pre14a
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
Filed by the Registrant
x
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant
o
Check the appropriate box:
|
|
|
x Preliminary
Proxy Statement |
|
|
o Confidential,
for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) |
|
|
o Definitive
Proxy Statement
|
o Definitive
Additional Materials
|
o Soliciting
Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12
|
United Parcel Service, 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)(4) 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:
|
|
|
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.:
|
55
Glenlake Parkway, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30328
Notice
of Annual Meeting of
Shareowners
May 6, 2010
To our Shareowners:
United Parcel Service, Inc.s annual meeting of shareowners
will be held at the Hotel du Pont, 11th and Market Streets,
Wilmington, Delaware 19801, on May 6, 2010, at
8:00 a.m. The purposes of the meeting are:
1. To elect ten directors nominated by the
board of directors and named in the proxy statement to serve
until our 2011 annual meeting of shareowners;
2. To ratify the appointment of
Deloitte & Touche LLP as our independent registered
public accountants for the year ending December 31, 2010;
3. To approve a proposal removing the voting
standard from our certificate of incorporation so that the board
may provide for majority voting in uncontested director
elections; and
4. To transact any other business as may
properly come before the meeting.
Our board of directors has fixed the close of business on
March 8, 2010 as the record date for determining holders of
our common stock entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the
annual meeting.
For a third year, we are pleased to take advantage of the
Securities and Exchange Commission rule allowing companies to
furnish proxy materials to shareowners over the Internet. We
believe that this
e-proxy
process expedites shareowners receipt of proxy materials,
while also lowering the costs and reducing the environmental
impact of our annual meeting. On March 15, 2010, we began
mailing to certain shareowners a Notice of Internet Availability
of Proxy Materials containing instructions on how to access our
2010 proxy statement and annual report and vote online. All
other shareowners will receive the proxy statement and annual
report by mail.
Teri P. McClure
Secretary
Atlanta, Georgia
March 15, 2010
Your vote is important. Please vote as soon as possible by
using the Internet or by telephone or, if you received a paper
copy of the proxy card by mail, by signing and returning the
enclosed proxy card. Instructions for your voting options are
described on the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy
Materials or proxy card.
Important
Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the
Shareowner Meeting to be Held on May 6, 2010: The proxy
statement and annual report are available at
www.proxyvote.com.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
General Information
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
Annex I
|
|
|
|
|
Annex II
|
|
55
Glenlake Parkway, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30328
PROXY
STATEMENT
FOR THE
2010 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREOWNERS
This proxy statement and proxy card are furnished in connection
with the solicitation of proxies to be voted at our annual
meeting of shareowners, which will be held at the Hotel du Pont,
11th and Market Streets, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, on
May 6, 2010, at 8:00 a.m. On March 15, 2010,
we began mailing to shareowners of record either a Notice of
Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (Notice) or
this proxy statement and proxy card.
Why am
I receiving this proxy statement and proxy card?
You have received these proxy materials because our board of
directors is soliciting your proxy to vote your shares at the
annual meeting. This proxy statement describes issues on which
we would like you to vote at our annual meeting of shareowners.
It also gives you information on these issues so that you can
make an informed decision.
Our board of directors has made this proxy statement and proxy
card available to you on the Internet because you own shares of
United Parcel Service, Inc. common stock, in addition to
delivering printed versions of this proxy statement and proxy
card to certain shareowners by mail.
When you vote by using the Internet, by telephone or (if you
received your proxy card by mail) by signing and returning the
proxy card, you appoint D. Scott Davis and Teri P. McClure as
your representatives at the annual meeting. They will vote your
shares at the annual meeting as you have instructed them or, if
an issue that is not on the proxy card comes up for vote, in
accordance with their best judgment. This way, your shares will
be voted whether or not you attend the annual meeting. Even if
you plan to attend the annual meeting, we encourage you to vote
in advance by using the Internet, by telephone or (if you
received your proxy card by mail) by signing and returning your
proxy card.
Why
did I receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy
Materials in the mail instead of a printed set of proxy
materials?
Pursuant to rules adopted by the Securities and Exchange
Commission, we are permitted to furnish our proxy materials over
the Internet to our shareowners by delivering a Notice in the
mail. We are sending the Notice to certain record shareowners.
If you received a Notice by mail, you will not receive a printed
copy of the proxy materials in the mail. Instead, the Notice
instructs you on how to access and review the proxy statement
and annual report over the Internet at www.proxyvote.com.
The Notice also instructs you on how you may submit your proxy
over the Internet. If you received a Notice by mail and would
like to receive a printed copy of our proxy materials, you
should follow the instructions for requesting these materials
contained on the Notice.
Shareowners who receive a printed set of proxy materials will
not receive the Notice, but may still access our proxy materials
and submit their proxies over the Internet at
www.proxyvote.com.
Who is
entitled to vote?
Holders of our class A common stock and our class B
common stock at the close of business on March 8, 2010 are
entitled to vote. March 8, 2010 is referred to as the
record date.
In accordance with Delaware law, a list of shareowners entitled
to vote at the meeting will be available in electronic form at
the place of the annual meeting on May 6, 2010 and will be
accessible in electronic form for ten days prior to the meeting
at our principal place of business, 55 Glenlake Parkway, N.E.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30328, and at the offices of Morris, Nichols,
Arsht & Tunnell, 1201 North Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware 19899, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m.
To how
many votes is each share of common stock entitled?
Holders of class A common stock are entitled to ten votes
per share. Holders of class B common stock are entitled to
one vote per share. On the record date, there
were shares
of our class A common stock
and shares
of our class B common stock outstanding and entitled to
vote.
The voting rights of any shareowner or shareowners as a group,
other than any of our employee benefit plans, who beneficially
own shares representing more than 25% of our voting power are
limited so that the shareowner or group may cast only one
one-hundredth of a vote with respect to each vote in excess of
25% of the outstanding voting power.
How do
I vote?
Shareowners of record may vote by using the Internet, by
telephone or (if you received a proxy card by mail) by mail as
described below. Shareowners also may attend the meeting and
vote in person. If you hold class B shares through a bank
or broker, please refer to your proxy card, Notice or other
information forwarded by your bank or broker to see which voting
options are available to you.
|
|
|
|
|
You may vote by using the Internet. The
address of the website for Internet voting is
www.proxyvote.com. Internet voting is available
24 hours a day and will be accessible until 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on May 5, 2010.
Easy-to-follow
instructions allow you to vote your shares and confirm that your
instructions have been properly recorded.
|
|
|
|
You may vote by telephone. The toll-free
telephone number is noted on your proxy card. Telephone voting
is available 24 hours a day and will be accessible until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on May 5, 2010.
Easy-to-follow
voice prompts allow you to vote your shares and confirm that
your instructions have been properly recorded.
|
|
|
|
You may vote by mail. If you received a proxy
card by mail and choose to vote by mail, simply mark your proxy
card, date and sign it, and return it in the postage-paid
envelope.
|
The method you use to vote will not limit your right to vote at
the annual meeting if you decide to attend in person. Written
ballots will be passed out to anyone who wants to vote at the
annual meeting. If you hold your shares in street
name, you must obtain a proxy, executed in your favor,
from the holder of record to be able to vote in person at the
annual meeting.
What
if I change my mind after I return my proxy?
You may revoke your proxy and change your vote at any time
before the polls close at the annual meeting. You may do this by:
|
|
|
|
|
submitting a subsequent proxy by using the Internet, by
telephone or by mail with a later date;
|
|
|
|
sending written notice of revocation to our Corporate Secretary
at 55 Glenlake Parkway, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30328; or
|
|
|
|
voting in person at the annual meeting.
|
Attendance at the meeting will not by itself revoke a proxy.
2
How
many votes do you need to hold the annual meeting?
The presence, in person or by proxy, of the holders of a
majority of the votes entitled to be cast at the annual meeting
will constitute a quorum. If a quorum is present, we can hold
the annual meeting and conduct business.
On
what items am I voting?
You are being asked to vote on three items:
|
|
|
|
|
the election of ten directors nominated by the board of
directors and named in the proxy statement to serve until our
2011 annual meeting of shareowners;
|
|
|
|
the ratification of the appointment of Deloitte &
Touche LLP as our independent registered public accountants for
the year ending December 31, 2010; and
|
|
|
|
a proposal to remove the voting standard from our certificate of
incorporation so that the board may provide for majority voting
in uncontested director elections.
|
No cumulative voting rights are authorized, and dissenters
rights are not applicable to these matters.
How
may I vote for the nominees for director, and how many votes
must the nominees receive to be elected?
With respect to the election of nominees for director, you may:
|
|
|
|
|
vote FOR the election of the ten nominees for director;
|
|
|
|
WITHHOLD AUTHORITY to vote for one or more of the nominees and
vote FOR the remaining nominees; or
|
|
|
|
WITHHOLD AUTHORITY to vote for the ten nominees.
|
The ten nominees receiving the highest number of affirmative
votes will be elected as directors. This number is called a
plurality. If you hold shares of class B common stock
through a bank or broker, your bank or broker will vote your
shares for you if you provide instructions on how to vote the
shares. In the absence of instructions, however, beginning this
year, banks and brokers no longer have the authority to vote
your shares for the election of directors. Accordingly, it is
important that you provide voting instructions to your bank or
broker, so that your shares may be voted in the election of
directors.
What
happens if a nominee is unable to stand for
election?
If a nominee is unable to stand for election, the board may
either:
|
|
|
|
|
reduce the number of directors that serve on the board, or
|
|
|
|
designate a substitute nominee.
|
If the board designates a substitute nominee, shares represented
by proxies voted for the nominee who is unable to stand for
election will be voted for the substitute nominee.
How
may I vote for the ratification of the appointment of our
independent registered public accountants, and how many votes
must the proposal receive to pass?
With respect to the proposal to ratify the appointment of our
independent registered public accountants, you may:
|
|
|
|
|
vote FOR the proposal;
|
|
|
|
vote AGAINST the proposal; or
|
|
|
|
ABSTAIN from voting on the proposal.
|
3
The ratification of the appointment of our independent
registered public accountants must receive the affirmative vote
of a majority of the votes that could be cast at the annual
meeting by the holders who are present in person or by proxy to
pass. If you abstain from voting on the proposal or your broker
is unable to vote your shares, it will have the same effect as a
vote against the proposal.
How
may I vote for the proposal to approve removing the voting
standard from our certificate of incorporation so that the board
may provide for majority voting in uncontested director
elections, and how many votes must the proposal receive to
pass?
With respect to the proposal to remove the voting standard from
our certificate of incorporation so that the board may provide
for majority voting in uncontested director elections, you may:
|
|
|
|
|
vote FOR the proposal;
|
|
|
|
vote AGAINST the proposal; or
|
|
|
|
ABSTAIN from voting on the proposal.
|
The approval of the proposal removing the voting standard from
our certificate of incorporation so that the board may provide
for majority voting in uncontested director elections must
receive the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes that
could be cast at the annual meeting by the holders who are
present in person or by proxy to pass. If you abstain from
voting on the proposal, it will have the same effect as a vote
against the proposal.
As described above under How may I vote for the
nominees for director, and how many votes must the nominees
receive to be elected?, the existing plurality voting
standard will be in effect for this annual meeting of
shareowners. Shareowner approval of this proposal will enable
the board of directors to amend UPSs Amended and Restated
Bylaws to provide for majority voting standard, which we expect
will be in effect for the 2011 annual meeting of shareowners.
For a discussion of majority voting in uncontested director
elections, see Proposal to Approve Removing the Voting
Standard from the Certificate of Incorporation so that the Board
may Provide for Majority Voting in Uncontested Director
Elections.
How
does the board of directors recommend that I vote?
The board recommends a vote
|
|
|
|
|
FOR all ten director nominees;
|
|
|
|
FOR the ratification of the appointment of our independent
registered public accountants; and
|
|
|
|
FOR the approval of the proposal removing the voting standard
from our certificate of incorporation so that the board may
provide for majority voting in uncontested director elections.
|
What
happens if I sign and return my proxy card but do not provide
voting instructions?
If you return a signed card but do not provide voting
instructions, your shares will be voted FOR all ten director
nominees, FOR the ratification of the appointment of our
independent registered public accountants, and FOR the proposal
removing the voting standard from our certificate of
incorporation so that the board may provide for majority voting
in uncontested director elections.
Will
my shares be voted if I do not vote by using the Internet, by
telephone or by signing and returning my proxy
card?
If you own class A shares and you do not vote by using the
Internet, by telephone or (if you received a proxy card by mail)
by signing and returning your proxy card, then your class A
shares will not be voted and will not count in deciding the
matters presented for shareowner consideration at the annual
meeting. If your class A shares are held pursuant to The
UPS Stock Fund in the UPS Savings Plan and you do not vote by
using the Internet, by telephone or by signing and returning
your proxy card, the trustee will vote your shares for each
proposal in the same proportion as the shares held pursuant to
that plan for which voting instructions were received.
4
If your class B shares are held in street name through a
bank or broker, your bank or broker may vote your class B
shares under certain limited circumstances if you do not provide
voting instructions before the annual meeting, in accordance
with New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) rules that
govern the banks and brokers. These circumstances include voting
your shares on routine matters, such as the
ratification of the appointment of our independent registered
public accountants described in this proxy statement. With
respect to this proposal, therefore, if you do not vote your
shares, your bank or broker may vote your shares on your behalf
or leave your shares unvoted.
Beginning this year, the election of directors is not considered
a routine matter under NYSE rules relating to voting by banks
and brokers. In addition, the approval of the proposal removing
the voting standard from our certificate of incorporation so
that the board may provide for majority voting in uncontested
director elections is not considered a routine matter. When a
proposal is not a routine matter and the brokerage firm has not
received voting instructions from the beneficial owner of the
shares with respect to that proposal, the brokerage firm cannot
vote the shares on that proposal. This is called a broker
non-vote. Broker non-votes that are represented at the
annual meeting will be counted for purposes of establishing a
quorum, but not for determining the number of shares voted for
or against the non-routine matter. Accordingly, both abstentions
and broker non-votes will have the effect of a vote against the
proposal removing the voting standard from our certificate of
incorporation so that the board may provide for majority voting
in uncontested director elections.
We encourage you to provide instructions to your bank or
brokerage firm by voting your proxy. This action ensures your
shares will be voted at the meeting in accordance with your
wishes.
What
do I need to show to attend the annual meeting in
person?
You will need proof of your share ownership (such as a recent
brokerage statement or letter from your broker showing that you
owned shares of United Parcel Service, Inc. common stock as of
March 8, 2010) and a form of photo identification. If
you do not have proof of ownership and valid photo
identification, you may not be admitted to the annual meeting.
All bags, briefcases and packages will be held at registration
and will not be allowed in the meeting.
Can I
receive future proxy materials and annual reports
electronically?
Yes. This proxy statement and the 2009 Annual Report to
Shareowners are available on our investor relations website
located at www.investors.ups.com. Instead of receiving paper
copies in the mail, shareowners can elect to receive an email
that provides a link to our future annual reports and proxy
materials on the Internet. Opting to receive your proxy
materials electronically will save us the cost of producing and
mailing documents to your home or business and will reduce the
environmental impact of our annual meetings, and will give you
an automatic link to the proxy voting site.
If you are a shareowner of record and wish to enroll in the
electronic proxy delivery service, you may do so by going to
www.icsdelivery.com/ups and following the prompts.
5
ELECTION
OF DIRECTORS
(Proposal No. 1)
There are ten nominees to our board of directors this year. All
directors are elected annually to serve until the next annual
meeting and until their respective successors are elected. All
of the nominees have served as directors since our last annual
meeting.
Biographical information about our nominees for director and the
experience, qualifications, attributes and skills considered by
our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and board in
determining that the nominee should serve as a director appears
below. For additional information about how we identify and
evaluate nominees for director, see Selecting Nominees for
Director.
The board
of directors recommends a vote FOR the election
to the board of each of the following nominees.
|
|
|
|
|
F. Duane Ackerman Age 67 Director since 2007 Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, BellSouth Corporation
Duane has been Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of BellSouth Corporation, a communication services company, since 2007. He previously served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of BellSouth Corporation from 2005 through 2006 and as Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer from 1998 until 2005. He is also a director at Allstate Corporation and The Home Depot Inc.
Duane brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, many years of experience as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of BellSouth, one of the worlds largest communications companies. In that leadership role, he gained broad experience in managing a large, complex, labor-intensive business, including experience with collective bargaining arrangements. He also gained knowledge in operations and communications technology, and worked in a corporate culture in which employees, who often spend their entire career with the company, are encouraged to develop their skills through jobs with increasing responsibility. Duane also brings the experience of serving as a director of other large, complex public companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Burns Age 58 Director since 2005 Former Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President, Dana Corporation
Michael was the Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of Dana Corporation until February 2008. He joined Dana Corporation in March 2004 after 34 years with General Motors Corporation. Michael had served as President of General Motors Europe since 1998.
