The pay for directors of publicly traded companies in Canada has jumped 400 per cent in the last 10 years, according to the Conference Board of Canada.

Over the same period, the value of the companies the directors oversaw rose 33 per cent, based on the S&P/TSX composite index.

The increase partly reflects the directors’ increasing roles and responsibilities in the decade since the collapse of Enron Inc., corporate governance experts said.

Despite its blue-chip board, management of the Houston-based firm engaged in a massive accounting fraud that destroyed billions in shareholder value when it was uncovered.

Enron’s failure, followed by WorldCom Inc. and others, laid the foundation for the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a U.S. law that required corporate boards to be more accountable and independent of management.

Canadian companies, especially those cross-listed on U.S. exchanges, followed suit.

Since then, directors’ average pay in Canada has quadrupled from $28,724 in 2000 to $112, 651 a decade later, conference board data shows.

Is it justified?

“I’d say yes. Good directors are worth it. The increased responsibility, duties and time, plus the increased personal liability that directors face are certainly worth $112,651 a year,” said Richard Powers, a professor at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management who also runs a directors’ education program.

It’s also a question of supply and demand, he said.

There are only so many qualified executives who can sit on corporate boards and now that time commitments are higher, they can no longer accept up to a dozen directorships like in the old days, he said.

“It’s rare to see somebody on more than four or five boards these days. It used to be referred to as an old boys club. It was quite an honour. You’d have lunch or dinner, look at the material, make some decisions. Maybe 20 years ago. Leading up to Enron things were certainly starting to change,” Powers said. “Directors jobs today are much more comprehensive and demanding. “

Institutional shareholders who pushed for much of the corporate governance changes that have increased directors’ workload said board practices have improved dramatically.

“Yes, things have absolutely improved from when we started in 2003,” said Steve Erlichman, president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance. The group represents 48 pension and mutual funds that together manage $2 trillion in assets on behalf of Canadian investors.

One of the biggest issues for the coalition was creating more board independence from management. A key goal has been splitting the roles of chief executive officer and board chair.

When the coalition was formed in 2003, just over a third of the companies in the S&P/TSX composite index had independent chairs. Now, the majority have them, Erlichman noted.

Still, there’s more to be done, he acknowledges.

Recently, auto parts Magna International Inc. agreed to adopt a series of corporate governance reforms after a group of institutional shareholders sued the company.

Among them, the company has promised to adopt a majority voting policy effective next year.

Prompted by the lawsuit, Magna revealed this week that three directors, including its chair, former Ontario premier Mike Harris, had been re-elected with less than 40 per cent support.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

The Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board, RBC Global Asset Management and Connor, Clark & Lunn Financial Group had filed an application in Ontario Supreme Court seeking the 2011 election results.

At issue was shareholder opposition to the election of three members of a special committee, including Harris, Louis Lataif and Donald Resnick, that oversaw a controversial decision to buy out founder Frank Stronach.

The plan called for a Stronach family trust to sell its controlling share block and in exchange for eliminating Magna’s multiple B voting shares, the trust received about $863 million in cash and stock.