” column reflect the grant date fair value in each year for awards of stock options and stock appreciation rights, computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718.  For accounting purposes, we use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to calculate grant date fair value for options and stock appreciation rights (only granted to Mr. Lennartz on or before February 2009) based on the following assumptions:

 

 

 

February
2011

 

March
2010

 

July
2009

 

February
2009

 

Expected Life (Years)

 

5.5

 

5.5

 

5

 

5

 

Risk-Free Interest Rate

 

2.2

%

2.4

%

2.4

%

1.9

%

Dividend Yield

 

1.7

%

1.5

%

1.8

%

1.9

%

Expected Volatility

 

24.3

%

26.9

%

27.2

%

27.0

%

 

41



 

The per-share Black-Scholes value for the option awards made to all named executive officers on February 22, 2011 was $8.76.  For a more detailed discussion of the assumptions used to calculate grant date fair value for our options, refer to Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements included in our 2011 Form 10-K.

 

Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation

 

The amounts in the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column are AIP awards made with respect to 2011 performance.  AIP awards are paid in cash, except participants may elect to have up to 100% paid in our common stock (as described under “Stock Awards” above).  In previous years this column included an amount for the portion of the supplemental award made to each named executive officer in July 2009 and earned during the applicable year.  As explained under the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section, no portion of the supplemental award was earned as the threshold was not met in 2011.

 

All awards were paid in cash except the award to Mr. Hunt.  Mr. Hunt elected to receive 25% of the net-after tax amount of his award in stock.  This resulted in a grant of 945 shares of stock on February 21, 2012, when the price per share of stock was $42.44.  Therefore, this stock had a total grant date value of $40,106.  Mr. Hunt also received 236 restricted incentive shares with a grant date value of $10,016.  This amount is not reflected in this column, but will be reflected in our 2013 proxy statement in the “Equity Awards” column.

 

All Other Compensation

 

The amounts in the “All Other Compensation” column consist of: (1) costs of providing a company-leased vehicle, including lease payments, gas, maintenance and insurance; (2) for Dr. Morel, Mr. Federici and Mr. Hunt, the total of the Company matching contributions made in 2011 on cash deferrals to the Employee Deferred Compensation Plan and 401(k) plan and, for Mr. Lennartz, the total Company contribution to deferred compensation programs maintained in Germany; (3) the annual incremental cost of medical benefits provided to executives that are not available to other similarly-situated employees; (4) Company-paid life insurance premiums; and (5) dividends credited in 2011 on unvested incentive shares and dividend equivalents credited in 2011 on unearned PVSUs, whether the awards are payable in cash or stock and whether or not those awards have been deferred.  There were no tax gross ups paid in 2011.

 

For U.S.-based executives, the incremental cost of medical benefits was determined by subtracting the total amount that was paid by us in 2011 for salaried non-executive employees at our corporate headquarters from the total premium that was paid by us for coverage under the medical plan applicable to named executive officers in 2011.  These additional benefits ended on May 1, 2011 when our 2011 welfare-benefit plan year began.  For Mr. Bedwell, the incremental cost of medical benefits is equal to the amount reimbursed to him for coverage (including worldwide expatriate coverage) not available to other employees in Singapore, which is his principal place of employment.  For Mr. Bedwell only, “All Other Compensation” also includes costs detailed in the chart below related to his overseas assignment.

 

The table below shows a breakdown of the total amount shown in the “All Other Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table.

 

Components of All Other Compensation — 2011

 

Name

 

Use of
Company
Car
$

 

Defined
Contribution Plan
Company
Contributions
$

 

Company Paid
Medical Plan
Costs
$

 

Life
Insurance
$

 

Dividends &
Dividend
Equivalents
$

 

Other (1)

 

Total
$

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

34,005

 

33,218

 

1,248

 

4,133

 

63,019

 

 

135,623

 

William J. Federici

 

16,140

 

9,800

 

1,248

 

893

 

17,414

 

 

45,495

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

19,041

 

9,800

 

1,248

 

698

 

1,733

 

 

32,520

 

Warwick Bedwell (2)

 

24,623

 

 

10,801

 

2,009

 

3,736

 

170,482

 

211,651

 

Heino Lennartz (3)

 

7,292

 

29,051

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

7,477

 

 

43,820

 

 

42



 


(1)             For Mr. Bedwell, the “Other” column is comprised of the following amounts which are payable primarily due to his overseas assignment: (a) housing and utilities allowance - $95,484, (b) airfare for his spouse and child - $14,378, (c) club membership fees - $13,329, and (d) payments for financial planning and tax preparation - $5,950.  In addition, this column includes $41,341 contributed to Mr. Bedwell’s personal superannuation fund, a portable defined contribution plan similar to an individual retirement account.  The superannuation fund is not sponsored by the Company.  Although the Company is not required to contribute to Mr. Bedwell’s superannuation account by law as he is not employed in Australia, we have agreed contractually to make a contribution of 12% of his salary to the fund and Mr. Bedwell makes a contribution of 8%.

 

(2)             All of Mr. Bedwell’s amounts except dividend equivalents were converted from Singapore dollars at a rate of 0.7957 U.S. dollars per Singapore dollar.

 

(3)             All of Mr. Lennartz’s amounts except dividend equivalents were converted from euros at a rate of 1.3923 U.S. dollars per euro.

 

2011 GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS TABLE

 

The following table provides information on stock options and PVSUs granted to our named executive officers in 2011.

 

 

 

 

 

Estimated Future Payouts Under
Non-Equity

Incentive Plan Awards (1)

 

Estimated Future Payouts
Under Equity
Incentive Plan Awards (2)

 

All Other
Option
Awards:
Number
of
Securities
Underlying

 

Exercise
or Base
Price

of
Option

 

Grant
Date
Fair
Value of Stock
and
Option

 

Name 

 

Grant
Date

 

Threshold
($)

 

Target
($)

 

Maximum
($)

 

Threshold
(#)

 

Target
(#)

 

Maximum
(#)

 

Options
(#)

 

Awards
($/Sh)

 

Awards (3)
($)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

01/21/11

 

412,514

 

825,028

 

1,237,542

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13,464

 

26,928

 

53,856

 

 

 

 

 

1,100,009

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

125,571

 

40.85

 

1,100,002

 

William J. Federici

 

01/21/11

 

154,444

 

308,887

 

463,331

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3,672

 

7,344

 

14,688

 

 

 

 

 

300,002

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

34,247

 

40.85

 

300,004

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

01/21/11

 

131,250

 

262,500

 

393,750

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2,448

 

4,896

 

9,792

 

 

 

 

 

200,002

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

22,831

 

40.85

 

200,000

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

01/21/11

 

101,138

 

202,275

 

303,413

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,836

 

3,672

 

7,344

 

 

 

 

 

150,001

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17,123

 

40.85

 

149,997

 

Heino Lennartz

 

01/21/11

 

87,919

 

175,837

 

263,755

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,836

 

3,672

 

7,344

 

 

 

 

 

150,001

 

 

 

02/22/11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17,123

 

40.85

 

149,997

 

 


(1)

These amounts represent the minimum, target and maximum awards under the AIP. The amounts are not reduced to reflect any elections to defer receipt of an executive’s cash bonus or bonus shares under any deferred compensation plan.