Michael brings to the board, among his other skills and qualifications, years of senior leadership experience in managing two large, complex businesses, General Motors Europe and Dana Corporation. As Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Dana Corporation, he gained experience leading an international organization that operated in the highly competitive vehicle component industry. As President of General Motors Europe he gained experience leading a large regional sector of General Motors that included design, engineering, manufacturing, and sales and distribution for its automotive brands in Europe as well as export to other regions of the world. During his career with General Motors, he served in ever increasing leadership responsibilities that included international assignments in Asia and Europe spanning nine years. Michael also brings deep knowledge of technology and the supply of components and services to major vehicle manufacturers in the global automotive, commercial vehicle and off-highway markets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
D. Scott Davis Age 58 Director since 2006 UPS Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Scott earned a bachelors degree in finance from Portland State University and completed the Advanced Management Program at the Wharton School of Business. He joined UPS in 1986 when the company acquired an Oregon technology company, II Morrow, where he had served as the chief financial officer and then chief executive officer. From 1991 to 1998, Scott held positions of increasing responsibility as treasury manager, financial reports and plans manager and accounting manager. From late 1998 to early 2000, he served as chief executive officer of Overseas Partners, Ltd., a Bermuda reinsurance company. Scott rejoined UPS as its vice president of finance in 2000. He joined the UPS Management Committee and assumed the role of Chief Financial Officer in 2001. In 2006, Scott was also appointed Vice Chairman. Scott became Chairman and Chief Executive Officer on January 1, 2008. He serves as a director of Honeywell International Inc. and was chairman of the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in 2009. Scott is also a trustee of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the worlds largest philanthropic foundation dedicated to helping disadvantaged children.
Scott brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, a unique understanding of our strategies and operations through his over 20 years of service to our Company, a complex, global business enterprise with a large, labor-intensive workforce. He has experience both as a Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and as a Chief Financial Officer, and significant experience in financial management. His tenure as Chairman of the Board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta also brings valuable financial experience. In addition, Scott has experience serving as a director of Honeywell, a large, global business. As described under Board Leadership and Risk Oversight, our Corporate Governance Guidelines call for our chief executive officer to serve as chairman.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
Stuart E. Eizenstat Age 67 Director since 2005 Partner, Covington & Burling LLP
Stuart has been a partner of Covington & Burling LLP in Washington, D.C. since 2001, and heads the law firms international practice. He served as Deputy Secretary of the United States Department of the Treasury from July 1999 to January 2001. He was Under Secretary of State for Economic, Business and Agricultural Affairs from 1997 to 1999. Stuart served as Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade from 1996 to 1997 and was Ambassador to the European Union from 1993 to 1996. From 1977 to 1981 he was Chief Domestic Policy Advisor in the White House to President Carter. He is a trustee of BlackRock Funds, a member of the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Alcatel-Lucent and Globe Specialty Metals, chairs the International Advisory Council of The Coca-Cola Company, and serves on the International Advisory Board of GML Ltd., Veracity Worldwide and Office of Cherifien de Phosphates. He has received seven honorary doctorate degrees and awards from the United States, French, German, Austrian, Belgian and Israeli governments. He was selected as the best international trade lawyer in Washington, D.C. in 2007 by Legal Times. He is the author of Imperfect Justice: Looted Assets, Slave Labor, and the Unfinished Business of World War II.
Stuart brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, experience in international trade and global economic matters as a result of a decade and a half of service at senior levels of several U.S. administrations, where among other responsibilities, he was charged with advising on international economic policy, promoting U.S. exports, assisting American business efforts abroad, enforcing laws against unfair trade practices and developing trade policy. He has also served as an advisor on international matters to large, multi-national corporations. He brings the experience of leading the international practice of a major law firm. Stuart also brings insight on environmental issues through his service as a director of the Chicago Climate Exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael L. Eskew Age 60 Director since 1998 Former UPS Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Mike joined UPS in 1972, after he received a bachelor of science degree in industrial engineering from Purdue University. He also completed the Advanced Management Program at the Wharton School of Business. In 1994, Mike was named UPSs Corporate Vice President for Industrial Engineering. Two years later he became Group Vice President for Engineering. He was appointed Executive Vice President in 1999 and Vice Chairman in 2000. In January 2002, he became Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. In January 2008, Mike retired as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Mike is a trustee of the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Mike also is a director of 3M Company, International Business Machines Corporation and Eli Lilly and Company.
Mike brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, his significant knowledge and understanding of our business and operations, acquired through his over 35 years of experience with our Company, a complex, global business enterprise with a large, labor-intensive workforce. He has experience as the former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of our Company, as well as experience in engineering, operations and labor issues. He brings great insight into our corporate culture in which our employees are encouraged to develop to their greatest potential throughout their career with us. Mike also has experience serving as a director of a number of other large public companies with complex global operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
William R. Johnson Age 61 Director since 2009 Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of H. J. Heinz Company
Bill has been Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the H. J. Heinz Company, a global packaged foods manufacturer, since 2000. He became President and Chief Operating Officer of Heinz in June 1996, and assumed the position of President and Chief Executive Officer in April 1998. He was named Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer in September 2000. Bill also serves on Emerson Electric Companys board of directors.
Bill brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, experience as the current Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of H. J. Heinz, a corporation with significant international operations and a large, labor-intensive workforce. He also gained deep experience in operations, marketing, brand development and logistics through his service to H. J. Heinz. Bills experience also includes service as a director of other public companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ann M. Livermore Age 51 Director since 1997 Executive Vice President, Hewlett-Packard Company
Ann is Executive Vice President of the HP Enterprise Business, an approximately $54 billion business that encompasses storage, servers, networking, software and services (2009 revenue). The products and services from this organization serve business and public sector customers of all sizes in more than 170 countries. For more than two decades, Ann has been involved with building solutions to help HP customers manage and transform their technology environments to optimize business outcomes. Ann joined HP in 1982 and has held a variety of management positions in marketing, sales, research and development, and business management before being elected a corporate vice president in 1995. Ann holds a bachelors degree in economics from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a masters degree in business administration from Stanford University.
Ann brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, extensive experience in senior leadership positions at HP, the worlds largest information technology company, a complex global business organization with a large workforce. Through her over 25 years at HP, she has gained knowledge and experience in the areas of technology, marketing, sales, research and development and business management. Ann brings the experience of working in a corporate culture in which employees are encouraged to develop and grow throughout their career.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
Rudy Markham Age 64 Director since 2007 Retired Financial Director, Unilever PLC and Unilever NV
Rudy was the Financial Director of Unilever from August 2000 through May 2007. He joined Unilever in 1968 and from 1989-1998 was based in East Asia where he held a series of increasing responsibilities, ultimately serving as Business Group President North East Asia based in Singapore. Rudy joined the Board of Unilever as Strategy and Technology Director, became a member of its Executive Committee in May 1998 and was subsequently appointed as Financial Director. In May 2007 he retired from the Board of Unilever and on October 31, 2007 he retired as CFO. Rudy studied at Christs College, Cambridge, where he gained a Masters Degree in Natural Sciences. He is a fellow of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants and of the Association of Corporate Treasurers. He also is a Non-executive Director of Legal & General Group PLC, AstraZeneca PLC and Standard Chartered PLC, where he serves as Chairman of its Audit & Risk Committee. Rudy is also a Non-executive Director of the Financial Reporting Council and Non-executive Chairman of Moorfields Eye Hospital, both of which are UK-registered institutions. In November 2009, Rudy was appointed a member of the Leverhulme Trust Board, a UK charitable foundation, and in January 2010, Rudy joined the operating board of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Rudy brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, significant experience in finance, technology and international operations that he gained through his almost 40 years of service at Unilever, one of the worlds largest consumer goods companies, with a large, global workforce. He served in a number of finance positions, including as Chief Financial Officer, and has a unique insight into operations based in Asia. Rudys experience also includes service as a director of other Europe-based global public companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John W. Thompson Age 60 Director since 2000 Chairman of the Board, Symantec Corporation
Until his retirement as Chief Executive Officer in 2009, John served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Symantec Corporation, the world leader in information security and availability solutions, since April 1999. Prior to joining Symantec, he held a variety of senior leadership positions at International Business Machines Corporation, including General Manager of IBM Americas, and was a member of IBMs Worldwide Management Council. John is a director of Seagate Technology. He currently serves on the Presidents National Infrastructure Advisory Council and the Board of Advisors for Teach for America.
John brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, his experience as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Symantec, one of the worlds largest software companies and the worlds largest maker of security software, as well as in senior leadership positions at IBM. Through his experiences at Symantec and IBM, he has gained deep knowledge in the areas of sales, marketing, technology and operations, including managing a large workforce and overseeing international business operations. Johns experience also includes service as a director of other large public companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
Carol B. Tomé Age 53 Director since 2003 Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President Corporate Services, The Home Depot, Inc.
Carol has been Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of The Home Depot, Inc., the worlds largest home improvement specialty retailer and the fourth largest retailer in the United States, since May 2001. In January 2007 Carol assumed the additional role of Executive Vice President Corporate Services. Prior to that, she had been Senior Vice President Finance and Accounting/Treasurer since February 2000. From 1995 until 2000, she served as Vice President and Treasurer. A native of Jackson, Wyoming, Carol holds a B.S. in Communication from the University of Wyoming and an M.B.A. in Finance from the University of Denver. She is an active volunteer, including serving as a member of The Committee of 200 and a member of the Atlanta Botanical Garden board. In January 2008, Carol joined the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta and serves as chair of the board.
Carol brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, extensive experience in corporate finance throughout her career at Home Depot, the fourth largest retailer in the United States and the worlds largest home improvement specialty retailer. She brings the experience of currently serving as chief financial officer of a complex, multi-national business with a large, labor-intensive workforce. Carols role as chair of the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta also brings a valuable financial experience.
|
Selecting
Nominees for Director
Our board has delegated to the Nominating and Corporate
Governance Committee the responsibility for reviewing and
recommending to the board nominees for director. In accordance
with our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Nominating and
Corporate Governance Committee, in evaluating board candidates,
considers factors such as personal character, values and
disciplines, ethical standards, diversity, other outside
commitments, professional background and skills, all in the
context of an assessment of the needs of the board at the time.
In addition, each director is expected to ensure that other
existing and planned future commitments do not materially
interfere with his or her responsibilities as a director.
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees
objective is to maintain a board of individuals of the highest
personal character, integrity and ethical standards, and that
reflects a range of professional backgrounds and skills relevant
to our business. For each of the nominees to the board, the
biographies shown above highlight the experiences and
qualifications that were among the most important to the
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee in concluding that
the nominee should serve as a director of the Company. The
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee considers
diversity in identifying nominees for director, including
personal characteristics such as race and gender, as well as
diversity in the experience and skills that contribute to the
boards performance of its responsibilities in the
oversight of a complex global business.
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible
for recommending nominees for election to the board at each
annual meeting of shareowners and for identifying one or more
candidates to fill any vacancies that may occur on the board.
Under our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Nominating and
Corporate Governance Committee may use a variety of sources in
order to identify new candidates. New candidates may be
identified through recommendations from independent directors or
members of management, search firms, discussions with other
persons who may know of suitable candidates to serve on the
board, and shareowner recommendations. Evaluations of
prospective candidates typically include a review of the
candidates background and qualifications by the Nominating
and Corporate Governance Committee, interviews with the
committee as a whole, one or more members of the committee, or
one or more other board members, and discussions of the
committee and the full board. The Committee then recommends
candidates to the full board, with the full board selecting the
candidates to be nominated for election by the shareowners or to
be elected by the board to fill a vacancy.
11
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will consider
director candidates proposed by shareowners on the same basis as
recommendations from other sources. Any shareowner who wishes to
recommend a prospective candidate for the board of directors for
consideration by the Nominating and Corporate Governance
Committee may do so by submitting the name and qualifications of
the prospective candidate in writing to the following address:
Corporate Secretary, 55 Glenlake Parkway, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia
30328. Any such submission should also describe the experience,
qualifications, attributes and skills that make the prospective
candidate a suitable nominee for the board of directors.
Meetings
of the Board of Directors and Attendance at the Annual
Meeting
Our board of directors held five meetings during 2009. Each of
our directors attended at least 75% of the total number of
meetings of the board and any committees of which he or she was
a member, except for Ann Livermore. It is the boards
policy that our directors attend the annual meeting. All but two
of the directors who were serving on the board at our 2009
annual meeting attended the meeting.
Director
Independence
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines include categorical
standards adopted by the board to determine director
independence that meet the listing standards set forth by the
NYSE. The portion of our Corporate Governance Guidelines
addressing director independence is attached to this proxy
statement as Annex I.
Pursuant to the Corporate Governance Guidelines, the board
undertook its annual review of director independence in February
2010. As part of this review, the board considered whether there
were any relationships between each director or any member of
his or her immediate family and UPS. The board also examined
whether there were any relationships between an organization of
which a director is a partner, shareholder or executive officer
and UPS. The purpose of this review was to determine whether any
such relationships were inconsistent with a determination that a
director is independent. The board also evaluated the
categorical standards that form a part of our Corporate
Governance Guidelines.
As a result of this review, the board affirmatively determined
that the following directors are independent directors: Duane
Ackerman, Michael Burns, Stuart Eizenstat, Bill Johnson, Ann
Livermore, Rudy Markham, John Thompson and Carol Tomé.
Accordingly, eight of our ten directors are independent, and all
directors on the following committees are independent:
|
|
|
|
|
Audit Committee;
|
|
|
|
Compensation Committee; and
|
|
|
|
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
|
In determining the independence of Stuart Eizenstat, Bill
Johnson, Ann Livermore, John Thompson and Carol Tomé, our
board considered ordinary course relationships between UPS and
the companies that employed these directors during 2009.
Other
Information Regarding Directors
Michael Burns is the former Chairman, Chief Executive Officer
and President of Dana Corporation. Dana Corporation filed a
voluntary petition under Chapter 11 of the federal
bankruptcy laws on March 3, 2006. On January 31, 2008,
Dana Corporation emerged from Chapter 11.
Executive
Sessions of our Non-Management Directors
Our non-management directors hold executive sessions without
management present as frequently as they deem appropriate. The
presiding director for these meetings rotates among the
chairpersons of the independent board committees, currently the
Audit, Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance
Committees. The presiding director determines the agenda for the
session and, after the session, acts as a liaison between the
non-management directors and the Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer. The presiding director may invite the Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer to join the session for certain
discussions, as he or she deems appropriate. If
12
the non-management directors include any directors who are not
independent directors, then at least once a year there will be
an executive session including only the independent directors.
Board
Leadership Structure and Role in Risk Oversight
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that our board will
include a majority of independent directors and these Guidelines
and our Bylaws provide that our CEO will serve as Chairman of
the Board. Accordingly, Scott Davis has served as Chairman of
the Board since he was appointed CEO on January 1, 2008.
Having our CEO serve as Chairman of the Board is consistent with
the historical practice of UPS, as all nine of our previous
Chief Executive Officers have also served as Chairman of the
Board.
As described above under Director Independence,
eight of our ten directors are independent. In addition, all of
the directors on each of the Audit Committee, the Compensation
Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
are independent directors and each of these committees is led by
a committee chair. The committee chairs set the agendas for
their committees and report to the full board on their work. We
do not have a lead director, but our Corporate Governance
Guidelines provide that our non-management directors will meet
in executive session without management present as frequently as
they deem appropriate, typically at the time of each regular
board meeting. The chairs of the independent board committees
rotate as presiding director, and the presiding director acts as
a liaison between the non-management directors and the Chairman
and CEO.
Our company has employed this leadership structure of having a
combined Chairman and Chief Executive Officer for many years,
and we believe that this leadership structure has been effective
for the Company. We believe that having a combined Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer, a board with a majority of independent
directors who meet regularly in executive session, and
independent chairs for the boards Audit, Compensation, and
Nominating and Corporate Governance committees provides the best
form of leadership for the Company and the board of directors.
We have a single leader for our Company and he is seen by our
employees, customers, business partners, shareowners and other
stakeholders as providing strong leadership for the Company, in
our industry and in the communities in which we operate.
Our board is responsible for overseeing our risk management. The
board delegates many of these functions to the Audit Committee.
Under its charter, the Audit Committee is responsible for
discussing with management policies with respect to financial
risk assessment and enterprise risk management, including
guidelines to govern the process by which major financial and
accounting risk assessment and management is undertaken by the
Company. The Audit Committee also oversees our corporate
compliance programs, as well as the internal audit function. In
addition to the Audit Committees work in overseeing risk
management, our full board regularly engages in discussions of
the most significant risks that the Company is facing and how
these risks are being managed, and the board receives reports on
risk management from senior officers of the Company and from the
chair of the Audit Committee. The board receives periodic
assessments from the Companys ongoing enterprise risk
management process that are designed to identify potential
events that may affect the achievement of the Companys
objectives.
