Having real votes and not the ridiculous non-binding votes that Obama supported is better, but still not the answer. Of course, it's all a bit off when you think that the UK is looking at their own quantitative easing program which would only stuff more cash into the wallets of the bankers. Cutting the banks off from their free rides and having real consequences for failure makes a lot more sense. The Guardian:
As David Cameron set out proposals to give shareholders a binding vote on executive pay deals, data compiled by a leading advisory body, Pensions & Investment Research Consultants (Pirc), showed how few remuneration votes had more than 50% of votes cast against them since investors were granted an advisory vote in 2003. "We would be in favour of exploring a binding vote on pay, but the problem at the moment is that too few shareholders are willing to use the rights they have, as demonstrated by the low number of remuneration reports that have been voted down," a Pirc spokesman said. Increasing numbers of shares in companies listed on the stock market are no longer owned by traditional institutional investors – such as pension funds – but by hedge funds and other overseas investors, which makes it more difficult to galvanise rebellions against pay deals.