 

 

(2)

These amounts represent PVSUs that may vest depending on attainment of performance targets over a three-year performance period. The amounts in this column are not reduced to reflect any elections to defer receipt of an executive’s PVSUs under any deferred compensation plan.

 

 

(3)

This column consists of the fair value of options and stock awards granted during 2011. The per-option grant date fair value (under FASB ASC Topic 718) was $8.76 per share for all options and $40.85 per share for all PVSUs. For the assumptions made in determining grant date fair values, refer to Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements included in our 2011 Form 10-K.

 

43



 

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT YEAR-END 2011

 

The following table contains information on the current holdings of stock options, unearned PVSUs and unvested incentive shares held by our named executive officers on December 31, 2011.

 

 

 

 

 

Option Awards

 

Stock Awards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Incentive Shares
 (Restricted Stock)

 

PVSUs
 Equity Incentive Plan Awards

 

Name

 

Grant Date

 

Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options

Exercisable
(#)

 

Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options

Unexercisable
(#)

 

Option
Exercise
Price

($)

 

Option
Expiration
Date

 

Number of
Shares or
Units of
Stock That
Have Not
Vested

(#)

 

Market
Value of
Shares or
Units of
Stock That
Have Not
Vested

($)

 

Number of
Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights
That Have Not
Vested

(#)

 

Market or Payout
Value of Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights That
Have Not Vested

($)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

725

(2)

27,514

*

87,371

(3)

3,315,729

*

 

 

5/5/2004

 

136,000

(1)

 

 

19.37

 

5/5/2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4/11/2005

 

95,183

(1)

 

 

24.20

 

4/11/2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/24/2006

 

74,257

(1)

 

 

32.59

 

2/24/2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/27/2007

 

96,576

(1)

 

 

44.97

 

2/27/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/26/2008

 

75,618

(1)

25,207

 

41.70

 

2/26/2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/24/2009

 

50,000

(1)

50,000

 

32.09

 

2/24/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3/22/2010

 

34,678

(1)

104,036

 

42.68

 

3/22/2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/22/2011

 

 

 

125,571

(1)

40.85

 

2/22/2021

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

William J. Federici

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

931

(2)

35,331

*

23,374

(3)

887,043

*

 

 

5/5/2004

 

24,600

(1)

 

 

19.37

 

5/5/2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3/5/2005

 

18,000

(1)

 

 

25.53

 

3/5/2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/24/2006

 

19,183

(1)

 

 

32.59

 

2/24/2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/27/2007

 

26,339

(1)

 

 

44.97

 

2/27/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/26/2008

 

20,623

(1)

6,875

 

41.70

 

2/26/2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/24/2009

 

13,000

(1)

13,000

 

32.09

 

2/24/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3/22/2010

 

9,457

(1)

28,374

 

42.68

 

3/22/2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/22/2011

 

 

 

34,247

(1)

40.85

 

2/22/2021

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

126

(2)

4,782

*

7,576

(3)

287,509

*

 

 

7/6/2010

 

3,152

(1)

9,458

 

36.29

 

7/6/2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/22/2011

 

 

 

22,831

(1)

40.85

 

2/22/2021

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

6,352

(3)

241,058

*

 

 

10/22/2010

 

3,152

(1)

9,458

 

36.10

 

10/22/2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/22/2011

 

 

 

17,123

(1)

40.85

 

2/22/2021

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

11,487

(3)

435,932

*

 

 

2/27/2007

 

2,634

(4)

 

 

44.97

 

2/27/2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/26/2008

 

2,062

(4)

688

 

41.70

 

2/26/2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/24/2009

 

1,250

(4)

1,250

 

32.09

 

2/24/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7/14/2009

 

5,000

(1)

5,000

 

32.58

 

7/14/2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3/22/2010

 

4,729

(1)

14,187

 

42.68

 

3/22/2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/22/2011

 

 

 

17,123

(1)

40.85

 

2/22/2021

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


*           The market value of the unvested incentive shares and unearned PVSUs is based on the closing price of our common stock on December 31, 2011, of $37.95.

 

(1)     Options are exercisable in 25% annual increments beginning one year from the grant date.

 

(2)     These incentive shares were granted on February 26, 2008, February 24, 2009, March 22, 2010 and February 22, 2011, and are 100% vested four years from the grant date if the bonus share to which the incentive share relates has not been sold and the employee has not terminated employment.  The incentive shares will also vest 25% per year upon retirement of a named executive officer.  Dividends are paid on unvested incentive shares and distributed or reinvested as additional stock.  Unvested incentive shares are forfeited on employment termination.

 

44



 

(3)    These PVSUs were awarded on February 24, 2009, March 22, 2010, and February 22, 2011, and each covers a three-year performance period.  Although the performance period for the 2009 award ended on December 31, 2011, performance is not actually determined and certified by the Compensation Committee until the first quarter of 2012.  The 2010 and 2011 awards will be earned (if at all) on December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2013, respectively, subject to satisfaction of the applicable performance criteria and generally subject to the recipient’s continued employment through those dates.  As required by the SEC’s disclosure rules, the number of PVSUs shown assumes a target payout of 100% will be achieved for all three awards.  All of the awards are distributed in stock except those made to Mr. Lennartz on February 24, 2009, which were paid in cash.

 

(4)     Stock appreciation rights exercisable in 25% annual increments beginning one year from the grant date.  The SARs are settled and paid in cash rather than shares.

 

2011 OPTION EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED TABLE

 

The following table provides information about the value realized by our named executive officers on the exercise of stock options, SARs and vesting of stock awards and units during 2011.

 

 

 

Option Awards

 

Stock Awards

 

 

 

Number of Shares
Acquired on Exercise

 

Value Realized on
Exercise (1)

 

Number of Shares Acquired
on Vesting (2)

 

Value Realized on
Vesting (3)

 

Name

 

(#)

 

($)

 

(#)

 

($)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

248,423

 

6,958,709

 

13,530

 

552,942

 

William J. Federici

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

3,297

 

134,682

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

1,231

 

50,286

 

 


(1)          The value realized is equal to the difference between the option exercise price and the fair market value of our common stock on the date of exercise, multiplied by the number of options exercised.