The Companys Senior Vice President of Legal, Compliance
and Public Affairs, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
reports directly to our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
providing him with visibility to the Companys risk
profile. The board of directors believes that the work
undertaken by the Audit Committee, together with the work of the
full board of directors and the Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer, enables the board of directors to effectively oversee
the Companys risk management function.
Corporate
Governance
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines are available on the
governance section of our investor relations website at
www.investors.ups.com. The charters for each of the Audit,
Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees
also are available on our investor relations website.
We have a long-standing commitment to conduct our business in
accordance with the highest ethical principles. Our Code of
Business Conduct is applicable to all the representatives of our
enterprise, including our executive officers and all other
employees and agents of our company and our subsidiary
companies, as well as to our directors. A copy of our code is
available on the governance section of the investor relations
website.
13
Any shareowners or interested parties who wish to communicate
directly with our board of directors, with our non-management
directors as a group or with the presiding director of our
non-management directors may do so by writing to the Corporate
Secretary, 55 Glenlake Parkway, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30328.
Please specify to whom your letter should be directed. Once the
communication is received and reviewed by the Corporate
Secretary, it will be promptly forwarded to the addressee.
Advertisements, solicitations for business, requests for
employment, requests for contributions or other inappropriate
material will not be forwarded to our directors.
Committees
of the Board of Directors
Our board of directors has four committees: the Audit Committee,
the Compensation Committee, the Nominating and Corporate
Governance Committee and the Executive Committee. The following
table shows the current members of each committee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nominating
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Audit
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Governance
|
|
Executive
|
|
F. Duane Ackerman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
X*
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
Michael J. Burns
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X*
|
|
Stuart E. Eizenstat
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael L. Eskew
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
William R. Johnson
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ann M. Livermore
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rudy Markham
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John W. Thompson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carol B. Tomé
|
|
|
X*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X= current committee member; * = chair
Audit Committee. The primary responsibilities
of our Audit Committee include:
|
|
|
|
|
discharging the boards responsibility relating to our
accounting, reporting and financial practices,
|
|
|
|
general responsibility for overseeing our accounting and
financial reporting processes,
|
|
|
|
overseeing the integrity of our financial statements, our
systems of disclosure controls and internal controls and our
compliance with legal and regulatory requirements,
|
|
|
|
overseeing the qualification and independence of our auditors
and the performance of our internal audit function and
independent auditors,
|
|
|
|
having sole authority to appoint and oversee a registered public
accounting firm (as defined by applicable law) to serve as our
independent auditors, including sole discretion to retain and
terminate the independent auditors, and
|
|
|
|
discussing with management policies with respect to financial
risk assessment and enterprise risk management.
|
In 2009, the Audit Committee held nine meetings. Each member of
our Audit Committee meets the independence requirements of the
NYSE and SEC rules and regulations, and each is financially
literate. Our board has determined that Carol Tomé is an
audit committee financial expert as defined by the SEC.
Compensation Committee. The primary
responsibilities of our Compensation Committee include:
|
|
|
|
|
discharging the boards responsibilities with respect to
compensation of our executive officers,
|
|
|
|
establishing corporate goals and objectives relevant to the
compensation for our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
(CEO),
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
evaluating the CEOs performance in light of these goals
and objectives and establishing the total compensation for the
CEO based on this evaluation,
|
|
|
|
reviewing and approving the compensation of other executive
officers based upon all relevant information,
|
|
|
|
reviewing and approving awards to executive officers under our
equity compensation plans, and
|
|
|
|
exercising sole authority with respect to retention,
compensation and termination of any outside consultants retained
to advise the Compensation Committee.
|
In 2009, the Compensation Committee held five meetings. Each
member of our Compensation Committee meets the independence
requirements of the NYSE and is an outside director under
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. For additional
information about the Compensation Committees processes
and the role of executive officers and compensation consultants
in determining compensation, see Compensation Discussion
and Analysis.
Nominating and Corporate Governance
Committee. The primary responsibilities of our
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee include:
|
|
|
|
|
receiving and considering recommendations from the CEO and
others regarding succession at the CEO and other senior officer
levels,
|
|
|
|
assisting the board in identifying and screening qualified
candidates to serve as directors, including considering
shareowner nominees,
|
|
|
|
recommending to the board candidates for election or reelection
to the board or to fill vacancies on the board,
|
|
|
|
aiding in attracting qualified candidates to serve on the
board, and
|
|
|
|
making recommendations to the board concerning corporate
governance principles, including the structure, composition and
functioning of the board and all board committees, the
delegation of authority to management, board oversight of
management actions and reporting duties of management.
|
In 2009, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee held
six meetings. Each member of our Nominating and Corporate
Governance Committee meets the independence requirements of the
NYSE.
Executive Committee. The Executive Committee
may exercise all powers of the board of directors in the
management of our business and affairs, except for those powers
expressly reserved to the board under Delaware law or otherwise
limited by the board of directors. In 2009, the Executive
Committee held no meetings.
15
BENEFICIAL
OWNERSHIP OF COMMON STOCK
The following table describes the beneficial ownership of our
common stock as of February 1, 2010 by:
|
|
|
|
|
our directors,
|
|
|
|
our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and three
other executive officers who had the highest total compensation
for 2009, calculated in accordance with SEC rules and
regulations (the Named Executive Officers),
|
|
|
|
all of our directors and executive officers as a group, and
|
|
|
|
each shareowner known to us to beneficially own more than 5% of
our class A or class B common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional Shares in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
which the Beneficial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owner Has or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
Options
|
|
Participates in the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directly Owned(1)(2)
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
Voting or
|
|
Total Shares
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
Class A
|
|
Class B
|
|
within 60
|
|
Investment
|
|
Beneficially
|
|
Outstanding
|
Directors and Executive Officers
|
|
Shares
|
|
Shares
|
|
Days(3)
|
|
Power(4)
|
|
Owned
|
|
Shares(5)
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
88,679
|
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
|
32,351
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
123,530
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
F. Duane Ackerman
|
|
|
1,981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,981
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Michael J. Burns
|
|
|
4,782
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,782
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
111,513
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,689
|
|
|
|
6,426,742
|
(6)
|
|
|
6,612,944
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Stuart E. Eizenstat
|
|
|
4,782
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,982
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Michael L. Eskew
|
|
|
256,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
308,191
|
|
|
|
6,426,742
|
(6)
|
|
|
6,991,683
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
26,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,969
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,438
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
William R. Johnson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
47,505
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,124
|
|
|
|
1,695,511
|
(7)
|
|
|
1,764,140
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Ann M. Livermore
|
|
|
26,606
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,215
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Rudy Markham
|
|
|
1,998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,998
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
72,177
|
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
|
36,822
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114,999
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
John W. Thompson
|
|
|
7,513
|
|
|
|
1,125
|
|
|
|
5,609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,247
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Carol B. Tomé
|
|
|
5,077
|
|
|
|
2,936
|
|
|
|
2,864
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,877
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Shares held by all directors and executive officers as a group
(21 persons)
|
|
|
1,022,216
|
|
|
|
67,621
|
|
|
|
640,035
|
|
|
|
8,122,253
|
(8)
|
|
|
9,852,125
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
5% Holders of our Class B Common Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlackRock Inc.(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,919,265
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,919,265
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
%
|
Capital World Investors(10)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,062,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,062,000
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Less than 1%. |
|
(1) |
|
Includes shares for which the named person has sole voting or
investment power or has shared voting or investment power with
his or her spouse. Includes shares held by immediate family
members as follows: Abney 26,500; Davis
500; Eskew 40,820; Kuehn 3,234;
McDevitt 15,171; and all directors and executive
officers as a group 130,029. Each named individual
disclaims all beneficial ownership of the shares held by
immediate family members. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes shares pledged as of February 1, 2010 as follows:
Abney 39,590; Davis 6,600;
Gray 20,046; Kuehn 39,731;
McDevitt 39,026; and all directors and executive
officers as a group 356,430. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents class A shares that may be acquired through
stock options exercisable through April 2, 2010. |
|
(4) |
|
Except as described in footnote 6, all shares listed in this
column are class A shares. None of the individuals listed,
nor members of their families, has any direct ownership rights
in the shares listed. See footnotes 6, 7 and 8. |
|
(5) |
|
Based on an aggregate of 993,330,850 shares of class A
and class B common stock outstanding as of February 1,
2010. Assumes that all options exercisable through April 2,
2010 owned by the named individual |
16
|
|
|
|
|
are exercised. The total number of shares outstanding used in
calculating this percentage also assumes that none of the
options owned by other named individuals are exercised. |
|
(6) |
|
Includes 6,250,484 class A shares and 176,258 class B
shares owned by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Inc., of which
Scott Davis, Mike Eskew and one other executive officer not
listed above and other persons constitute the corporate Board of
Trustees. |
|
(7) |
|
Includes 1,695,511 class A shares held by various trusts of
which Kurt Kuehn, one other person and one other executive
officer not listed above are co-fiduciaries. |
|
(8) |
|
Includes shares held by the foundations and trusts of which the
listed directors and executive officers are trustees. Eliminates
duplications in the reported number of shares arising from the
fact that several directors and executive officers share in the
voting power with respect to these shares. |
|
(9) |
|
According to a Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on
January 29, 2010, BlackRock Inc. has sole voting and
dispositive power with respect to 41,919,265 shares of our
class B common stock. According to the Schedule 13G,
BlackRock beneficially owned 5.94% of our class B common
stock as of December 31, 2009. The business address of
BlackRock is 40 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10022. |
|
(10) |
|
According to a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on
February 10, 2010, Capital World Investors, a division of
Capital Research and Management Company (Capital
World), an investment advisor, has sole voting power with
respect to 5,907,000 shares of our class B common
stock and sole dispositive power with respect to
39,062,000 shares of our class B common stock.
According to the Schedule 13G, Capital World beneficially
owned 5.5% of our class B common stock as of
December 31, 2009. Capital World disclaims beneficial
ownership of these shares. The business address of Capital World
is 333 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, CA 90071. |
Additional
Ownership
In addition to the beneficial ownership of our common stock
shown above, our directors and executive officers also hold
equity instruments that are not reported in the beneficial
ownership table but represent additional financial interests
that are subject to the same market risk as ownership of our
common stock. The number of shares of stock to which these stock
units are equivalent as of February 1, 2010 is as follows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
Stock Option
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
Phantom
|
|
Performance
|
|
Deferral
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Units
|
|
Stock Units
|
|
Units
|
|
Shares
|
|
Shares
|
|
Total
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
31,831
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,638
|
|
|
|
14,191
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,660
|
|
F. Duane Ackerman
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
Michael J. Burns
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,729
|
|
|
|
6,116
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
66,123
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57,868
|
|
|
|
5,201
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
129,192
|
|
Stuart E. Eizenstat
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
Michael L. Eskew
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
15,391
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,096
|
|
|
|
4,584
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,071
|
|
William R. Johnson
|
|
|
3,172
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,172
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
19,950
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,330
|
|
|
|
12,171
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,451
|
|
Ann M. Livermore
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
1,926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,313
|
|
Rudy Markham
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
19,926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,872
|
|
|
|
21,059
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65,857
|
|
John W. Thompson
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
1,926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
4,546
|
|
Carol B. Tomé
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
911
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,298
|
|
Restricted stock units (RSUs) are bookkeeping units,
the value of each of which corresponds to one share of UPS
class A common stock. We grant RSUs to the Named Executive
Officers under two programs, the Management Incentive Program
and the Long-Term Incentive Performance Award Program, described
in more detail in the Compensation Discussion and
Analysis. We also grant RSUs to our non-employee
directors, described in more detail in Compensation of
Directors.
17
Phantom stock units are bookkeeping units, the value of each of
which corresponds to one share of UPS class A common stock.
Dividends paid on UPS common stock are added to the
directors phantom stock unit balance. Upon termination of
the individuals service as a director, amounts represented
by phantom stock units will be distributed in cash over a time
period elected by the recipient.
Restricted performance units (RPUs) are bookkeeping
units, the value of each of which corresponds to one share of
UPS class A common stock. We grant RPUs under the Long-Term
Incentive Award Program, described in more detail in the
Compensation Discussion and Analysis.
Stock option deferral shares are shares held for the individual
in a rabbi trust within the UPS Deferred Compensation Plan. Each
individual elected to defer the receipt of these shares rather
than acquiring them directly upon the exercise of a stock option.
Other Deferred Compensation Plan shares are amounts within the
UPS Deferred Compensation Plan allocated to UPS common stock.
These represent the retainer fees deferred by the non-employee
directors. See Compensation of Directors for more
information.
18
COMPENSATION
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Introduction
The Compensation Discussion and Analysis describes UPSs
executive compensation programs for 2009 and certain aspects of
the programs for 2010. The focus of this section of the proxy is
to explain how and why the Committee made its 2009 compensation
decisions for the following Named Executive Officers:
|
|
|
|
|
D. Scott
Davis Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
David P.
Abney Senior
Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
|
|
|
Kurt P.
Kuehn Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
Myron A.
Gray Senior
Vice President, U.S. Operations
|
|
|
|
John J.
McDevitt Senior
Vice President, Global Transportation Services and Labor
Relations
|
Business
Environment
The 2009 global recession presented a very challenging operating
environment. Throughout the year, we sought to effectively
manage our costs while maintaining the high quality service and
value our customers have come to expect from UPS. At the same
time, we continued to make strategic investments in global
infrastructure, acquisitions, technology and new products and
services that will enable UPS to capitalize on opportunities as
global markets recover.
As a result of the difficult economic environment, performance
in 2009 did not meet our plans or expectations established at
the beginning of the year. Although our revenue, operating
profit and earnings per share declined, we believe the UPS
management team took the right steps to manage operations well,
while keeping its focus on the long-term health of the Company,
specifically:
|
|
|
|
|
UPS implemented unprecedented and comprehensive cost management
initiatives that achieved $1.4 billion in savings;
|
|
|
|
Our global small package operations teams adjusted the network
throughout the year to best match assets to declining package
volume while still maintaining the highest levels of service;
|
|
|
|
We invested for the future through acquisitions, infrastructure
and new products; and
|
|
|
|
We continued to generate strong free cash flow in 2009.
|
We believe UPS has emerged from a very difficult year as a
leaner and more focused Company that is better positioned to
take advantage of improved trade throughout the world.
Summary
of 2009 Actions
The economy impacted both our Company performance and the
performance-based awards earned by our executives in 2009. Some
of the actions we have taken include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Base salaries generally were frozen, other than increases
attributable to promotions and relocations.
|
|
|
|
2009 annual incentive awards under the Management Incentive
Program were earned at 60% of target.
|
|
|
|
10% potential increase in restricted performance units under the
Long-Term Incentive program was not earned for the 2005 grant
maturing in 2009, due to below target earnings per share
performance.
|
|
|
|
2009 Long-Term Incentive Performance award tranches were earned
at 55% of target based on revenue growth and operating return on
invested capital below goal.
|
|
|
|
2009 net income was below threshold, therefore the
three-year earnings measurement tranche of the 2007 Long-Term
Incentive Performance award was not earned.
|
|
|
|
UPS indefinitely suspended the company match to the UPS Savings
Plan, a 401(k) plan.
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
The discount on UPS common stock purchased through the
Discounted Employee Stock Purchase Plan was reduced from 10% to
5%.
|
|
|
|
The UPS Gift Matching Program was suspended indefinitely during
the first quarter of 2009.
|
Compensation
Decisions Process and Inputs
Executive
Compensation Strategy
The UPS executive compensation program is designed to:
|
|
|
|
|
Drive organizational performance by tying a significant portion
of pay to Company performance;
|
|
|
|
Retain and motivate talent by fairly compensating executive
officers; and
|
|
|
|
Encourage long-term stock ownership and careers with UPS,
linking executives to long-term value creation.
|
Compensation plans are designed to emphasize strong annual
performance and foster long-term operational performance and
success. We believe that a majority of total compensation (base
salary, annual incentives and long-term incentives) that can be
earned by the Named Executive Officers should be at
risk, meaning that the compensation is only earned by
meeting annual or long-term performance goals. The 2009
compensation elements with at risk components are
approximately 71% of the 2009 target compensation opportunity
for the Named Executive Officers.
Roles
and Responsibilities
The UPS executive compensation program is administered by the
Compensation Committee of the board of directors. Each of the
three non-employee directors on the Compensation Committee meets
the independence requirements of the NYSE. The Compensation
Committee has sole authority to engage and terminate outside
advisors and consultants to assist the Compensation Committee in
carrying out its responsibilities. In 2009, the Committee
retained Frederic W. Cook & Co. (Cook).
Cook reports directly to the Chair of the Compensation Committee
and serves as a resource for market data on pay practices and
trends, provides advice to the Compensation Committee, provides
competitive analysis and advice related to outside director
compensation, reviews our Compensation Discussion and Analysis,
and attends committee meetings as requested. Cook provides no
additional services to UPS.
20
The following table summarizes the roles of each of the key
participants in the executive compensation decision-making
process.
|
|
|
Participant
|
|
Roles
|
Compensation Committee
|
|
Approves the compensation philosophy for
executive officers
|
|
|
Reviews and approves compensation for
the executive officers, including the Named Executive Officers
|
|
|
Conducts comprehensive review of Chief
Executive Officer performance
|
|
|
Reviews the Chief Executive
Officers performance assessment of other executive officers
|
|
Independent Members of the Board of Directors
|
|
Reviews Committees assessment of
Chief Executive Officer performance
|
|
Independent Compensation Consultant
|
|
Serves as a resource for market data on
pay practices and trends
Provides independent advice to the
Compensation Committee
Provides competitive analysis and advice
related to outside director compensation
Reviews the Compensation Discussion and
Analysis
|
|
Executive Officers
|
|
Chief Executive Officer makes
compensation recommendations to the Compensation Committee for
the other executive officers with respect to base salary
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and the Chief
Financial Officer make recommendations on performance goals
under our incentive compensation plans and provide their
recommendation as to whether the performance goals were achieved
at the end of the performance period
|
|
|
Executive officers are not present when
the Compensation Committee meets in executive session, or when
decisions about their own compensation are discussed
|
|
Market
Data
While the Compensation Committee considers market data in making
compensation decisions, it does not target compensation at a
particular percentile or within any targeted range based solely
on competitive data. The data is one of a variety of factors
weighed by the Compensation Committee when considering base
salary, annual and long-term equity awards and total
compensation levels, and is generally considered as a market
check.
Each year, we review general compensation survey data from
sources such as Towers Watson to provide the Compensation
Committee with information about our compensation levels
relative to comparable sized companies. In addition, we look at
pay practices and levels for a peer group of companies that
typically have global operations, a
21
diversified business and annual sales and market capitalizations
comparable to UPS. The 2009 peer group, which is the same as the
2008 peer group, consisted of the following 20 companies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boeing Co.
|
|
Dell Inc.
|
|
Lowes Companies Inc.
|
|
Sysco Corp.
|
Caterpillar Inc.
|
|
FedEx Corporation
|
|
McDonalds Corp.
|
|
Target Corp.
|
Coca-Cola
Co.
|
|
Johnson & Johnson
|
|
Motorola Inc.
|
|
United Technologies Corp.
|
Coca-Cola
Enterprises Inc.
|
|
Kroger Co.
|
|
PepsiCo Inc.
|
|
Walgreen Co.
|
Costco Wholesale Corp.
|
|
Lockheed Martin
|
|
Procter & Gamble
|
|
Xerox Corp.
|
Internal
Relationships
In addition to market data, the Compensation Committee considers
the differentials between executive officer compensation and
other UPS positions, and the additional responsibilities of the
Chief Executive Officer compared to the other executive
officers. Internal comparisons are made between executive
officers and their direct reports in an effort to ensure that
compensation paid to executive officers is reasonable compared
to that of others with whom they work.
Annual
Performance Reviews
Each year the Chief Executive Officer provides the Compensation
Committee with a subjective assessment of the Named Executive
Officers. The Compensation Committee undertakes a comprehensive
review each year of the Chief Executive Officers
performance and the full board meets in executive session to
review the Chief Executive Officers performance. Factors
considered include the boards assessment of the
performance of the Chief Executive Officer, his strategic vision
and leadership, his ability to execute our business strategy and
achieve our business goals, his ability to make and drive
long-term decisions that create competitive advantage and his
overall effectiveness as a leader and role model.
Elements
of UPS Compensation
The components of the compensation program for our Named
Executive Officers are:
|
|
|
|
|
Base salary;
|
|
|
|
Annual incentives (delivered in cash, restricted stock units or
UPS stock);
|
|
|
|
Long-term incentives (delivered in stock options, restricted
stock units and restricted performance units); and
|
|
|
|
Benefits and perquisites.
|
Base
Salary
The Compensation Committee considers a number of factors in
determining the annual base salaries of the Named Executive
Officers. While company performance is the most important
factor, scope of responsibility, leadership, market data and
internal equity comparisons are all considered by the
Compensation Committee when determining annual salary
adjustments. In light of anticipated challenging worldwide
economic conditions, in March 2009 the Compensation Committee
froze base salaries for the Named Executive Officers at 2008
levels, as generally was done with all other management
employees (other than increases attributable to promotions and
relocations).
Amounts presented as annual base salary in the Summary
Compensation Table include an amount equal to one-half of one
months salary, which is referred to as the half-month
bonus. The half-month bonus is a discretionary cash bonus
awarded in the fourth quarter to eligible salaried employees in
the U.S., including the Named Executive Officers.
Annual
Incentives
The annual incentive program, referred to as the Management
Incentive Program (MIP), has two components:
A. MIP Award; and
B. MIP Ownership Incentive Award.
The MIP award is designed to align pay with annual company
performance, and for historical reasons the performance period
is from October 1 through September 30 of the following year.
MIP awards are granted under
22
the United Parcel Service, Inc. 2009 Omnibus Incentive
Compensation Plan (the 2009 Plan). Participants in
the plan, who include approximately 36,000 of our management
employees, have the opportunity to earn an annual incentive
award based on target performance objectives. Incentives paid
above target are possible if we exceed our performance
objectives. The payout level for the plan also takes into
account other considerations including company performance
relative to target objectives, the general economic environment,
and performance trends.
The award is provided one-half in UPS class A common stock
or cash (which may be deferred into the participants
401(k) or related savings program), at the participants
election, and one-half in restricted stock units. For
approximately 10,000 of the managers among the plan
participants, including the Named Executive Officers, the target
award level for the overall MIP is four months base salary. For
the remaining plan participants, the overall target award level
ranges from one to three months base salary.
For the one-half of the MIP award that is paid in restricted
stock units, we determine the number of restricted stock units
granted by calculating the dollar value of the MIP award
allocated to restricted stock units and dividing by the
applicable closing price of our class B common stock on the
NYSE. The restricted stock units vest 20% per year over five
years. The Compensation Committee believes that restricted stock
units provide a retention incentive and enhance executive stock
ownership and shareholder linkage. When dividends are paid on
UPS common stock, an equivalent value is credited to the
participants bookkeeping account in additional restricted
stock units.
At the end of the MIP fiscal year, we evaluate our success in
achieving our annual performance objectives and approve the
MIP factor, which is then multiplied by the
participants monthly base salary to determine the actual
award earned by the participant. The MIP factor is applied
equally to all program participants. Individual performance of
the participants, including the Named Executive Officers, is not
considered in determining the MIP award. Rather, the award is
based solely on overall company achievement of the business
elements and other considerations described above. The final
awards are reviewed and approved by the Compensation Committee.
|
|
|
|
B.
|
MIP Ownership Incentive Award
|
To reward management employees for maintaining a targeted
ownership level of UPS class A common stock, all MIP
participants are eligible for an additional incentive award up
to the equivalent of one months salary. This portion of
the MIP award is also provided one-half in UPS class A
common stock or cash (which may be deferred into the
participants 401(k) or related savings program), at the
participants election, and one-half in restricted stock
units. The target level of one months salary is the same
for all 36,000 participants in the program.
The amount of the award is equal to the participants
percent of ownership relative to their target ownership of
class A common stock under our stock ownership guidelines,
multiplied by one months salary. For example, if the
participants ownership equaled 80% of their ownership
target, their ownership incentive award would have a value equal
to 80% of one months salary. The maximum award that can be
granted is one months salary.
Summary
of Annual Incentive Programs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment Form and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
|
Program
|
|
|
Program Type
|
|
|
Target Amount
|
|
|
Measures
|
|
|
Program Objectives
|
MIP Award
MIP Ownership Incentive Award
|
|
|
50% of the total award is paid, at the participants election, in cash, UPS stock or deferred into the participants 401(k) or related savings program
50% paid in RSUs and vest 20% per year over five years
|
|
|
MIP Award: four times monthly base salary for the Named Executive Officers
MIP Ownership Incentive Award: one month base salary for all participants
|
|
|
MIP Award: volume growth, revenue growth, EPS growth, operating leverage and end-to-end service
MIP Ownership Incentive Award: ownership level in UPS stock compared to ownership target
|
|
|
Supports our annual operating plan and business strategy
Enhances stock ownership and shareowner alignment
Retention incentive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23
Long-Term
Incentives
Our long-term incentive programs provide participants with
grants of equity-based incentives that are intended to reward
performance over a multi-year period and include:
A. Long-Term Incentive Program
B. Long-Term Incentive Performance Award Program
|
|
|
|
A.
|
Long-Term Incentive (LTI) Program
|
Our LTI program has two parts: stock option awards and
restricted performance units (RPUs). Grants are made
annually, typically in May of each year. Approximately 3,000
members of our management team participate in this program.
Region manager-level and above participants, including the Named
Executive Officers, receive 75% of their award in RPUs and 25%
in stock options in an effort to more closely align their
compensation with shareowner return. All other participants
receive 100% of their award in RPUs.
Stock Options
The Compensation Committee believes that stock options provide a
significant link to company performance and maximize shareowner
value, as the option holder receives value only if our stock
price increases. Stock options also have retention value, as the
option holder will not receive value from the options unless he
or she remains our employee during the vesting period for the
award (except in the case of retirement, death or disability
during the vesting period).
Stock options granted in and after 2008 vest 20% per year over
five years and expire ten years from the date of grant. Grants
do not include dividend equivalents or any reload grant features.
Restricted
Performance Units
RPUs are bookkeeping units, the value of which corresponds to
one share of class A common stock. The decision by the
Compensation Committee to use restricted performance units is
based on two goals for the award:
|
|
|
|
|
Maintain the long-term nature of the award and its impact on
retention; and
|
|
|
|
Align managements interests with shareowner interests by
utilizing an award linked to share price performance.
|
Restricted performance units granted in and after 2008 vest 20%
per year over five years. Upon vesting of restricted performance
units, the individual receives shares of UPS class A common
stock. When dividends are paid on UPS common stock, an
equivalent value is automatically credited to the
participants bookkeeping account in additional restricted
performance units.
The restricted performance units granted under the LTI program
prior to 2008 provided that the number of restricted performance
units ultimately earned would increase by 10% if we attain a
performance measure, such as adjusted diluted earnings per
share, for the five-year performance period. Beginning in 2008,
the restricted performance units no longer include this
provision.
Target
Amounts
Target amounts vary to reflect the responsibility level of
executive positions and competitive market practice.
The total target award value at grant for the LTI awards are set
at 175% of base salary for the Chief Executive Officer and 125%
of base salary for the other executive officers. For other
management employees, target award values range from 25% to 75%
of base salary.
|
|
|
|
B.
|
Long-Term Incentive Performance (LTIP) Award
Program
|
The LTIP award program is designed to further strengthen the
performance component of our executive compensation package and
enhance retention of key talent. The program was introduced to
bring total
24
compensation of senior management closer to the compensation of
comparable positions at similarly sized companies. Approximately
550 of our senior management team, including the Named Executive
Officers, participate in this program.
The program has a three-year award cycle. A target award of RSUs
is granted to executive officers and certain other eligible
managers at the beginning of the three-year period. Ninety
percent of the total target award is divided into three
substantially equal tranches, one for each calendar year in the
three-year award cycle. The remaining 10% is based upon
achievement of a net income or diluted earnings per share target
for the third year. Performance measures, such as revenue
growth, operating return on invested capital (ROIC),
net income or diluted earnings per share, are set by the
Compensation Committee at the beginning of each calendar year in
the three-year award cycle.
The actual number of restricted stock units that the management
employee will receive is determined once the payment percentage
for a particular tranche has been approved by the Compensation
Committee, based on achievement of performance goals for the
applicable calendar year.
Summary
of Long-Term Incentive Programs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Measures and/or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment Form and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
Program
|
|
|
Program Type
|
|
|
Target Amount
|
|
|
Proposition
|
|
|
Program Objectives
|
LTI: stock options
|
|
|
Stock options
Vest 20% per year over five years; ten-year term
|
|
|
25% of target LTI (175% of base salary for the Chief Executive
Officer and 125% for the other executive officers)
|
|
|
Value recognized only if UPS stock price appreciates
|
|
|
Provides a significant link to Company stock price performance
Enhances stock ownership and shareowner alignment
|
LTI: RPUs
|
|
|
RPUs are paid in UPS stock upon vesting
Vest 20% per year over five years
|
|
|
75% of target LTI (175% of base salary for the Chief Executive
Officer and 125% for the other executive officers)
|
|
|
Value increases as stock price increases
|
|
|
Retention
Enhances stock ownership and shareowner alignment
|
LTIP: RSUs
|
|
|
RSUs are settled in UPS stock if earned based on Company performance
Award vests after the end of the third fiscal year
|
|
|
As a percent of base salary: 600% - Chief Executive Officer
500% - Chief Operating Officer
275% - Chief Financial Officer
225% - other executive officers
|
|
|
Value increases as stock price increases
Revenue growth
Operating return on invested capital
Three-year net income or EPS targets
|
|
|
Supports the Companys annual and long-term operating plan and business strategy
Enhances stock ownership and shareowner alignment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits
and Perquisites
Consistent with our culture, the benefits and perquisites
offered to the Named Executive Officers are the same or similar
to programs offered to the entire UPS management team, with the
exception of a financial planning service and executive health
services. Additional information on these benefits can be found
in the program descriptions below.
The UPS
Savings Plan
The UPS Savings Plan is a 401(k) plan offered to all
U.S.-based
employees who are not subject to a collective bargaining
agreement and who are not eligible to participate in another
savings plan sponsored by UPS or one of its subsidiaries. We
generally have provided a matching contribution (generally up to
a maximum of 3% of each participants eligible
compensation) to those UPS employees who make elective deferrals
to the UPS Savings Plan. Matching contributions are made to the
UPS Stock Fund, an investment election under the UPS Savings
Plan, in the form of shares of our class A common stock.
Prior to January 1, 2009, the matching contributions were
made to the UPS Qualified Stock Ownership Plan
(QSOP). The QSOP was merged with the UPS Savings
Plan on January 1, 2009. Company matches to the UPS Savings
Plan were suspended for the contribution period beginning
February 1, 2009 and have not been reinstated.
25
Qualified
and Non-Qualified Pension Plans
Named Executive Officers participate in our qualified retirement
program, the UPS Retirement Plan, on the same terms as all other
participants. Benefits payable under the plan are subject to the
maximum compensation limits and the annual benefit limits for a
tax-qualified defined benefit plan as prescribed and adjusted
from time to time by the Internal Revenue Service. Amounts
exceeding these limits are paid pursuant to the UPS Excess
Coordinating Benefit Plan, which is a non-qualified restoration
plan designed to replace the amount of benefits limited under
the tax-qualified plan. Without the Excess Coordinating Benefit
Plan, the Named Executive Officers would receive a lower benefit
as a percent of final average earnings than the benefit received
by other participants in the UPS Retirement Plan.
Discounted
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
To foster our manager-owner philosophy, we have a Discounted
Employee Stock Purchase Plan. The plan provides all
U.S.-based
employees, including the Named Executive Officers, and some
internationally based employees, with the opportunity to
purchase up to $10,000 in our class A common stock annually
at a discount to the market price of our stock. The plan has
been designed to comply with Section 423 of the Internal
Revenue Code. The purchase price at which our class A
common stock may be acquired under the plan is equal to 95% of
the fair market value of the shares on the last day of each
calendar quarter. Share purchases are made on a quarterly basis.
UPS Gift
Matching Program
In past years, the UPS Foundation matched charitable
contributions made by all active employees with 12 months
of service, including the Named Executive Officers, up to a
maximum of $3,000 per year. On March 2, 2009, the UPS Gift
Matching Program was suspended, and has not been reinstated.
Financial
Planning Service
Executive officers are eligible for financial planning services
provided by the Ayco Company. Although this financial planning
service benefit is not offered to other management employees, we
offer a separate financial counseling service through
PricewaterhouseCoopers to all U.S. and Puerto Rico-based
employees who are not subject to a collective bargaining
agreement.
Executive
Health Services
In 2009, all Named Executive Officers were provided certain
executive health services, including executive physical
examinations. The cost of the executive health services was
approximately $6,000 per person.
Relocation
Assistance
For those management employees who are transferred to new
geographic work locations by UPS, we provide a relocation
assistance program that is similar for all levels of management.
The assistance includes benefits and features common to
relocation assistance programs such as home sale assistance;
household goods movement/storage; temporary living expenses;
loss on sale benefits; home search assistance; and in some
cases, additional cost of living provisions.