 

(2)          This column reflects incentive shares that were awarded in 2007 and vested in 2011, and PVSUs that were awarded in 2008 and earned in 2011, whether or not either award was deferred under the Employee Deferred Compensation Plan.  The total includes additional shares awarded pursuant to dividend equivalents, which are credited on unvested PVSUs over the three-year vesting period at a rate that assumes the participant will earn the target award.  At the time of the payout, the credited dividend equivalents are then increased or decreased based on the payout factor earned for the applicable three-year performance period.  Because the payout factor earned for the 2008-2010 performance period was 39.17%, the number of dividend equivalents accrued over that period was multiplied by 39.17% and the remaining 60.83% of accrued dividend equivalents was forfeited.  The following table shows the number of vested incentive shares and PVSU payouts, and the number of additional shares distributed due to dividend equivalents.  The PVSU payouts for eligible U.S.-based executives were made in stock and the PVSU payouts for Mr. Lennartz were made in cash.

 

 

 

Vested Incentive
Shares

 

PVSU Payouts

 

Dividend Equivalents
Paid on

PVSU Payouts

 

Name

 

(#)

 

(#)

 

(#)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

756

 

12,141

 

633

 

William J. Federici

 

-0-

 

3,134

 

163

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

 

 

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

 

 

 

Heino Lennartz

 

-0-

 

1,175

 

56

 

 

(3)          The value of vested incentive shares was determined by multiplying the number of vested incentive shares by $41.17, the fair market value of our common stock on the vesting date, February 27, 2011.  The value of the PVSUs was determined by multiplying the number of vested units by $40.85, the fair market value of our common stock on the payout date, February 22, 2011.

 

45



 

2011 PENSION BENEFITS

 

Retirement Plan

 

Until December 31, 2006, we maintained a final average pay defined benefit pension plan, which calculated retirement benefits for salaried participants as a percentage of average annual earnings.  The normal retirement benefit equals 1.9% of the average of a participant’s five highest consecutive calendar years of compensation out of the participant’s last ten calendar years of service, multiplied by his or her years of service up to 25 years, plus 0.5% of that average multiplied by his or her years of service in excess of 25 but not more than 35 years.  The benefit is reduced by the participant’s expected social security benefits.

 

Effective January 1, 2007, each participant’s accrued benefit under the retirement plan’s pension formula was frozen, and the pension benefits related to service on or after January 1, 2007 for all existing and new participants are expressed as a “cash balance” type formula.  Under the cash balance approach, an allocation is made at the end of each calendar year (or on employment termination, if earlier) to a participant’s hypothetical cash balance account.  The allocation is determined by the age of the participant and the percentage of annual compensation for that age band pursuant to the basic cash balance formula.

 

For participants who have attained minimum age and service requirements, an additional annual allocation is made to their accounts to replace all or part of the benefit for participants who were participating in the retirement plan on December 31, 2006 (“transition benefit”).  The transition benefit percentage will remain for the duration of the transition period, which continues until December 31, 2018 or a participant’s retirement, whichever comes first.  The transition benefit is applicable only to employees who were actively employed on January 1, 2007 and the allocation percentage is based on the age of the participant on that date.  The transition benefit for each of our named executive officers eligible to participate is 8%.  Each year, the balance in the hypothetical account will be credited with interest at a rate equal to the average 30-Year Treasury Bond Rate for November of the year prior to the year the interest is credited.

 

In general, the compensation used for determining a participant’s benefits under the retirement plan consists of base salary, overtime, annual incentive awards (paid in cash or stock) and other cash remuneration, plus a participant’s contributions to our 401(k) plan.

 

Normal retirement age under the retirement plan is age 65.  Participants with ten years of service may retire and commence payment of their frozen benefits upon reaching age 55, with reduced benefits based on their age at the retirement date.  A participant may begin distribution of his cash balance benefits on employment termination, without regard to age or years of service, but will forego any future interest credits.

 

The retirement benefit that each participant will receive at retirement will be the sum of the accrued benefit under the old pension formula as of December 31, 2006, plus the amount allocated to the participant’s cash-balance account.  A participant vests in his or her combined benefit upon reaching three years of service.

 

Supplemental Employees’ Retirement Plan

 

IRS requirements limit the compensation that can be used to calculate a participant’s benefit under a qualified retirement plan to $245,000 and the annual benefit is limited to $195,000.  The SERP benefits are substantially equal to the difference between the total benefit accrued under the retirement plan and the amount of benefit the retirement plan is permitted to provide under the statutory limits on benefits and earnings.  The benefits are unfunded and paid out of our general assets.

 

Before January 1, 2009, SERP benefits were payable at the same time and in the same form as benefits payable under the qualified retirement plan, except that SERP participants could elect to receive their SERP benefits in a lump sum.  Due to changes in the tax laws, the SERP was amended effective January 1, 2009 to provide that benefits accrued on or after January 1, 2005 are payable in a lump sum on the date that is six months following termination of employment.  These benefits may be reduced to reflect early

 

46



 

commencement of benefits before age 65.  Benefits accrued before 2005 are still payable according to the SERP rules in effect on December 31, 2004.

 

The following table shows the actuarial present value of accumulated pension benefits payable to our named executive officers under our retirement plan and the SERP.  Mr. Lennartz and Mr. Bedwell are not eligible to participate in U.S. company-sponsored defined benefit retirement plans or similar plans.  The benefits were determined using assumptions consistent with those used by us in our financial statements.

 

2011 Pension Benefits Table

 

 

 

 

 

Number of Years
Credited Service (1)

 

Present Value of
Accumulated Benefit (2)

 

Payments During Last
Fiscal Year

 

Name

 

Plan Name

 

(#)

 

($)

 

($)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

Retirement Plan

 

19

 

97,152

 

-0-

 

 

 

SERP

 

19

 

553,059

 

-0-

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

650,211

 

-0-

 

William J. Federici

 

Retirement Plan

 

8

 

47,456

 

-0-

 

 

 

SERP

 

8

 

105,500

 

-0-

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

152,956

 

-0-

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

Retirement Plan

 

1

 

19,778

 

-0-

 

 

 

SERP

 

1

 

9,926

 

-0-

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

29,704

 

-0-

 

 


(1)          Equals the number of full years of credited service as of December 31, 2011.  Credited service begins with a participant’s hire date and ends with the date of employment termination.