2009
Compensation Decisions
Base
Salary
In 2009, we froze base salaries for most management employees,
including the Named Executive Officers, at 2008 levels. Salary
increases generally were approved only for company-initiated
relocations and promotions to positions of additional
responsibility.
26
Annual
Incentives
2009 MIP
Award
The 2009 performance goals were primarily based on our business
plans for the 2009 MIP fiscal year, October 1, 2008 through
September 30, 2009. Performance targets and results were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Business Element
|
|
Performance Target
|
|
Result
|
|
Volume growth
|
|
Average daily volume to remain flat over 2008
|
|
Below target, at a 3.7% decline
|
Growth in consolidated revenue
|
|
Consolidated revenue to remain at 2008 levels
|
|
Below target, at a 12.6% decrease
|
Growth in consolidated, as adjusted, diluted earnings per share
|
|
As adjusted, diluted EPS growth to remain flat over 2008
|
|
Below target, at a 36.5% decline
|
Positive operating leverage
|
|
Revenue increases at a rate greater than cost
|
|
Below target
|
End-to-end
service
|
|
Improved year-over-year service levels, overall
6 percent
|
|
Above target
|
Some of the business elements have a greater impact than others
on UPS financial results and our long-term success. We do not
assign a specific weight to each business element when
determining award payouts; rather, we use the achievement of
these goals to judge our success in implementing our overall
business strategy. In addition to evaluating results for these
business elements when setting award amounts, we also consider
our assessment of the challenges of the economic and competitive
market in which UPS operated during the award year.
In 2009, the global economy continued to have a significant
negative impact on our business. We managed costs as volumes
declined and focused on customer service, as evident in our
end-to-end
service improvement. After evaluating actual company performance
against the business elements and these other factors, the 2009
MIP award was paid at 60% of the targeted award amount. This
award was less than the award made in 2008 of 70% of target, and
below the average of the previous five years (2004 to
2008) of 96%.
MIP
Ownership Incentive Award
Ownership levels for the 2009 awards were determined by totaling
the number of UPS shares in the participants family group
accounts and the participants vested and unvested MIP and
LTIP restricted stock units and deferred compensation shares,
and then multiplying the sum by the closing price of a
class B share on the NYSE on October 16, 2009. With
the exception of Scott Davis, whose ownership guidelines
increased from six times annual salary to ten times annual
salary and Myron Gray, whose ownership guidelines increased from
five times annual salary to six times annual salary, when they
were promoted to the positions they hold today in 2008 and 2009,
respectively, all of the Named Executive Officers met their
ownership expectation; therefore the MIP ownership incentive of
one month salary was earned by David Abney, Kurt Kuehn and
John McDevitt. Under the terms of our ownership guidelines,
Scott Davis and Myron Gray are expected to meet their respective
ownership targets within five years of their promotion. In 2009,
Scott Davis received 86% and Myron Gray received 98% of their
respective MIP ownership incentive awards.
Long-Term
Incentives
2009 LTI
Grants
2009 LTI awards for the Named Executive Officers were
granted 25% in stock options and 75% in restricted performance
units. The number of stock options granted is determined by
dividing 25% of the target award value by the Black-Scholes
value of a UPS stock option on the date of grant. The number of
restricted performance units granted is determined by dividing
75% of the target award value by the NYSE closing price of UPS
stock on the date of grant. The number of stock options and
restricted performance units granted to the Named Executive
Officers on May 6, 2009 is shown in the Grants of
Plan-Based Awards for 2009 table.
27
LTIP
Targets
Over the last several years, with the assistance of its
independent compensation consultant, the Compensation Committee
has undertaken a comprehensive review of the positioning of the
total direct compensation of key UPS executive officers in
comparison to the market data described above. These reviews
showed that the total direct compensation for certain key
executives, specifically the Chief Executive Officer, Chief
Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer, was in the lowest
quartile compared to the market data. In the third quarter of
2008, the Compensation Committee determined that it was
appropriate to consider a multi-year strategy to increase
compensation as a means of ensuring that their total direct
compensation was more consistent with comparable positions at
similarly sized companies, while reinforcing the link between
compensation and company performance, increasing the retention
incentive for these individuals and further aligning the
interests of these executives with our shareowners.
The Compensation Committee determined that the most effective
manner of achieving these goals was to increase the target award
to these key executives under the existing LTIP program,
commencing with the awards made in 2008, in an effort to move
them closer to the top of the lowest quartile of the
Companys peer group. The following table shows previous
years target grant values and the Compensation
Committees expected target LTIP award values for 2010 for
these key executives, based on a percentage of annual base
salary. Each target amount covers a three-year performance
period.
LTIP
Target Award Values
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Planned
|
|
|
2007 LTIP Target
|
|
2008 LTIP Target
|
|
2009 LTIP Target
|
|
2010 LTIP Target
|
|
|
(% of base salary)
|
|
(% of base salary)
|
|
(% of base salary)
|
|
(% of base salary)
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
250
|
|
|
|
475
|
|
|
|
600
|
|
|
|
675
|
|
Chief Operating Officer
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
500
|
|
|
|
575
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
|
250
|
|
|
|
275
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
In March 2009, the Compensation Committee approved 2009 target
award values for the three-year 2009 LTIP awards consistent with
the strategy and 2009 targets described in the table above. For
the other executive officers, targets were set at 225% of base
salary; for other management employees, targets range from 50%
to 200% of base salary. Target award values are based on
internal pay equity considerations and market data regarding
total compensation of comparable positions at similarly sized
companies. Differences in the target award values are based on
increasing levels of responsibility amongst the management team.
The threshold, target and maximum number of restricted stock
units that can be earned by the Named Executive Officers under
the 2009 LTIP is shown in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards for
2009 table.
Shown in the table below is the total long-term incentive
opportunity granted to the Named Executive Officers in 2009,
based upon a percentage of annual base salary.
Summary
of Long-Term Incentive Targets for 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Long-Term
|
|
|
LTI
|
|
LTIP
|
|
Incentive Target
|
|
|
Options and RPUs
|
|
RSUs
|
|
for 2009
|
Named Executive Officer
|
|
(% of salary)
|
|
(% of salary)
|
|
(% of salary)
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
600
|
|
|
|
775
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
500
|
|
|
|
625
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
275
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
|
350
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
|
350
|
|
28
Long-Term
Incentive Awards Earned in 2009
Restricted
Performance Units Results
For the restricted performance units issued in 2005, an adjusted
earnings per share goal of $5.34 per diluted share for 2009 was
established. Because the adjusted diluted earnings per share
goal was not met in 2009, the potential 10% increase in
restricted performance units will not be earned for the 2005
awards that will vest in May 2010.
LTIP
Performance Results
Performance targets and actual results for the completed
performance periods for the 2007 LTIP, 2008 LTIP and 2009 LTIP
are described below. Where the three-year LTIP cycles overlap,
the performance goals for individual years are the same.
Pursuant to the terms of the LTIP award, the underlying
restricted stock units are earned based on actual performance as
compared to pre-established performance criteria for each period
over the three-year cycle of the award. The tranches based on
2009 performance, and therefore 2009 Committee decisions, are
shaded in the chart below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LTIP
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tranche
|
|
|
|
LTIP Award
|
|
|
Performance Goals
|
|
|
Actual Results
|
|
|
Earned
|
2007 LTIP Award
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 Performance Tranche
|
|
|
|
30
|
%
|
|
|
revenue growth 6.1%
operating ROIC 25.0%
|
|
|
revenue growth 4.5%
operating ROIC, as adjusted 24.5%
|
|
|
|
75
|
%
|
2008 Performance Tranche
|
|
|
|
30
|
%
|
|
|
revenue growth 7.0%
operating ROIC 23.0%
|
|
|
revenue growth 3.6%
operating ROIC, as adjusted 18.7%
|
|
|
|
65
|
%
|
2009 Performance Tranche
|
|
|
|
30
|
%
|
|
|
revenue growth flat
operating ROIC 18.7%
|
|
|
revenue growth (12.2)%
operating ROIC, as adjusted 15.0%
|
|
|
|
55
|
%
|
2009 Earnings Measurement Tranche
|
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
2009 earnings per share $5.28
|
|
|
2009 earnings per share $2.31
|
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
2008 LTIP Award
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 Performance Tranche
|
|
|
|
30
|
%
|
|
|
revenue growth 7.0%
operating ROIC 3.0%
|
|
|
revenue growth 3.6%
operating ROIC, as adjusted 18.7%
|
|
|
|
65
|
%
|
2009 Performance Tranche
|
|
|
|
30
|
%
|
|
|
revenue growth flat
operating ROIC 18.7%
|
|
|
revenue growth (12.2)%
operating ROIC, as adjusted 15.0%
|
|
|
|
55
|
%
|
2009 LTIP Award
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 Performance Tranche
|
|
|
|
30
|
%
|
|
|
revenue growth flat
operating ROIC 18.7%
|
|
|
revenue growth (12.2)%
operating ROIC, as adjusted 15.0%
|
|
|
|
55
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As shown in the table above, based on actual performance, 55% of
the 2009 performance tranche was earned for each of the
outstanding LTIP awards. Because the 2009 earnings measurement
goal was not achieved, no amount was earned for that tranche.
The restricted stock units for 2009 are now fixed,
meaning the amount of the award for the 2009 performance period
has been determined, but will not vest until January 31
following the third year of the cycle, provided the participant
remains employed as of the vesting date. For example, the 2007
LTIP award vested January 31, 2010 and the 2009 LTIP award
will not vest until January 31, 2012. Special vesting rules
apply to terminations by reason of death, disability or
retirement. A participants earned restricted stock units
account will be adjusted quarterly for dividends paid on
class A common stock. The restricted stock unit awards that
vest will be distributed in the form of class A common
stock.
2010
Compensation Decisions
We anticipate a challenging worldwide economic environment in
2010. In February 2009, we suspended our matching contributions
to our 401(k) plan for all participants, including the Named
Executive Officers. We also have suspended the UPS Gift Matching
Program. In addition, we reduced the Discounted Employee Stock
Purchase Plan share purchase price discount from 10% to 5% off
of the closing stock price on the last day of the applicable
29
quarter for all participants, including the Named Executive
Officers. As of the date of this proxy statement, no further
changes have been undertaken with respect to these programs. We
intend to continue to monitor business performance and make such
compensation-related adjustments as appropriate.
In the first quarter of 2010, the Compensation Committee granted
three-year 2010 LTIP awards to LTIP participants covering the
period from 2010 through 2012. The 2010 LTIP target awards made
to the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer and
Chief Financial Officer are expected to be made in accordance
with the LTIP Target Award Values table above. We also expect
that the Compensation Committee will consider reinstituting
management base salary increases in 2010.
Other
Compensation Policies
Stock
Ownership Guidelines
The board has adopted stock ownership guidelines which extend to
most levels of management and to members of our board of
directors. The guidelines are consistent with our core
philosophy that managers should also be owners of our company.
The guidelines are based on our expectation that each executive
officer and director will maintain a targeted level of
investment in our stock. Compensation programs are designed to
foster long-term stock ownership by all of our managers;
therefore each executive officer has accumulated a meaningful
number of shares of our common stock. As a result, the interests
of shareowners and our executive officers are closely aligned,
and our executive officers have a strong incentive to provide
effective management.
Target ownership for the Chief Executive Officer is ten times
annual salary, and for the other executive officers is six times
annual salary. The target for our non-employee directors is
three times their annual retainer. Shares of class A common
stock, deferred units and vested and unvested RSUs are
considered as owned for purposes of calculating ownership.
Managers and directors are expected to reach target ownership
within five years.
Recoupment
or Clawback of Compensation
The 2009 Plan provides that if an award is to an executive
officer, and the Compensation Committee later determines that
financial results used to determine the amount of the award are
materially restated and that the executive officer engaged in
fraud or intentional misconduct, we will seek repayment or
recovery of the award. This clawback applies to all awards
granted under the 2009 Plan.
Equity
Grant Practices
Grants for all equity programs under the 2009 Plan are approved
by the Compensation Committee. Stock options have an exercise
price equal to the closing market price on the NYSE on the date
of grant.
Equity
Usage
Since equity award programs can have a dilutive impact on
shareowner value, we evaluate the current overhang rate (defined
as shares underlying outstanding equity award grants plus shares
available for additional award grants divided by total common
shares outstanding) when designing new programs or granting new
awards. Our 2009 overhang rate was 10.38%. Included in the
overhang calculation are outstanding stock options, RPUs and
RSUs, as well as the number of shares set aside for future
grants.
Another indicator of dilutive impact to shareowner value is the
annual grant rate (defined as total shares underlying equity
awards granted in one year divided by total common shares
outstanding), sometimes referred to as the burn
rate. In 2009, our grant rate was 1.45%. We believe that
the low overhang and grant rate percentages demonstrate our
objective to effectively and responsibly manage equity usage.
Employment
or Change in Control Agreements
We do not have employment agreements with any of our executive
officers. In addition, we do not have a separate change in
control or severance agreement with any of our executive
officers.
30
The 2009 Plan generally requires a double
trigger both a change in control and a
termination of employment for the participant, to
accelerate the vesting of unvested awards. The UPS Incentive
Compensation Plan adopted in 1999 (the 1999 Plan)
included a provision for an automatic acceleration of unvested
awards in the event of a change in control. This provision
applies equally to all outstanding equity awards under the 1999
Plan. At the time of the adoption of the 1999 Plan, the
accelerated vesting of all outstanding equity awards following a
change in control was a customary and reasonable component of an
equity incentive program. All of the equity awards granted to
the Named Executive Officers prior to May 7, 2009 are
subject to the single trigger, while equity awards granted after
that date are subject to the double trigger.
Compensation
Policies and Programs and Risk Management
We believe our compensation policies and programs provide a
balanced mix of cash and equity, annual and longer-term
incentives, and performance metrics which mitigate excessive
risk-taking that could harm our value or reward poor judgment by
our Named Executive Officers.
|
|
|
|
|
Using multiple business elements under the MIP program and
multiple performance measures under the three-year LTIP program
serves as an internal
check-and-balance
so as not to put emphasis solely on one measure of performance;
|
|
|
|
Permitting discretion in making final award determinations under
the MIP program so as to take into account changing market
conditions allows our executives to focus on the long-term
health of our Company rather than an all or nothing
approach to achieving short-term goals;
|
|
|
|
Using both restricted stock units and stock options for equity
awards balances risk incentives;
|
|
|
|
Awards to executive officers are limited by the terms of the
incentive plan to a fixed maximum percentage specified in the
plan or the award;
|
|
|
|
The performance goals under our annual and long-term incentive
plans include company-wide metrics; we believe that the use of
company-wide metrics encourages decision-making that is in the
best long-term interests of our shareowners;
|
|
|
|
The time-based vesting over three or more years for our equity
awards ensures that our executives interests align with
those of our shareowners over the long term;
|
|
|
|
Awards to our Named Executive Officers are subject to the
recoupment policy contained in the 2009 Plan; and
|
|
|
|
The Named Executive Officers are subject to our stock ownership
guidelines.
|
Tax
Implications of Executive Compensation
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code makes
compensation paid to certain executives in amounts in excess of
$1 million not deductible unless the compensation is paid
under a predetermined objective performance plan meeting certain
requirements, or satisfies one of various other exemptions. The
Compensation Committee believes that the interests of our
shareowners are best served by not restricting the Compensation
Committees discretion and flexibility in crafting
compensation plans and arrangements. While the Compensation
Committee intends to structure awards to comply with
Section 162(m), the Compensation Committee may approve
elements of compensation for certain executive officers that are
not fully deductible, and reserves the right to do so in the
future in appropriate circumstances.