 

(2)          An actuarial present value of the benefits is calculated by estimating expected future payments starting at an assumed retirement age, weighting the estimated payments by the estimated probability of surviving to each post-retirement age, and discounting the weighted payments at an assumed discount rate to reflect the time value of money. The actuarial present value represents an estimate of the amount which, if invested as of December 31, 2011 at a discount rate of 4.90%, would be sufficient on an average basis to provide estimated future payments based on the current accumulated benefit. Estimated future payments are assumed to be in the form of a single lump-sum payment at retirement determined using an interest-rate of 4.90% for the Retirement Plan and 4.40% for the SERP and mortality assumptions contained in the RP-2000 Mortality Table projected to 2025 using Scale AA with a linear phase-out for the Retirement Plan and mortality assumptions contained in the Mortality Table prescribed by the IRS under the Internal Revenue Code Section 417(e)(3) for the SERP.  The assumed retirement age for each named executive officer is 65 and the assumed cash balance crediting rate is 3.30%. Actual benefit present values will vary from these estimates depending on many factors, including an executive’s actual retirement age, future-credited years of service, future compensation, applicable interest-rates and regulatory changes.

 

2011 NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION

 

Employee Deferred Compensation Plan

 

The Employee Deferred Compensation Plan allows highly compensated employees, including executive officers, to defer up to 100% of salary and cash bonus.  We match at the rate of 100% of the first 3% of salary deferrals, plus 50% of the next 2%.  Employer matching contributions made before January 1, 2007 vest 20% per year of service and matching contributions made on or after January 1, 2007 are 100% vested.  Participants also may defer payout of annual bonus shares and PVSUs.  We contribute one time-vested incentive share for each four bonus shares deferred.

 

Deferred cash contributions may be invested in a selection of investment options that mirror the funds available under our 401(k) plan. Incentive shares will vest on the fourth anniversary of the date of contribution or will vest pro rata on retirement, death and/or disability, if earlier.  During the time these awards are deferred, they are deemed invested in our common stock and receive additional credits for dividend equivalents.  All deferred stock awards are distributed in shares of common stock.

 

Amounts deferred in any year, except for matching contributions on cash contributions, will be distributed automatically in a lump sum five years after the year of deferral.  A participant may choose to defer these amounts to another date or until employment termination.  Matching contributions on cash contributions are only distributable on employment termination.  Participants may elect

 

47



 

to receive their distributions on termination in a cash lump sum, stock lump sum, or in up to ten substantially equal annual installments.

 

German Executive Deferred Compensation Plan

 

In 2009, we adopted a new deferred compensation plan for our European corporate headquarters senior employees, including Mr. Lennartz.  Under the plan, a contribution is made to a tax-deferred account for eligible employees.  The amount of the contribution equals 3% of their base compensation up to the limit on wages under the German social security system plus 13% of their base compensation in excess of that limit.  Base compensation includes a participant’s base salary plus the three-year average of the bonus earned under our AIP.

 

The account earns interest at the rate of 2.25%, compounding annually or at the average of a German government bond index, whichever is greater as measured at the time a participant commences distributions under the plan.  Distributions generally can begin when a participant is eligible to retire under the German social security system, death or permanent disability.  They are payable in three forms: (1) an annuity (purchased with the account balance), (2) a lump sum or (3) up to ten annual installments.  Distributions do not require a participant to terminate employment.

 

2011 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table

 

Name

 

Executive
Contributions in Last
FY (1)

($)

 

Registrant
Contributions in Last
FY (2)

($)

 

Aggregate
Earnings in Last
FY (3)

($)

 

Aggregate
Withdrawals/
Distributions

($)

 

Aggregate
Balance

at Last
FYE (4)
($)

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

82,503

 

33,218

 

(73,456

)

319,324

 

1,644,723

 

William J. Federici

 

-0-

 

-0-

 

(22,663

)

229,652

 

394,894

 

Heino Lennartz (5)

 

-0-

 

29,051

 

2,937

 

-0-

 

85,012

 

 


(1)          The amounts reported in this column are reflected in this year’s Salary column of the Summary Compensation Table.

 

(2)          The amount in this column for Dr. Morel represents salary deferral matching contributions.  For Mr. Lennartz, the amount in this column reflects our required contribution.

 

(3)         For U.S.-based executives, these amounts reflect the net gains attributable to the investment funds in which the executives have chosen to invest and for deferred shares of stock contributed to the Employee Deferred Compensation Plan.  For Mr. Lennartz, amounts deferred under the current German Deferred Compensation Plan are deemed to earn the minimum guaranteed rate of 2.25% per year.

 

(4)          The total balance includes amounts contributed for prior years which have all been previously reported in the Summary Compensation Table for the year those amounts were deferred.

 

(5)          Amounts were converted at a rate of 1.3923 U.S. dollars per euro.

 

Payments on Disability

 

Each current U.S. named executive officer has long-term disability coverage, which is available to all eligible U.S. employees.  The coverage provides full salary continuation for six months and thereafter up to 60% of pay with a $25,000 monthly limit.  Eligible U.S. employees also continue to earn cash balance pay credits at the rate of pay in effect when they became disabled under the retirement plan and SERP.  Employees who are vested in our retirement plan also receive continued medical coverage while on disability on the same terms as active employees.  Deferred compensation is payable according to the executive’s election.  Outstanding unvested stock options would be forfeited and outstanding vested stock options would be exercisable for the term of the option.  Outstanding PVSUs and unvested incentive shares would be forfeited when an employee becomes disabled.  Mr. Bedwell is covered by a life insurance

 

48



 

policy that has its premiums paid by the Australian superannuation funded by both the Company and him.  This life insurance policy has a death benefit of $1,500,000 Australian dollars, which converted at the average daily rate for 2011 (0.9684 U.S. dollar per Australian dollar), is equal to $1,452,600.

 

Mr. Lennartz is also covered by group disability coverage, which is generally available to all German-based employees.  This coverage entitles Mr. Lennartz to receive one million euros ($1,392,300, converted at a rate of 1.3923 U.S. dollars per euro) if he becomes permanently disabled under German social security laws.  Mr. Lennartz would also receive any amounts deferred under the German Executive Deferred Compensation Plan.

 

Payments on Death

 

Each U.S.-based named executive officer has group life insurance benefits, which are available to all eligible U.S. employees.  The benefit is equal to 1x pay with a maximum limit of $500,000, plus any supplemental life insurance elected and paid for by the named executive officer.  Dr. Morel’s beneficiaries will also receive a benefit of $1,750,000 payable under the terms of a term life insurance policy paid for by us.