31
COMPENSATION
OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
Summary
Compensation Table for 2009
The following table shows the compensation for each of the Named
Executive Officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity
|
|
Nonqualified
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
Deferred
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Option
|
|
Plan
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Compen-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salary
|
|
Awards
|
|
Awards
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Earnings
|
|
sation
|
|
Total
|
Name and Principal Position
|
|
Year
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
($)(3)
|
|
($)(4)
|
|
($)(5)
|
|
($)(6)
|
|
($)
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
|
|
3,890,437
|
|
|
|
437,511
|
|
|
|
130,523
|
|
|
|
752,239
|
|
|
|
31,345
|
|
|
|
6,242,055
|
|
Chairman and
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
|
|
3,965,836
|
|
|
|
437,619
|
|
|
|
136,944
|
|
|
|
712,041
|
|
|
|
30,014
|
|
|
|
6,282,454
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
609,000
|
|
|
|
1,473,772
|
|
|
|
271,031
|
|
|
|
115,000
|
|
|
|
287,600
|
|
|
|
27,367
|
|
|
|
2,783,770
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
462,500
|
|
|
|
1,523,098
|
|
|
|
144,534
|
|
|
|
62,900
|
|
|
|
278,014
|
|
|
|
8,269
|
|
|
|
2,479,315
|
|
Senior Vice President and
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
458,500
|
|
|
|
1,820,660
|
|
|
|
144,576
|
|
|
|
70,300
|
|
|
|
363,444
|
|
|
|
7,976
|
|
|
|
2,865,456
|
|
Chief Operating Officer
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
437,500
|
|
|
|
1,053,007
|
|
|
|
189,719
|
|
|
|
80,500
|
|
|
|
271,700
|
|
|
|
7,771
|
|
|
|
2,040,197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
400,000
|
|
|
|
963,909
|
|
|
|
125,006
|
|
|
|
54,400
|
|
|
|
289,639
|
|
|
|
22,612
|
|
|
|
1,855,566
|
|
Senior Vice President and
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
396,000
|
|
|
|
1,309,167
|
|
|
|
125,034
|
|
|
|
60,800
|
|
|
|
368,792
|
|
|
|
21,082
|
|
|
|
2,280,875
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Myron A. Gray(7)
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
381,250
|
|
|
|
814,024
|
|
|
|
119,144
|
|
|
|
51,539
|
|
|
|
230,157
|
|
|
|
540,717
|
|
|
|
2,136,831
|
|
Senior Vice President,
U.S. Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
420,000
|
|
|
|
943,485
|
|
|
|
131,259
|
|
|
|
57,120
|
|
|
|
229,573
|
|
|
|
8,054
|
|
|
|
1,789,491
|
|
Senior Vice President,
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
418,000
|
|
|
|
1,356,344
|
|
|
|
131,291
|
|
|
|
63,840
|
|
|
|
230,274
|
|
|
|
7,869
|
|
|
|
2,207,618
|
|
Global Transportation Services
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
405,300
|
|
|
|
993,577
|
|
|
|
176,711
|
|
|
|
74,980
|
|
|
|
163,483
|
|
|
|
7,360
|
|
|
|
1,821,411
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This column represents the salary earned from January 1 through
December 31 of the applicable year, including the half-month
bonus described above under Compensation Discussion and
Analysis. Salary increases are effective in March of the
relevant fiscal year and therefore account for any
2008-2009
discrepancies reflected in this column. |
|
(2) |
|
The values for stock awards in this column represent the
aggregate grant date fair value for the stock awards granted in
the applicable year, computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic
718. These awards include LTIP RSUs, LTI RPUs and MIP RSUs.
Awards with performance conditions are computed based on the
probable outcome of the performance condition as of the grant
date for the award. Information about the assumptions used to
value these awards can be found in Note 10
Stock-Based Compensation in our 2009 Annual Report
on
Form 10-K.
An overview of the features of these awards can be found in the
Compensation Discussion and Analysis above. |
|
|
|
In accordance with SEC rules, we also are required to disclose
the grant date fair value for awards with performance conditions
assuming maximum performance. The grant date fair value for the
2009 LTIP RSU awards, assuming maximum performance, are as
follows: Davis $4,891,771; Abney
$2,077,584; Kuehn $1,094,874; Gray
$826,594; and McDevitt $1,017,657. |
|
(3) |
|
The values for stock option awards in this column represent the
aggregate grant date fair value for the option awards granted in
the applicable year computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic
718. The assumptions used to value these awards can be found in
Note 10 Stock-Based Compensation in our 2009
Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
An overview of the features of these awards can be found in the
Compensation Discussion and Analysis above. |
|
(4) |
|
This column shows the cash portion (representing 50%) of the MIP
award and the MIP Ownership Incentive award. For a description
of the MIP, see Compensation Discussion and Analysis
above. The MIP Ownership Incentive award was paid at 100% of
target (one months salary) for each Named Executive
Officer who met or exceeded his target ownership level. |
|
(5) |
|
This column represents an estimate of the annual increase in the
actuarial present value of the Named Executive Officers
accrued benefit under our retirement plans for the applicable
year, assuming a retirement age of 60. See 2009 Pension
Benefits below for additional information, including the
present value assumptions used in this calculation. There are no
above market or preferential earnings for the UPS Deferred
Compensation Plan. |
32
|
|
|
(6) |
|
The following table breaks down the amounts shown in this column
for 2009 (all amounts in $): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
401(k)
|
|
Life
|
|
|
|
Financial
|
|
Relocation
|
|
Executive
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Match
|
|
Insurance
|
|
RPRO
|
|
Planning
|
|
Assistance
|
|
Health Services
|
|
Total
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
2,400
|
|
|
|
4,695
|
|
|
|
4,414
|
|
|
|
13,765
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,071
|
|
|
|
31,345
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
1,110
|
|
|
|
1,088
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,071
|
|
|
|
8,269
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
960
|
|
|
|
1,724
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,857
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,071
|
|
|
|
22,612
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
915
|
|
|
|
872
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,485
|
|
|
|
513,374
|
|
|
|
6,071
|
|
|
|
540,717
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
1,008
|
|
|
|
975
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,071
|
|
|
|
8,054
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 401(k) match was suspended beginning February 1, 2009;
the amount shown above represents the match for January 2009.
For a description of the Restoration Plan Rollover Option, or
RPRO, see 2009 Pension Benefits below. |
(7) |
|
In accordance with SEC rules, because Myron Gray first became a
Named Executive Officer in 2009, only his 2009 compensation is
included in the table, and because Kurt Kuehn first became a
Named Executive Officer in 2008, only his 2008 and 2009
compensation information is included in the table. |
Grants of
Plan-Based Awards for 2009
The following table provides information about awards granted in
2009 to each of the Named Executive Officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
Awards:
|
|
Exercise
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Possible Payouts
|
|
Estimated Future Payouts
|
|
Number
|
|
Number of
|
|
or Base
|
|
of Stock
|
|
|
|
|
Under Non-Equity
|
|
Under Equity Incentive
|
|
of Shares
|
|
Securities
|
|
Price of
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive Plan Awards(1)
|
|
Plan Awards(2)
|
|
of Stock
|
|
Underlying
|
|
Option
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
Threshold
|
|
Target
|
|
Maximum
|
|
Threshold
|
|
Target
|
|
Maximum
|
|
or Units
|
|
Options
|
|
Awards
|
|
Award
|
Name
|
|
Date
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)(3)
|
|
($/Sh)
|
|
($)(4)
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/10/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,301
|
|
|
|
134,169
|
|
|
|
194,546
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,447,355
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,509(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,312,507
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,305
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
437,511
|
|
|
|
|
12/04/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,395(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130,575
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/10/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,616
|
|
|
|
51,711
|
|
|
|
74,981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,026,550
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,767(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
433,632
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,315
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
144,534
|
|
|
|
|
12/04/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,154(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,916
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/10/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,856
|
|
|
|
24,598
|
|
|
|
35,668
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
534,488
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,717(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
375,010
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,516
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
125,006
|
|
|
|
|
12/04/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
998(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,411
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/10/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,906
|
|
|
|
19,182
|
|
|
|
27,814
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
405,024
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,402(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
357,424
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,976
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
119,144
|
|
|
|
|
12/04/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
946(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,576
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02/10/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,608
|
|
|
|
21,132
|
|
|
|
30,642
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
492,579
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,053(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
393,769
|
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,092
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
131,259
|
|
|
|
|
12/04/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,048(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57,137
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
The amount reflects the target
value of the cash portion of the 2009 MIP award and the MIP
Ownership Incentive Award for each Named Executive Officer. The
potential payments for the MIP are performance-based and
therefore at risk. The MIP program is described in the
Compensation Discussion and Analysis above.
|
(2)
|
|
These columns show the potential
number of RSUs that would be awarded under the 2009 LTIP at the
end of the applicable three-year performance period if the
threshold, target or maximum performance goals are satisfied.
|
(3)
|
|
This column shows the number of
stock options granted under the LTI on May 6, 2009.
|
(4)
|
|
This column shows the grant date
fair value of the LTIP RSUs, MIP RSUs, LTI RPUs and LTI stock
options under FASB ASC Topic 718 granted to each of the Named
Executive Officers in 2009. The grant date fair values are
calculated using the NYSE closing price of UPS stock on the date
of grant for RSUs and RPUs and the Black-Scholes option pricing
model for stock options. The grant date fair value of the RSUs
granted under the 2007 LTIP, 2008 LTIP and 2009 LTIP, which have
performance conditions, are computed based on the probable
outcome of the performance condition for the 2009 performance
period and the related earnings measurement tranche. There can
be no assurance that the grant date fair value of stock and
option awards will ever be realized.
|
(5)
|
|
Represents the number of RPUs
granted under the LTI on May 6, 2009.
|
(6)
|
|
Represents the number of RSUs
granted under the MIP on December 4, 2009.
|
33
Outstanding
Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End 2009
The following table shows the number of shares covered by
exercisable and unexercisable options and unvested RSUs and RPUs
held by the Named Executive Officers on December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
Market or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
Payout
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Value of
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market
|
|
Unearned
|
|
Unearned
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Value of
|
|
Shares,
|
|
Shares,
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares or
|
|
Shares or
|
|
Units or
|
|
Units or
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Units of
|
|
Units of
|
|
Other
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Options
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Stock That
|
|
Rights That
|
|
Rights That
|
|
|
Options
|
|
(#)
|
|
Exercise
|
|
Option
|
|
Option
|
|
That Have
|
|
Have Not
|
|
Have Not
|
|
Have Not
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
Price
|
|
Grant
|
|
Expiration
|
|
Not Vested
|
|
Vested
|
|
Vested
|
|
Vested
|
Name
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
(1)
|
|
($)
|
|
Date
|
|
Date
|
|
(#)(2)
|
|
($)(3)
|
|
(#)(4)
|
|
($)(3)
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
20,043
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.90
|
|
|
|
03/30/2001
|
|
|
|
03/30/2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,864
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60.22
|
|
|
|
04/25/2002
|
|
|
|
04/25/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,305
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62.40
|
|
|
|
05/02/2003
|
|
|
|
05/02/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,260
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70.70
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004
|
|
|
|
05/02/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,660
|
|
|
|
72.07
|
|
|
|
05/09/2005
|
|
|
|
05/08/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,844
|
|
|
|
80.88
|
|
|
|
05/01/2006
|
|
|
|
04/29/2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,086
|
|
|
|
70.90
|
|
|
|
05/09/2007
|
|
|
|
05/08/2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,217
|
|
|
|
20,872
|
|
|
|
71.58
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008
|
|
|
|
05/07/2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,305
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
05/06/2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87,283
|
|
|
|
5,007,442
|
|
|
|
151,096
|
|
|
|
8,668,378
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
3,977
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.90
|
|
|
|
03/30/2001
|
|
|
|
03/30/2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60.22
|
|
|
|
04/25/2002
|
|
|
|
04/25/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,321
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62.40
|
|
|
|
05/02/2003
|
|
|
|
05/02/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,034
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70.70
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004
|
|
|
|
05/02/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,812
|
|
|
|
72.07
|
|
|
|
05/09/2005
|
|
|
|
05/08/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,052
|
|
|
|
80.88
|
|
|
|
05/01/2006
|
|
|
|
04/29/2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,260
|
|
|
|
70.90
|
|
|
|
05/09/2007
|
|
|
|
05/08/2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,723
|
|
|
|
6,896
|
|
|
|
71.58
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008
|
|
|
|
05/07/2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,315
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
05/06/2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,685
|
|
|
|
2,448,855
|
|
|
|
60,951
|
|
|
|
3,496,759
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
4,490
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.90
|
|
|
|
03/30/2001
|
|
|
|
03/30/2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,819
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60.22
|
|
|
|
04/25/2002
|
|
|
|
04/25/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,420
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62.40
|
|
|
|
05/02/2003
|
|
|
|
05/02/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,905
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70.70
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004
|
|
|
|
05/02/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,862
|
|
|
|
72.07
|
|
|
|
05/09/2005
|
|
|
|
05/08/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,178
|
|
|
|
80.88
|
|
|
|
05/01/2006
|
|
|
|
04/29/2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,652
|
|
|
|
70.90
|
|
|
|
05/09/2007
|
|
|
|
05/08/2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,490
|
|
|
|
5,964
|
|
|
|
71.58
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008
|
|
|
|
05/07/2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,516
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
05/06/2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,863
|
|
|
|
2,000,115
|
|
|
|
29,944
|
|
|
|
1,717,887
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
3,849
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.90
|
|
|
|
03/30/2001
|
|
|
|
03/30/2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,152
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60.22
|
|
|
|
04/25/2002
|
|
|
|
04/25/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,058
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62.40
|
|
|
|
05/02/2003
|
|
|
|
05/02/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,143
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70.70
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004
|
|
|
|
05/02/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,586
|
|
|
|
72.07
|
|
|
|
05/09/2005
|
|
|
|
05/08/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,256
|
|
|
|
80.88
|
|
|
|
05/01/2006
|
|
|
|
04/29/2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,048
|
|
|
|
70.90
|
|
|
|
05/09/2007
|
|
|
|
05/08/2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
767
|
|
|
|
3,070
|
|
|
|
71.58
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008
|
|
|
|
05/07/2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,976
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
05/06/2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,155
|
|
|
|
1,385,790
|
|
|
|
22,715
|
|
|
|
1,303,160
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
1,537
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59.38
|
|
|
|
04/03/2000
|
|
|
|
04/03/2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,216
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.90
|
|
|
|
03/30/2001
|
|
|
|
03/30/2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60.22
|
|
|
|
04/25/2002
|
|
|
|
04/25/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,174
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62.40
|
|
|
|
05/02/2003
|
|
|
|
05/02/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,034
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70.70
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004
|
|
|
|
05/02/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,495
|
|
|
|
72.07
|
|
|
|
05/09/2005
|
|
|
|
05/08/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,883
|
|
|
|
80.88
|
|
|
|
05/01/2006
|
|
|
|
04/29/2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,488
|
|
|
|
70.90
|
|
|
|
05/09/2007
|
|
|
|
05/08/2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,565
|
|
|
|
6,262
|
|
|
|
71.58
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008
|
|
|
|
05/07/2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,092
|
|
|
|
55.83
|
|
|
|
05/06/2009
|
|
|
|
05/06/2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,912
|
|
|
|
2,117,644
|
|
|
|
26,750
|
|
|
|
1,534,648
|
|
34
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Stock options granted on May 9, 2005, May 1, 2006 and
May 9, 2007 vest on May 10, 2010, May 2, 2011 and
May 10, 2012. For these option grants, the options vest
five years from the date of grant. For stock options granted on
May 7, 2008 and May 6, 2009, the options generally
vest over a five-year period with 20% of the option vesting at
each anniversary date of the grant. All options expire ten years
from the date of grant. |
|
(2) |
|
Unvested stock awards in this column include RSUs and RPUs. The
RSUs granted as part of MIP generally vest over a five-year
period with approximately 20% of the award vesting at each
anniversary date of the grant. RSUs were granted as part of MIP
in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 and will vest on
October 15th of each year during the five-year vesting
period. The RSUs granted as part of LTIP will vest, if earned,
on January 31 of the year following the end of the three-year
performance cycle for each grant. For the RPUs granted under the
LTI in 2005, 2006 and 2007, they generally vest five years after
the date of grant, and will vest on May 10, 2010,
May 2, 2011 and May 10, 2012, respectively. For RPUs
granted in 2008 and 2009, vesting is generally over a five-year
period with 20% of the award vesting at each anniversary date of
the grant. Values were rounded to the closest unit. |
|
(3) |
|
Market value based on NYSE closing price on December 31,
2009 of $57.37. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents the potential RSUs to be earned under the 2007 LTIP
award (for the 2009 performance period), the 2008 LTIP award
(for the 2009 and 2010 performance periods), the 2009 LTIP award
(for the 2009, 2010 and 2011 performance periods) and the
related earnings measurement tranches. For the 2009 performance
period, the percent of the LTIP earned was 55%. For the 2010 and
2011 performance periods, we have assumed target performance
goals will be met, with the exception of the 2010 earnings
measurement tranche. |
Option
Exercises and Stock Vested in 2009
The following table sets forth the number and corresponding
value realized during 2009 with respect to options that were
exercised and restricted stock units and restricted performance
units that vested for each Named Executive Officer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
Acquired
|
|
|
Realized
|
|
|
Acquired
|
|
|
Realized
|
|
|
|
on Exercise
|
|
|
on Exercise
|
|
|
on Vesting
|
|
|
on Vesting
|
|
Name
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
|
(#)(3)
|
|
|
($)(4)
|
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
6,569(1
|
)
|
|
|
50,056
|
|
|
|
22,024
|
|
|
|
1,061,240
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
2,716
|
|
|
|
24,987
|
|
|
|
14,862
|
|
|
|
701,357
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
2,519
|
|
|
|
23,175
|
|
|
|
13,237
|
|
|
|
623,512
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
2,497
|
|
|
|
22,972
|
|
|
|
9,125
|
|
|
|
424,208
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
2,738
|
|
|
|
25,190
|
|
|
|
14,530
|
|
|
|
684,829
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents the exercise of stock appreciation rights granted
under the 1999 Plan. |
|
(2) |
|
This number is calculated by subtracting the exercise price from
the price of our class B common stock on the date of
exercise and multiplying the number of stock appreciation rights
or shares underlying the options, as applicable. The amounts in
this column may not represent amounts that were actually
realized. |
|
(3) |
|
The value in this column represents approximately 20% of the
2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 MIP award granted in the form of RSUs
that vested on October 15, 2009, the 2004 LTI award granted
in the form of RPUs that vested on May 3, 2009 and the 2006
LTIP award granted in the form of RSUs that vested on
January 31, 2009. Vested RSU and RPU awards are distributed
to participants in an equivalent number of shares of
class A common stock. |
|
(4) |
|
The value shown is based on the NYSE closing prices on
January 30, 2009, the date the RSUs granted under the LTIP
vested, of $42.49 per share; May 3, 2009, the date the RPUs
granted under the LTI vested, of $51.66 per share; May 7,
2009, the date that 20% of the RPUs granted under the 2008 LTI
vested, of $55.83 per share, and October 15, 2009, the date
the RSUs granted under MIP vested, of $57.71 per share. |
35
2009
Pension Benefits
The following table quantifies the pension benefits expected to
be paid to each of the Named Executive Officers from the UPS
Retirement Plan, the Restoration Plan Rollover Option
(RPRO) and the UPS Excess Coordinating Plan. The
terms of each are described below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Present
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Value of
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
|
|
Years
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
During Last
|
|
|
|
|
Credited
|
|
Benefit
|
|
Fiscal Year
|
Name
|
|
Plan Name
|
|
Service(#)(1)
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
($)
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
UPS Retirement Plan
|
|
|
25.0
|
|
|
|
804,934
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restoration Plan Rollover Option
|
|
|
24.0
|
|
|
|
1,370,241
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UPS Excess Coordinating Plan
|
|
|
25.0
|
|
|
|
1,686,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,861,579
|
|
|
|
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
UPS Retirement Plan
|
|
|
35.8
|
|
|
|
886,369
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UPS Excess Coordinating Plan
|
|
|
35.8
|
|
|
|
1,590,873
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,477,242
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
UPS Retirement Plan
|
|
|
32.9
|
|
|
|
890,895
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UPS Excess Coordinating Plan
|
|
|
32.9
|
|
|
|
1,273,032
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,163,927
|
|
|
|
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
UPS Retirement Plan
|
|
|
31.0
|
|
|
|
683,670
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UPS Excess Coordinating Plan
|
|
|
31.0
|
|
|
|
774,897
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,458,567
|
|
|
|
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
UPS Retirement Plan
|
|
|
33.2
|
|
|
|
693,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UPS Excess Coordinating Plan
|
|
|
33.2
|
|
|
|
1,120,953
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,814,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This column represents years of service as of December 31,
2009 for all plans except for the RPRO. Service used for the
RPRO was frozen for Mr. Davis at age 57. |
|
(2) |
|
This column represents the total discounted value of the monthly
lifetime benefit earned at December 31, 2009 assuming the
executive continues in service and retires at age 60. The
present value is not the monthly or annual lifetime benefit that
would be paid to the executive. The present values are based on
discount rates of 6.57%, 5.72% and 6.52% for the UPS Retirement
Plan, Restoration Plan Rollover Option and UPS Excess
Coordinating Plan, respectively, at December 31, 2009. The
present values assume no pre-retirement mortality and utilize
the RP 2000 mortality tables projected to 2012 using scale AA
with no collar adjustments. |
The UPS Retirement Plan is a qualified defined benefit plan
provided to executives and other UPS employees who generally are
not covered by a collective bargaining agreement and who are not
participating in another UPS-sponsored plan at a subsidiary
company. UPS also sponsors a non-qualified defined benefit plan,
the UPS Excess Coordinating Benefit Plan, for non-union
employees whose pay and benefits in the qualified plan are
limited by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Compensation Committee believes that the retirement,
deferred compensation
and/or
savings plans offered at UPS are important for the long-term
economic well-being of our employees, and are important elements
of attracting and retaining the key talent necessary to compete.
The UPS Retirement Plan and UPS Excess Coordinating Plan provide
monthly lifetime benefits to participants and their eligible
beneficiaries based on final average compensation at retirement,
service with UPS and age at retirement. Participants may choose
to receive a reduced benefit payable in an optional form of
annuity that is equivalent to the single lifetime benefit.
The plans provide monthly benefits based on the greatest result
from up to four benefit formulas. Participants receive the
largest benefit from the applicable benefit formulas. For all
executives, the formula that results in the largest benefit is
called the grandfathered integrated formula. This
formula provides retirement income equal to
36
58.33% of final average compensation offset by a portion of the
Social Security benefit. A participant with less than
35 years of benefit service receives a proportionately
lesser amount.
Participants earn benefit service for the time they work as an
eligible UPS employee. For purposes of the formulas,
compensation includes salary and the cash and RSU portions of
the MIP award. The average final compensation for each
participant in the plans is the average covered compensation of
the participant during the five highest consecutive years out of
the last ten full calendar years of service.
Benefits payable under the UPS Retirement Plan are subject to
the maximum compensation limits and the annual benefit limits
for a tax-qualified defined benefit plan as prescribed and
adjusted from time to time by the Internal Revenue Service.
Eligible amounts exceeding these limits will be paid from the
UPS Excess Coordinating Benefit Plan. Under this plan,
participants receive the benefit in the form of a life annuity.
From 1999 through 2002, certain executives were eligible for the
RPRO, which allowed them to receive their benefit in excess of
the Retirement Plan in a combination of life annuity and cash
lump sum. Under this option, the cash lump sum is based on a
projected benefit under the Excess Coordinating Benefit Plan
using projected pay and service through the date the executive
would have reached age 57.
The plans permit participants with 25 or more years of benefit
service to retire as early as age 55 with only a limited
reduction in the amount of their monthly benefits. Each of the
Named Executive Officers would be eligible to retire at
age 60 and receive unreduced benefits from the plans. In
addition, the plans allow participants with ten years or more of
service to retire at age 55 with a larger reduction in the
amount of their benefit. As of December 31, 2009,
Messrs. Davis and Kuehn were eligible for early retirement
with reduced benefits. If they had retired on December 31,
2009, their benefits would be reduced by 6.0% and 14.25%,
respectively.
2009
Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation
The following table shows the executive contributions, earnings
and account balances for the Named Executive Officers in the UPS
Deferred Compensation Plan for 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive
|
|
Registrant
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
Contributions in
|
|
Contributions in
|
|
Earnings/(Loss)
|
|
Withdrawals/
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Last FY
|
|
Last FY
|
|
in Last FY
|
|
Distributions
|
|
Last FYE
|
Name
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
1,822
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,982
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
685,454
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
26,657
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
131,138
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,143,203
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61,628
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
764,735
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,990
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
274,055
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
25,036
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120,851
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,360,373
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Certain amounts in this column represent salary or bonus
contributed by the Named Executive Officer to the plan and was
or, if the individual had been a Named Executive Officer, would
have been required to be reported in the summary compensation
tables in prior years as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
($)
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
536,848
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
1,058,142
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
711,254
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
245,157
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
1,274,729
|
|
There are three deferred compensation vehicles in the UPS
Deferred Compensation Plan, and not all of the Named Executive
Officers participate in each feature of the UPS Deferred
Compensation Plan.
2004 and
Before Salary Deferral Feature
|
|
|
|
|
Prior to December 31, 2004, contributions could be deferred
from executive officers monthly salary and the half-month
bonus.
|
37
|
|
|
|
|
Prior to December 31, 2004, non-employee directors could
defer retainer and meeting fees quarterly. Assets from the
discontinued UPS Retirement Plan for Outside Directors were
transferred to the 2004 and Before Salary Deferral Feature in
2003.
|
|
|
|
No contributions were permitted after December 31, 2004.
|
2005 and
Beyond Salary Deferral Feature
|
|
|
|
|
Executive officers may defer one to 35% of their monthly salary,
one to 100% of the half-month bonus and one to 100% of the cash
portion of the MIP award. They may also defer excess pre-tax
contributions if the UPS Savings Plan fails the annual average
deferral percentage (ADP) test.
|
|
|
|
Non-employee directors may defer retainer fees quarterly.
|
|
|
|
Elections are made annually for the following calendar year.
|
Stock
Option Deferral Feature
|
|
|
|
|
Assets are invested solely in shares of UPS stock.
|
|
|
|
Non-qualified or Incentive Stock Options which vested prior to
December 31, 2004 were deferrable during the annual
enrollment period for the following calendar year. Participants
deferred receipt of UPS stock that would otherwise be taxable
upon the exercise of the stock option.
|
|
|
|
The shares received upon exercise of these options are deferred
into a rabbi trust. The shares held in this trust are classified
as treasury stock, and the liability to participating employees
is classified as deferred compensation obligations
in the shareowners equity section of the balance sheet.
|
|
|
|
No deferrals of stock options which vest after December 31,
2004 are permitted. However, stock options that vested prior to
December 31, 2004 and were deferred but not yet exercised
will be deferred into the Stock Option Deferral Feature at the
time of exercise, provided no separation from service has
occurred.
|
|
|
|
As a result of the requirements applicable to non-qualified
deferred compensation arrangements under Section 409A of
the Internal Revenue Code and related guidance, deferral of
stock options is no longer offered under the UPS Deferred
Compensation Plan for options that vested after
December 31, 2004.
|
Withdrawals
and Distributions under the UPS Deferred Compensation
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
For the 2004 and Before Salary Deferral Feature, participants
may elect to receive the funds in a lump sum or up to a
10 year installment (of 120 monthly payments), subject
to restrictions if the balance is less than $20,000. For the
Stock Option Deferral Feature, participants may elect to receive
shares in a lump sum or up to 10 annual installments, subject to
restrictions if the balance is less than $20,000.
|
|
|
|
For the 2005 and Beyond Salary Deferral Feature, participants
may elect to receive funds in a lump sum or up to a 10 year
installment (120 monthly payments), subject to restrictions
if the balance, plus the total balance in any other account
which must be aggregated with the 2005 and Beyond Salary
Deferral Account under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue
Code, is less than the Internal Revenue Code Section 402(g)
annual limit in effect for qualified 401(k) plans on the date of
the participant becomes eligible for a distribution.
|
|
|
|
The distribution election is irrevocable under the 2005 and
Beyond Salary Deferral Feature, but may be changed under the
2004 and Before Salary Deferral Feature and the Stock Option
Deferral Feature.
|
|
|
|
Hardship distributions are permitted under all three features of
the UPS Deferred Compensation Plan.
|
|
|
|
No withdrawals are permitted under the 2005 and Beyond Salary
Deferral Feature, but withdrawals are permitted for 100% of the
account under the 2004 and Before Salary Deferral Feature and
Stock Option Deferral Feature with forfeitures of 10% of the
total account balances.
|
We do not make any company contributions to any of the three
features of the UPS Deferred Compensation Plan. The aggregate
balances shown in the table above represent amounts that the
Named Executive Officers have
38
earned but elected to defer, plus earnings (or less losses).
There are no above-market or preferential earnings in the UPS
Deferred Compensation Plan. The investment options mirror those
in the UPS Savings Plan, our 401(k) plan. Dividends earned on
shares of our stock in the UPS Deferred Compensation Plan are
earned at the same rate as all other class A and
class B shares of common stock. Dividends are added to the
participants deferred compensation balance. Deferral
elections made under the UPS Deferred Compensation Plan are
irrevocable.
Potential
Payments on Termination or Change In Control
We have not entered into any employment agreements with our
Named Executive Officers that provide for severance or change in
control benefits, nor do we have separate severance or change in
control agreements or arrangements with our Named Executive
Officers. As described earlier, our Compensation Committee
believes that the UPS promotion from within policy has created a
culture where long tenure for executives is the norm. As a
result, the Named Executive Officers serve without employment
contracts, as do most of our other
U.S.-based
non-union employees.
The equity awards that we have granted to our Named Executive
Officers after May 7, 2009 are made pursuant to the 2009
Plan. Awards under the 2009 Plan generally can be granted to any
of our employees, employees of our subsidiaries and affiliates,
directors and certain consultants. The 2009 Plan and the related
award certificates contain provisions that affect outstanding
awards to all plan participants, including the Named Executive
Officers, under certain circumstances, including a change in
control (as defined below) of the Company and a
participants retirement, death or disability. Pursuant to
the terms of the 2009 Plan and the related award certificates,
upon a participants retirement, death or disability:
|
|
|
|
|
All outstanding options become immediately exercisable;
|
|
|
|
Any restriction periods and restrictions imposed on shares of
restricted stock, RSUs or RPUs which are not performance-based
lapse; and
|
|
|
|
Target payout opportunities attainable under all outstanding
awards of performance-based restricted stock, RSUs and RPUs are
deemed to have been fully earned for the applicable performance
periods, and payment of the awards (in cash or stock, as
applicable) is paid to the participant based upon an assumed
achievement of all relevant targeted performance goals and the
length of time within the applicable performance period which
has elapsed.
|
In the event of a change in control, if the successor company
continues, assumes or substitutes other grants for outstanding
awards and within two years following the change in control, the
participant is terminated by the successor without cause or
resigns for good reason, then:
|
|
|
|
|
Options and SARs will become immediately exercisable as of the
termination or resignation;
|
|
|
|
Restrictions imposed on restricted stock or RSUs that are not
performance-based will lapse; and
|
|
|
|
Performance-based awards will vest with respect to each
performance measurement tranche completed during the performance
period prior to the termination or resignation (or, if the
performance period is not divided into separate performance
measurement tranches, proportionately based on the portion of
the performance period completed prior to such resignation or
termination).
|
In the event of a change in control, if the successor company
does not continue, assume or substitute other grants for
outstanding awards, or in the case of a dissolution or
liquidation of UPS, then options and SARs will be fully vested
and exercisable and the Compensation Committee will either give
a participant a reasonable opportunity to exercise the option
and SAR before the transaction resulting in the change in
control or pay the participant the difference between the
exercise price for the option or SAR and the consideration
provided to other similarly situated shareholders. Other
outstanding awards will vest and be paid generally as described
in the bullet points above (except, where applicable, timing of
payment generally will be tied to such change in control, rather
than termination or resignation).
In addition, the 1999 Plan provides for tax
gross-up
payments to plan participants upon a change in control if the
plan participants would be subject to certain excise taxes
imposed as a result of the amounts paid to the
39
participant pursuant to the treatment of the awards as a result
of the event. The tax
gross-ups
are payable as an additional lump sum cash payment. The 2009
Plan does not provide for the payment of tax
gross-ups.