 

For U.S.-based named executive officers, deferred compensation is payable according to the executive’s election on file.  Outstanding unvested stock options would be forfeited and outstanding vested stock options would be exercisable for the term of the option.  Outstanding PVSUs and unvested incentive shares would be forfeited when an employee dies.

 

Mr. Bedwell is covered by a disability insurance policy that has its premiums paid by the Australian superannuation funded by both the Company and him.  This disability insurance policy pays a benefit of up to $1,500,000 Australian dollars, which converted at the average daily rate for 2011 (0.9684 U.S. dollar per Australian dollar), is equal $1,452,600.

 

Mr. Lennartz is covered by group life insurance coverage, which is generally available to all German-based employees at varying levels depending on position.  The insurance entitles their beneficiaries to receive one million euros ($1,392,300, converted at a rate of 1.3923 U.S. Dollars per euro) upon his death.  He would also receive any amounts deferred under the German Executive Deferred Compensation Plan.

 

Estimated Payments Following Severance—Current Named Executive Officers

 

We have agreements with Dr. Morel, Mr. Hunt and Mr. Bedwell that entitles them to severance benefits on certain types of employment terminations not related to a change-in-control.  Mr. Federici is not covered under a general severance plan and any severance benefits payable to him under similar circumstances would be determined by the Compensation Committee in its discretion.  Mr. Lennartz has a severance arrangement governed by his standard German employment contract.

 

Dr. Morel.  Dr. Morel has an employment agreement that entitles him to a lump-sum severance payment if he is terminated involuntarily other than for cause.  The amount of the payment is equal to his annual base salary in effect on the termination date plus an amount equal to his salary for the next year if it has been set (or if not set, his current base salary).  The payment would be made six months following his termination date.  Dr. Morel’s employment agreement does not entitle him to additional payments or benefits if his employment is terminated for cause or as a result of his death or disability.  “Cause” means the conviction of a felony; the willful failure to perform his job duties; gross negligence or willful misconduct in the performance of his duties; willful misconduct that materially injures us; or the violation of the non-compete, non-solicitation or confidentiality obligations under the agreement.

 

Any severance pay would be contingent on execution of a release and other customary provisions, including compliance with non-competition, non-solicitation and confidentiality obligations contained in the agreement.

 

49



 

Mr. Hunt and Mr. Bedwell.  Mr. Hunt and Mr. Bedwell have entered into substantially similar Non-Competition Agreements with the Company.  Each agreement provides that the executive may not compete with the Company for a period of one year following termination of employment for any reason.  In addition, if the executive is terminated by the Company other than for cause or has a constructive termination, then he is entitled to severance compensation provided that he signs a release of any legal claims in favor of the Company.  Constructive termination is defined as a significant diminution or reduction in authority or duties; a material reduction in salary or incentive compensation opportunity; a relocation of employment by more than 50 miles; or, the failure of a successor of the Company to assume the Company’s obligations under the agreement.  In the event of a termination without cause or a constructive termination, Mr. Hunt will receive continuation of his regular salary and medical, dental and life insurance benefits for 6 months and Mr. Bedwell will receive continuation of his regular salary and medical, dental and life insurance benefits for 12 months.

 

Mr. Lennartz.  Under the employment agreement with Mr. Lennartz, each party must give six months’ notice of a termination.  This is a standard German employment agreement.  Severance pay equal to his monthly base compensation may be paid in lieu of six months’ notice.  Monthly base compensation is equal to his monthly base salary plus one-twelfth of his three-year average AIP bonus.  In addition, under German common law, if we terminate Mr. Lennartz without cause, he would be entitled to receive a payment equal to one month of salary per year of service.  As of December 31, 2011, Mr. Lennartz was eligible to receive 11 months’ total base compensation if we terminated him without cause.

 

Estimated Severance Payments Table

 

The table below reflects amounts that executives would receive on certain terminations of employment other than following a change-in-control.  No named executive officer will receive any enhanced benefit as a result of a termination for cause.  The amounts do not include amounts payable through a plan or arrangement that is generally applicable to all salaried employees.

 

Name

 

Event

 

Cash Severance

 

Value of Stock
Awards That Will
Become Vested (1)

 

Continuation of
Welfare Benefits (2)

 

Additional
Life

Insurance (3)

 

Total

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

Involuntary (no cause)

 

$

1,650,056

 

 

 

 

$

1,650,056

 

 

 

Death

 

 

 

 

$

1,750,000

 

1,750,000

 

 

 

Retirement

 

 

$

2,139,280

 

 

 

2,139,280

 

William J. Federici

 

Retirement

 

 

583,444

 

 

 

583,444

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

Involuntary (no cause)

 

187,500

 

 

7,932

 

 

195,432

 

 

 

Retirement

 

 

287,509

 

 

 

287,509

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

Involuntary (no cause)

 

347,004

 

 

12,599

 

 

359,603

 

 

 

Retirement

 

 

241,058

 

 

 

241,058

 

Heino Lennartz

 

Retirement

 

 

291,721

 

 

 

291,721

 

 


(1)          This amount is the total of unvested PVSUs that could, with Compensation Committee discretion, become vested due to retirement measured at their fair market value on December 31, 2011, $37.95, using an assumed 100% performance rate for the 2010-2012 and 2011-2013 performance periods.  These awards would still be payable at the same time and subject to the same performance conditions that apply to awards to participants who remain active, and thus may be greater than or less than the target amount.

 

(2)          This amount reflects the current premium incremental cost to us for continuation of elected benefits to the extent required under an applicable agreement.

 

(3)          The life insurance benefit represents additional life insurance paid for by us over the standard coverage level.

 

50



 

Payments on Termination in Connection With a Change-in-Control

 

Dr. Morel and Mr. Federici

 

We have entered into agreements with each of our U.S.-based named executive officers, as well as certain other of our officers, which provide the benefits described below on qualifying terminations of employment in connection with or within two years following a change-in-control.  For Dr. Morel and Mr. Federici, the agreements provide for the following compensation and benefits if their employment is terminated under certain circumstances following a change-in-control:

 

·                  Cash severance pay equal to three times the sum of the executive’s highest annual base salary in effect during the year of termination and the average annual bonus for the three years (or, if employed less than three years, the lesser period) immediately preceding the change-in-control.  Severance compensation will be reduced on a pro rata basis if an executive reaches normal retirement age or commences retirement within three years following the change-in-control.  The severance payments for Mr. Federici is payable in monthly installments, and the severance payments for Dr. Morel are payable in a lump sum.  If any of these individuals is a key employee at the time of his termination, payments will be delayed six months to the extent required by applicable tax law.

 

·                  Immediate vesting of any unvested benefits and matching contributions under our 401(k) plan and the Employee Deferred Compensation Plan as of the termination of the executive’s employment.

 

·                  Immediate vesting of all unvested stock options, stock appreciation rights, shares of stock, stock units and other equity-based awards awarded under any compensation or benefit plan or arrangement.

 

·                  Continued medical, dental, life and other benefits for 36 months after termination of the executive’s employment, or until his retirement or eligibility for similar benefits with a new employer.

 

·                  Outplacement assistance.

 

Employment terminations that entitle an executive to receive the severance benefits under a change-in-control, consist of (1) resignation following a constructive termination of his employment; (2) employment termination other than by reason of death, disability, continuous willful misconduct or normal retirement; or (3) voluntary resignation during a 30-day period beginning 12 months following the change-in-control.

 

Definition of “Change-in-Control.  For each agreement, a “change-in-control” is defined generally as any such event that requires a report to the SEC, but also includes any of the following:

 

·                  Any person or entity other than us, any of our current directors or officers or a trustee or fiduciary holding our securities, becomes the beneficial owner of more than 50% of the combined voting power of our outstanding securities;

 

·                  An acquisition, sale, merger or other transaction that results in a change in ownership of more than 50% of the combined voting power of our stock;

 

·                  A change in the majority of our Board of Directors over a two-year period that is not approved by at least two-thirds of the directors then in office who were directors at the beginning of the period; or

 

·                  Execution of an agreement with us, which if consummated, would result in any of the above events.

 

51



 

Definition of “Constructive Termination.”  A “constructive termination” generally includes any of the following actions taken by us without the executive’s written consent following a change-in-control:

 

·                  Significantly reducing or diminishing the nature or scope of the executive’s authority or duties;

 

·                  Materially reducing the executive’s annual salary or incentive compensation opportunities;

 

·                  Changing the executive’s office location so that he must commute more than 50 miles, as compared to his commute as of the date of the agreement;

 

·                  Failing to provide substantially similar fringe benefits, or substitute benefits that were substantially similar taken as a whole, to the benefits provided as of the date of the agreement; or

 

·                  Failing to obtain a satisfactory agreement from any successor to us to assume and agree to perform the obligations under the agreement.

 

However, no constructive termination occurs if the executive:

 

·                  Fails to give us written notice of his intention to claim constructive termination and the basis for that claim at least ten days in advance of the effective date of the executive’s resignation; or

 

·                  We cure the circumstances giving rise to the constructive termination before the effective date of the executive’s resignation.

 

Non-Competition.  To receive the severance benefits under the agreement, the named executive officer must agree not to be employed by any of our competitors or compete with us in any part of the United States (any market or territory, in the case of Dr. Morel) for up to one year (two years, in the case of Dr. Morel) following employment termination for any reason.

 

Excise-Tax Indemnification.  The named executive officers are entitled to full indemnification for any excise taxes that may be imposed by Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code in connection with the change-in-control, including interest and penalties, and payment of their legal fees and expenses if we contest the validity or enforceability of the agreement.  Currently, no named executive officer would receive a gross-up payment.

 

Mr. Hunt

 

Mr. Hunt has a Change-in-Control agreement that is substantially similar to the agreements with Dr. Morel and Mr. Federici with the following changes:

 

·                  the definition of change-in-control explicitly requires the consummation of any transaction agreed to in writing;

 

·                  the payments and benefits are triggered only if Mr. Hunt is involuntarily terminated (without cause) or has a constructive termination within two years after a change-in-control, and cannot be triggered by his voluntary resignation at any time; and

 

·                  there is no Internal Revenue Code Section 4999 excise-tax indemnification; payments will be reduced below the applicable threshold in the Internal Revenue Code if Mr. Hunt would be in a better after-tax position than if the excise tax applied.

 

52



 

Mr. Lennartz and Mr. Bedwell

 

Mr. Lennartz and Mr. Bedwell are entitled to the same termination benefits they would receive in the absence of a change-in-control of the Company.

 

Estimated Benefits on Termination Following a Change-in-Control

 

The following table shows potential payments to our named executive officers if their employment terminates following a change-in-control under existing contracts, agreements, plans or arrangements.  The amounts assume a December 31, 2011 termination date and use the closing price of our common stock as of that date, $37.95.  Currently, no executive would be entitled to a parachute tax gross-up payment.

 

Name

 

Aggregate
Severance Pay (1)

 

PVSU
Acceleration (2)

 

Early Vesting of
Restricted Stock (3)

 

Early Vesting of Stock
Options and SARs (4)

 

Welfare
Benefits
Continuation (5)

 

Outplacement
Assistance (6)

 

Total

 

Donald E. Morel, Jr.

 

$

4,492,312

 

$

2,261,997

 

$

27,514

 

$

293,000

 

$

60,605

 

$

25,000

 

$

7,160,428

 

William J. Federici

 

2,013,106

 

599,661

 

35,331

 

76,180

 

50,913

 

25,000

 

2,800,191

 

Jeffrey C. Hunt

 

1,312,869

 

129,738

 

4,782

 

20,933

 

50,503

 

25,000

 

1,543,825

 

Warwick Bedwell

 

347,005

(7)

114,255

 

-0-

 

23,329

 

 

 

484,589

 

Heino Lennartz

 

402,721

(8)

292,240

 

-0-

 

34,175

 

 

 

729,136

 

 


(1)             For Dr. Morel, Mr. Federici and Mr. Hunt, this amount represents three times the sum of the executive officer’s (a) highest annual base salary in effect during the year of termination; and, (b) the average annual bonus for the three years (or, if employed less than three years, the lesser period).  These amounts are based on the salary rates in effect on December 31, 2011 and AIP bonuses paid during the three years before the year containing the termination date (2008, 2009 and 2010).  For Mr. Bedwell this amount represents 12 months of salary continuation under his Non-Competition Agreement.  For Mr. Lennartz, this amount represents 11 months of severance as calculated under his employment agreement.

 

(2)             This amount represents the payout of all outstanding PVSU awards on a change-in-control at the target payout level with each award then pro-rated based on the time elapsed for the applicable three-year performance period.

 

(3)             This amount represents the value of all unvested restricted awards, which would become vested on a change-in-control (whether or not the awards were deferred).  The amount was calculated by multiplying an executive’s number of unvested shares by the fair market value of a single share on December 31, 2011, which was $37.95.

 

(4)             This amount is the intrinsic value (fair market value on December 31, 2011 ($37.95 per share) minus the per share exercise price) of all unvested stock options and SARs for each executive.  Any option or SAR with an exercise price of greater than fair market value was assumed to be cancelled for no consideration and, therefore, had no intrinsic value.

 

(5)             This amount represents the employer-paid portion of the premiums for medical, dental and life insurance coverage for Dr. Morel, Mr. Federici, and Mr. Hunt.

 

(6)             This amount represents the cost of providing outplacement assistance.

 

(7)            Amount converted at a rate of 0.7957 U.S. dollars per Singapore dollar.

 

(8)             Amount converted at a rate of 1.3923 U.S. dollars per euro.

 

53



 

PROPOSAL 2 — ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATION

 

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, enacted in July 2010, requires that we include in our proxy statement a non-binding shareholder vote to approve the compensation of our named executive officers, as described in this proxy statement.  Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the shareholder vote on executive compensation is an advisory vote only, and it is not binding on us or the Board and neither the Board nor the Compensation Committee will be required to take any action as a result of the outcome of the vote on this proposal.  Nonetheless, the Compensation Committee and the Board value the opinions of the shareholders and will consider the outcome of the vote when making future compensation decisions.

 

At our 2011 annual meeting of shareholders, we provided our shareholders with the opportunity to cast an advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in the proxy statement for the 2011 annual meeting, our shareholders approved the proposal, with approximately 72.6% of the votes cast in favor. At the 2011 annual meeting, we also asked our shareholders to indicate if we should hold an advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers every one, two or three years, with our Board recommending an annual advisory vote. Because our Board views it as a good corporate governance practice, and because our shareholders overwhelmingly supported an annual advisory vote, we again are asking our shareholders to approve the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement in accordance with the SEC’s rules.

 

As described more fully in the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section, our executive compensation program is designed to provide competitive executive pay opportunities tied to our short-term and long-term success and attract, motivate and retain the type of executive leadership that will help us achieve our strategic goals.  The Compensation Committee continually reviews the compensation programs for our named executive officers to ensure they achieve the desired goals of aligning our executive compensation structure with our shareholders’ interests and current market practices.

 

As a result of our 2011 shareholder advisory vote on executive compensation, we believe that our executive compensation is appropriately aligned with Company performance.  However, in an effort to further align executive compensation and performance, in 2011 and 2012 our Compensation Committee made the following improvements to our compensation programs as more fully described in our Compensation Discussion and Analysis:

 

·                  Changed the way we calculate expected values of LTI awards so that the values reflected in the SCT align more closely with the expected values approved by the Compensation Committee;

 

·                  Increased the weighting of the Adjusted EPS metric under the AIP to emphasize the importance of improving our earnings per share;

 

·                  Rebalanced the peer groups to include companies that more closely match our current size and global complexity, as well as companies used by third-party advisory firms; and

 

·                  Conducted annual realizable pay-for-performance alignment analyses for the Chief Executive Officer versus the Company’s peer groups in 2011 and 2012.

 

Our Board strongly endorses our executive compensation program and recommends that the shareholders vote to approve the compensation of our named executive officers as described in this proxy statement under the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” heading.

 

The Board unanimously recommends a vote FOR the approval of the compensation of the named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables and narrative discussion.

 

54



 

SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR AND FEES PAID

 

Fees Paid to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

The following table presents fees for audit and other services provided by PwC for years 2011 and 2010.  All of the services described in the following fee table were approved in conformity with the Audit Committee’s pre-approval process.

 

Type of Fees

 

2011

 

2010

 

Audit Fees

 

$

1,463,205

 

$

1,466,697

 

Audit-Related Fees

 

41,000

 

9,000

 

Tax Fees

 

158,049

 

128,632

 

All Other Fees

 

3,403

 

1,800

 

Total

 

$

1,665,657

 

$

1,606,129

 

 

Audit Committee Policy on Pre-Approval of Audit and Permissible Non-Audit Services

 

Our Audit Committee has responsibility for appointing, setting compensation and overseeing the work of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm.  As part of this responsibility, the Committee has established a policy to pre-approve all audit and permissible non-audit services provided by the independent registered public accounting firm.  Prior to engagement for the next year’s audit, management will submit a list of services and related fees expected to be rendered by the independent registered public accounting firm during that year for pre-approval by the Audit Committee.  Those services fall within one of the four following categories:

 

Audit Fees include fees for audit work performed on the financial statements and internal control over financial reporting, and work that generally only the independent registered public accounting firm can reasonably be expected to provide, including statutory audits or financial audits for our subsidiaries or affiliates; services associated with SEC registration statements; periodic reports and other documents filed with the SEC or other documents issued in connection with securities offerings (e.g., comfort letters, consents); and assistance in responding to SEC comment letters.

 

Audit-Related Fees are fees for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of our financial statements and are traditionally performed by the independent registered public accounting firm, including due diligence related to potential business acquisitions/divestitures, financial statement audits of employee benefit plans and special procedures required to meet certain regulatory requirements.

 

Tax Fees include fees for all services, except those specifically related to the audit of the financial statements, which are performed by the independent registered public accounting firm’s tax personnel and may include tax advice, tax analysis and compliance, and review of income and other tax returns.

 

All other fees are fees for those services not captured in any of the above three categories.

 

55



 

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

 

The Audit Committee reviewed the Company’s financial-reporting process on behalf of the Board.  Management has the primary responsibility for the financial statements and the reporting process, including the system of internal controls.  PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”), the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2011, is responsible for expressing its opinion on the conformity of the Company’s audited financial statements with generally accepted accounting principles and on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed with management and PwC the audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2011, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting and PwC’s evaluation of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

The Committee has discussed with PwC the matters that are required to be discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 61 (Communication With Audit Committees), as amended (AICPA, Professional Standards, Vol.  I AU §380), as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in Rule 3200T.  PwC has provided to the Committee the written disclosures and the letter required by the applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding PwC’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence and the Committee has discussed with PwC that firm’s independence from the Company.

 

The Audit Committee also considered whether the independent registered public accounting firm’s provision of non-audit services to the Company is compatible with the auditor’s independence.  The Audit Committee has concluded that the independent registered public accounting firm is independent from the Company and its management.  Based on the considerations and discussions referred to above, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board that the audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2011 be included in the Company’s 2011 Form 10-K.

 

 

Audit Committee:

 

 

 

Mark A. Buthman, Chairman

 

Thomas W. Hofmann

 

Douglas A. Michels

 

PROPOSAL 3 — RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR 2012

 

The Audit Committee has appointed PwC as our independent registered public accounting firm for 2012.  Although shareholder approval for this appointment is not required, the Audit Committee and our Board are submitting the selection of PwC for ratification to obtain the views of shareholders and as a matter of good corporate governance.  If the appointment is not ratified, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or not to retain that firm.  Representatives of PwC will be present at the 2012 annual meeting to answer questions.  They also will have the opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so.

 

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a vote FOR the ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for 2012.

 

56



 

ADDITIONAL MEETING INFORMATION

 

Householding

 

We have adopted a procedure called “householding” for making the proxy statement and the annual report available.  Householding means that shareholders who share the same last name and address will receive only one copy of the materials, unless we are notified that one or more of these shareholders wishes to continue receiving additional copies.  We will continue to make available a proxy card to each shareholder of record.  If you prefer to receive multiple copies of the proxy materials at the same address, please contact the Corporate Secretary (in writing: West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc., 101 Gordon Drive, Lionville, PA 19341; or by telephone: (610) 594-3319).

 

Costs of Solicitation

 

We pay the cost of soliciting proxies.  Proxies will be solicited on behalf of the Board by mail, telephone, other electronic means or in person.  We have retained Georgeson Inc., 199 Water Street 26th Floor, New York, NY 10038, to help with the solicitation for a fee of $12,500 plus reasonable out-of-pocket costs and expenses.  We will reimburse brokerage firms and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses for forwarding solicitation materials to shareholders and obtaining their votes.

 

OTHER INFORMATION

 

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

 

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, requires that our directors and officers file reports of holdings and transactions in our shares with the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange.  Based on our records and other information, we believe that our directors and officers met all applicable Section 16(a) filing requirements during 2011, with the exception of Dr. Morel who filed a late Form 4 on April 15, 2011.  The late filing was due to an administrative error.

 

2013 Shareholder Proposals or Nominations

 

Under SEC rules, if a shareholder wants us to include a proposal in our proxy statement and form of proxy for presentation at the 2013 Annual Meeting, the proposal must be received by us at our principal executive offices at 101 Gordon Drive, Lionville, Pennsylvania 19341 by November 23, 2012 and comply with the procedures of Rule 14a-8 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The proposal should be sent to the attention of the Secretary of the Company (in writing: West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc., 101 Gordon Drive, Lionville, PA 19341; or by telephone: (610) 594-3319).

 

Our Bylaws contain procedures that a shareholder must follow to nominate persons for election as directors or to introduce an item of business at an annual meeting of shareholders.  Nominations for director nominees or an item of business to be conducted must be submitted in writing to the Corporate Secretary of the Company at our executive offices and should be mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested.  We must receive the notice of your intention to introduce a nomination or to propose an item of business at our 2013 Annual Meeting:

 

·                  Not less than 90 days prior to the anniversary date of this year’s Annual Meeting (May 1, 2012); or

 

·                  Seven days following the date on which notice of the date of the 2013 Annual Meeting is made available or the public disclosure of the date of the 2013 Annual Meeting is made, whichever first occurs.

 

57



 

The nomination must contain information about the nominees as specified in our Bylaws.  The notice must include information specified in our Bylaws, including information concerning the nominee or proposal, as the case may be, and information about the shareholder’s ownership of and agreements related to our shares.

 

Except as otherwise required by law, the Chairman of the meeting may refuse to allow the transaction of any business, or to acknowledge the nomination of any person, not made in compliance with our Bylaws.  You may obtain a copy of our Bylaws by contacting our Corporate Secretary, 101 Gordon Drive, Lionville, Pennsylvania 19341.

 

2011 Annual Report and SEC Filings

 

Our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2011 are included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, which we will make available to shareholders at the same time as this proxy statement. Our Annual Report and this proxy statement are posted on our website at http://www.westpharma.com/na/en/Investors/Pages/ProxyMaterials.aspx and are available from the SEC at its website at www.sec.gov.  If you do not have access to the Internet or have not received a copy of our Annual Report, you may request a copy of it or any exhibits thereto without charge by writing to our Corporate Secretary, at West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc., 101 Gordon Drive, Lionville, PA, 19341.

 

Other Matters

 

As of the date this proxy statement was printed, the Board is not aware of any other matters that will be presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting other than those referred to in this proxy statement.  If any other matters come before the 2012 Annual Meeting, the proxies named in this proxy statement intend to vote the proxies according to their best judgment.

 

58



TO VOTE, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS: KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION ONLY THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED. Signature (Joint Owners) Date Date Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX] VOTE BY INTERNET - www.proxyvote.com Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the website and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form. ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF FUTURE PROXY MATERIALS If you would like to reduce the costs incurred by our company in mailing proxy materials, you can consent to receiving all future proxy statements, proxy cards and annual reports electronically via e-mail or the Internet. To sign up for electronic delivery, please follow the instructions above to vote using the Internet and, when prompted, indicate that you agree to receive or access proxy materials electronically in future years. VOTE BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903 Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions. VOTE BY MAIL Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717. WEST PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES, INC. 101 GORDON DRIVE LIONVILLE, PA 19341-0645 M41476-P22278 To withhold authority to vote for any individual nominee(s), mark “For All Except” and write the number(s) of the nominee(s) on the line below. WEST PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES, INC. Withhold All For All For All Except The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR the following: 1. To elect the ten directors nominated by our Board of Directors and named in the Proxy Statement; Nominees: 06) Douglas A. Michels 07) Donald E. Morel, Jr. 08) John H. Weiland 09) Anthony Welters 10) Patrick J. Zenner 01) Mark A. Buthman 02) William F. Feehery 03) Thomas W. Hofmann 04) L. Robert Johnson 05) Paula A. Johnson For Against Abstain The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR the following proposals: 2. Advisory vote to approve named executive officer compensation; 3. To ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the 2012 fiscal year; and 4. To transact any other business that may properly come before the meeting and any adjournment or postponement. Please sign exactly as your name(s) appear(s) hereon. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, or other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must sign. If a corporation or partnership, please sign in full corporate or partnership name by authorized officer.

 


Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting: The Notice and Proxy Statement and Annual Report are available at www.proxyvote.com. M41477-P22278 WEST PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES, INC. 101 Gordon Drive Lionville, Pennsylvania 19341 This proxy is solicited by the Board of Directors The undersigned hereby appoints John R. Gailey III and William J. Federici as Proxies, each with the power to appoint his substitute, and hereby authorizes them to represent and to vote, as designated on the reverse side, all the shares of common stock of West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc., held of record by the undersigned on March 9, 2012, at the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on May 1, 2012 or any postponement or adjournment thereof. This Proxy when properly executed will be voted in the manner directed herein by the undersigned shareholder. If no direction is made, this Proxy will be voted FOR Proposals 1, 2, and 3. Continued and to be signed on reverse side