The following table shows the potential payments to the Named
Executive Officers upon a termination of employment under
various circumstances. In preparing the table, we assumed the
termination occurred on December 31, 2009. The closing
price per share of our common stock on December 31, 2009
was $57.37. With respect to the tax
gross-ups,
we assumed an excise tax rate under 280G of the Internal Revenue
Code of 20%, a 35% federal income tax rate, a 1.45% Medicare tax
rate and a 6% state income tax rate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accelerated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
Estimated Tax
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
Awards
|
|
Benefits
|
|
Gross-Up
|
|
Total
|
Name
|
|
Amount
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
($)(3)
|
|
($)
|
|
D. Scott Davis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination (Voluntary or Involuntary)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Control
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,175,450
|
|
|
|
3,502,841
|
|
|
|
2,480,718
|
|
|
|
13,159,009
|
|
Early Retirement (Age 55)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,175,450
|
|
|
|
3,502,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,678,291
|
|
Normal Retirement (Age 65)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,175,450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,175,450
|
|
Death
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,175,450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,175,450
|
|
Disability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,175,450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,175,450
|
|
David P. Abney
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination (Voluntary or Involuntary)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Control
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
465,327
|
|
|
|
3,840,215
|
|
Early Retirement (Age 55)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
Normal Retirement (Age 65)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
Death
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
Disability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,374,888
|
|
Kurt P. Kuehn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination (Voluntary or Involuntary)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Control
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500,675
|
|
|
|
1,766,371
|
|
|
|
859,325
|
|
|
|
5,126,371
|
|
Early Retirement (Age 55)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500,675
|
|
|
|
1,766,371
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,267,046
|
|
Normal Retirement (Age 65)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500,675
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500,675
|
|
Death
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500,675
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500,675
|
|
Disability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500,675
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500,675
|
|
Myron A. Gray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination (Voluntary or Involuntary)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Control
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
Early Retirement (Age 55)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
Normal Retirement (Age 65)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
Death
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
Disability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,765,960
|
|
John J. McDevitt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination (Voluntary or Involuntary)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Control
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
187,978
|
|
|
|
2,776,663
|
|
Early Retirement (Age 55)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
Normal Retirement (Age 65)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
Death
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
Disability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,588,685
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents the value of accelerated vesting of stock options,
RSUs, RPUs and RSUs in accordance with the terms of the 1999
Plan, the 2009 Plan and the applicable award certificates. |
|
(2) |
|
For Scott Davis and Kurt Kuehn, represents the present value of
benefit amounts accrued under the UPS Excess Coordinating Plan,
life insurance elected under the Retirement Plan Restoration
Option (Davis only) and post-retirement medical benefits as a
result of early retirement as of December 31, 2009. For
information about the UPS Excess Coordinating Plan and the
Retirement Plan Restoration Option, see the 2009 Pension
Benefits table and related narrative. The same assumptions were
used to calculate the present value of the amounts in this table
that were used for the 2009 Pension Benefits table. |
|
(3) |
|
In accordance with the terms of the 1999 Plan, we are required
to provide tax
gross-ups in
connection with the accelerated vesting of the equity awards
granted under the plan in the event of a change in control. Tax
gross-ups
are not provided for awards made under the 2009 Plan. |
40
Other
Amounts
The tables above do not include payments and benefits to the
extent they are generally provided on a non-discriminatory basis
to salaried employees not subject to a collective bargaining
agreement upon termination of employment. These include:
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance upon death in the amount of 12 times the
employees monthly base salary, with a December 31,
2009 maximum benefit payable of $1 million;
|
|
|
|
A death benefit in the amount of three times the employees
monthly salary;
|
|
|
|
Disability benefits; and
|
|
|
|
Accrued vacation amounts.
|
The tables above also do not include amounts to which the
executives would be entitled to receive that are already
described in the compensation tables that appear earlier in this
proxy statement, including:
|
|
|
|
|
The value of equity awards that are already vested;
|
|
|
|
Amounts payable under defined benefit pension plans; and
|
|
|
|
Amounts previously deferred into the deferred compensation plan.
|
Definition
of a Change in Control
A change in control is deemed to have occurred as a result of
any one of the following events:
|
|
|
|
|
The consummation of a reorganization, merger, share exchange or
consolidation, in each case, where persons who were the
shareowners immediately prior to such event do not, immediately
thereafter, own more than 50% of the combined voting power of
the reorganized, merged, surviving or consolidated
companys then outstanding securities entitled to vote
generally in the election of directors; or
|
|
|
|
The board members as of May 7, 2009 or board members whose
elections or nominations are approved by a majority of such
board members cease for any reason to constitute at least an 80%
majority of the board of directors.
|
41
COMPENSATION
OF DIRECTORS
We provide both cash and equity awards to our non-employee
directors. Our employee directors do not receive any
compensation for service as a director. Directors are reimbursed
for their expenses related to board membership.
In 2009, our non-employee directors received an annual cash
retainer of $90,000. The chairs of the Compensation and
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees received an
additional annual cash retainer of $15,000, and the chair of the
Audit Committee received an additional annual cash retainer of
$20,000. Cash retainers are paid on a quarterly basis. Under the
UPS Deferred Compensation Plan, non-employee directors may defer
retainer fees quarterly, but we do not make any company
contributions under this plan. There are no preferential or
above-market earnings in the UPS Deferred Compensation Plan.
In addition, in 2009 non-employee directors received an annual
restricted stock unit grant that will be settled in shares of
class A common stock in the amount of $130,000 (rounded up
to the nearest whole share). The cash retainers and annual
equity grant are prorated based on the portion of the year that
a director serves on the board. There is no additional equity
award for new non-employee directors who join the board.
2009 Director
Compensation
The following table sets forth the compensation paid to our
non-employee directors in 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fees Earned
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
or Paid in
|
|
Stock
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
Awards
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Total
|
Name
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
($)(3)
|
|
($)
|
|
F. Duane Ackerman
|
|
|
105,000
|
|
|
|
130,028
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
238,028
|
|
Michael J. Burns
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
130,028
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
223,028
|
|
Stuart E. Eizenstat
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
130,028
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
223,028
|
|
Michael L. Eskew
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
130,028
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
223,028
|
|
William R. Johnson(4)
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
162,541
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
252,541
|
|
Ann M. Livermore
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
130,028
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
220,028
|
|
Rudy Markham
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
130,028
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
220,028
|
|
John W. Thompson
|
|
|
105,000
|
|
|
|
130,028
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
235,028
|
|
Carol B. Tomé
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
|
|
130,028
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
243,028
|
|
Ben Verwaayen(5)
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The following directors deferred 2009 cash compensation into the
UPS Deferred Compensation Plan (further described above under
the Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Table):
Tomé $110,000; and Verwaayen
$45,000. |
|
(2) |
|
The values for stock awards in this column represent the grant
date fair value of the restricted stock units granted in 2009,
computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. Information
about the assumptions used to value these awards can be found in
Note 10 Stock-Based Compensation in our 2009
Annual Report on
Form 10-K. |
|
|
|
Restricted stock units are fully vested on the date of grant,
and will be paid in shares of class A common stock
following the directors separation from service from UPS.
Dividends earned on each award are reinvested in additional
units at each dividend payable date. |
|
(3) |
|
This column represents charitable contribution matches for 2009. |
|
(4) |
|
In addition to the annual restricted stock unit award received
in May 2009, Bill Johnson also received a prorated restricted
stock unit award in the amount of $32,513 to reflect his first
quarter 2009 board service. |
|
(5) |
|
Ben Verwaayen served as a director until May 7, 2009, the
date of the 2009 annual meeting. |
42
The aggregate number of stock awards and option awards made
under our director compensation programs and outstanding as of
December 31, 2009 for each of our non-employee directors
are set forth below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Options
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
Restricted
|
|
Phantom
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
Stock
|
|
Stock
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
Units
|
|
Units
|
|
Units
|
|
Options
|
Name
|
|
Stock (#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
F. Duane Ackerman
|
|
|
1,981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Burns
|
|
|
3,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stuart E. Eizenstat
|
|
|
3,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael L. Eskew
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William R. Johnson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,172
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ann M. Livermore
|
|
|
3,263
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
1,926
|
|
|
|
5,609
|
|
Rudy Markham
|
|
|
1,998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John W. Thompson
|
|
|
3,263
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
1,926
|
|
|
|
5,609
|
|
Carol B. Tomé
|
|
|
3,263
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387
|
|
|
|
911
|
|
|
|
2,864
|
|
Ben Verwaayen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REPORT OF
THE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
The Compensation Committee is responsible for, among other
things, reviewing and approving compensation for the executive
officers, establishing the performance goals on which the
compensation plans are based and setting the overall
compensation principles that guide the committees
decision-making. The Compensation Committee has reviewed the
Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A) and
discussed it with management. Based on the review and the
discussions with management, the Compensation Committee
recommended to the board of directors that the CD&A be
included in the 2010 proxy statement and incorporated by
reference in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Compensation Committee
John W. Thompson, Chair
F. Duane Ackerman
Stuart E. Eizenstat
COMPENSATION
COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION
Duane Ackerman, Stuart Eizenstat and John Thompson were members
of the Compensation Committee of our board of directors during
2009. None of these directors are employees or former employees
of UPS. None of the members of the Compensation Committee has
any direct or indirect material interest in or relationship with
us outside of his position as a non-employee director. None of
our executive officers serves as a member of a board of
directors or compensation committee of any entity that has one
or more executive officers who serves on our board of directors
or Compensation Committee.
RELATED
PERSON TRANSACTIONS
In accordance with our Audit Committee charter, our Audit
Committee is responsible for overseeing our written Code of
Business Conduct, which includes policies relating to conflicts
of interest. The Code requires that all of our employees and
directors avoid conflicts of interest, defined as situations
where the persons private interests conflict, or even
appear to conflict, with the interests of UPS as a whole.
43
At least annually, each director and executive officer completes
a detailed questionnaire that inquires about any business
relationship that may give rise to a conflict of interest and
all transactions in which UPS is involved and in which the
executive officer, a director or a related person has a direct
or indirect material interest. We also conduct a review, at
least annually, of our financial systems to determine whether a
director, or a company employing a director, engaged in
transactions with us during the fiscal year.
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, which
includes only independent directors, conducts an annual review
of the information from the questionnaire and financial systems
review, evaluates related party transactions (if any) involving
the directors and their related persons and makes
recommendations to the board of directors regarding the
independence of each board member.
If a transaction arises during the year that may require
disclosure as a related person transaction, information about
the transaction would be provided to the Audit Committee and the
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, as applicable,
for review, approval or ratification of the transaction.
We have not entered into any related person transactions that
meet the requirements for disclosure in this proxy statement.
We have purchase, finance and other transactions and
relationships in the normal course of business with companies
with which our directors are associated, but which are not
material. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has
reviewed these transactions and relationships and believes they
were entered into on terms that are both reasonable and
competitive. Additional transactions and relationships of this
nature may be expected to take place in the ordinary course of
business in the future.
REPORT OF
THE AUDIT COMMITTEE
The Audit Committee of our board of directors is responsible
for, among other things, reviewing with Deloitte &
Touche LLP, our independent registered public accountants, the
scope and results of their audit engagement. In connection with
the 2009 audit, the Audit Committee has:
|
|
|
|
|
reviewed and discussed with management UPSs audited
financial statements, including managements report on
internal controls over financial reporting, included in our
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009,
|
|
|
|
discussed with Deloitte & Touche the matters required
by Statement of Auditing Standards No. 61, as amended
(AICPA, Professional Standards, Vol. 1, AU § 380), as
adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in
Rule 3200T, and
|
|
|
|
received from and discussed with Deloitte & Touche the
communications from Deloitte & Touche required by the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding their
independence.
|
Based on the review and the discussions described in the
preceding bullet points, the Audit Committee recommended to the
board of directors that the audited financial statements and
managements report on internal controls over financial
reporting be included in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009 for filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Audit Committee has adopted a charter and a process for
pre-approving services to be provided by Deloitte &
Touche.
The members of the Audit Committee have been determined to be
independent in accordance with the requirements of
Section 303.01 (B)(2)(a) and (3) of the New York Stock
Exchange listing standards and the requirements of
Section 10A(m)(3) of the Exchange Act.
The Audit Committee
Carol B. Tomé, Chair
Michael J. Burns
William R. Johnson
Rudy Markham
44
RATIFICATION
OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
(Proposal No. 2)
Our Audit Committee has appointed Deloitte & Touche
LLP, independent registered public accountants, to audit our
consolidated financial statements for the year ending
December 31, 2010 and to prepare a report on this audit,
subject to ratification by our shareowners. This proposal asks
you to ratify the selection of Deloitte & Touche, LLP
as your independent registered public accounting firm. Although
we are not required to obtain such ratification from our
shareowners, the board of directors believes it is good practice
to do so. If the appointment of Deloitte & Touche is
not ratified by you, the Audit Committee may reconsider the
appointment. A representative of Deloitte & Touche
will be present at the annual meeting of shareowners, will have
the opportunity to make a statement and will be available to
respond to appropriate questions by shareowners.
The board
of directors recommends that shareowners vote FOR the
ratification
of the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as our
independent registered public accountants.
Principal
Accounting Firm Fees
Aggregate fees billed to us for the fiscal years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 by our independent registered
public accountants, Deloitte & Touche LLP, the member
firms of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, and their respective
affiliates were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Audit Fees(1)
|
|
$
|
12,686,000
|
|
|
$
|
13,819,000
|
|
Audit-Related Fees(2)
|
|
|
530,000
|
|
|
|
460,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Audit and Audit-Related Fees
|
|
|
13,216,000
|
|
|
|
14,279,000
|
|
Tax Fees(3)
|
|
|
1,554,000
|
|
|
|
1,274,000
|
|
All Other Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fees
|
|
$
|
14,770,000
|
|
|
$
|
15,553,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes fees for the audit of our annual financial statements,
Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404 attestation procedures,
statutory audits of foreign subsidiary financial statements and
services associated with securities filings. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes fees for employee benefit plan audits and accounting
consultations. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes fees for tax compliance work and tax planning and
advice services. |
The Audit Committee has considered whether the provision of
audit-related and other non-audit services by
Deloitte & Touche is compatible with maintaining
Deloitte & Touches independence.
Our Audit Committee has established a policy requiring the
pre-approval of all audit and non-audit services provided to us
by Deloitte & Touche. The policy provides for
pre-approval of audit, audit-related and tax services
specifically described by the Audit Committee. The Audit
Committee has delegated to its chair authority to pre-approve
permitted services between the Audit Committees regularly
scheduled meetings, and the chair must report any pre-approval
decisions to the Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting
for review by the Audit Committee. The policy prohibits the
Audit Committee from delegating to management the Audit
Committees responsibility to pre-approve permitted
services of our independent registered public accountants.
45
PROPOSAL TO
APPROVE REMOVING THE VOTING STANDARD FROM THE
CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION SO THAT THE BOARD MAY PROVIDE
FOR
MAJORITY VOTING IN UNCONTESTED DIRECTOR ELECTIONS
(Proposal No. 3)
The board of directors recommends that the shareowners approve
an amendment to UPSs Restated Certificate of
Incorporation, as amended (the Certificate of
Incorporation) to enable the board to amend the UPS
Amended and Restated Bylaws (the Bylaws) to adopt
majority voting in uncontested director elections.
This amendment consists of deleting the final sentence in
paragraph (d) of Article Fourth of the Certificate of
Incorporation. The text of the revised Article Fourth,
marked with the proposed deletion indicated by strike-out, is
attached to this proxy statement as Annex II. The
description below of the proposed amendment to our Certificate
of Incorporation is only a summary of the material terms of this
amendment and is qualified by reference to the actual text as
set forth in Annex II. If approved, this amendment will
become effective upon the filing of a certificate of amendment
with the Delaware Secretary of State (which is expected to occur
promptly following the Annual Meeting).
Currently, the final sentence in paragraph (d) of
Article Fourth of the Certificate of Incorporation sets
forth the voting standard applicable to the election of
directors and to other matters upon which shareowners may vote,
to the extent not otherwise addressed in the Certificate of
Incorporation or under Delaware law. The Certificate of
Incorporation requires that directors be elected by a plurality
vote. Under a plurality voting standard, the director nominee
who receives the highest number of affirmative votes cast is
elected, whether or not such for votes constitute a
majority of all votes (including those withheld). Under a
majority voting standard, however, a director nominee is only
elected if the number of votes cast for the
nominees election is greater than the number of votes cast
against that director nominee. Abstentions are not
considered votes cast for or against the
nominee under a majority voting standard.
The board has concluded that the adoption of a majority voting
standard in uncontested director elections will give shareowners
a greater voice in determining the composition of the board by
giving effect to shareowner votes against a nominee
for director, and by requiring more shareowner votes for a
nominee to obtain or retain a seat on the board. The adoption of
this standard in uncontested elections is intended to reinforce
the boards accountability to shareowners. Moreover, the
board recognizes that many public companies recently have
approved amendments to their governing documents requiring a
majority voting standard in uncontested director elections.
The board believes, however, that the plurality voting standard
should continue to apply in contested elections. If a majority
voting standard is used in a contested election, fewer
candidates or more candidates could be elected to the board than
the number of board seats. Because the proposed majority voting
standard only compares the number of for votes with
the number of against votes for each director
nominee without regard to voting for other candidates, it is not
effective in ensuring that all board seats are filled when there
are more candidates than available board seats. Accordingly, the
board intends to retain plurality voting in a contested election
to avoid such results.
If shareowners approve this Proposal No. 3, the board
of directors intends to amend Section 9 of Article II
of the Bylaws to provide a majority voting standard in
uncontested director elections. Thus, upon effectiveness of this
amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation, the board of
directors will amend Section 9 of Article II of the
Bylaws to change the standard for the election of directors in
uncontested elections from a plurality voting standard to a
majority voting standard. However, as noted above, a plurality
voting standard would continue to apply in the event of a
contested election.
Upon effectiveness of this amendment to the Certificate of
Incorporation, the board of directors also will adopt an
amendment to the UPS Corporate Governance Guidelines to add a
director resignation policy consistent with the majority vote
standard. This policy will provide that an incumbent director
who does not receive the requisite affirmative majority of the
votes cast for his or her re-election shall immediately tender
his or her resignation to the board of directors. The board then
will decide, through a process administered by the Nominating
and Corporate Governance Committee whether to accept the
resignation. In making its decision, the board of directors may
consider any factors or information that it considers
appropriate or relevant. The board of directors will decide
46
whether to accept or reject the resignation offer or to take
other action within 90 days following certification of the
election results and publicly disclose its decision.
The amendment also would remove from the Certificate of
Incorporation the voting standard for all matters other than the
election of directors, to the extent not otherwise addressed in
the Certificate of Incorporation or under Delaware law. The
Certificate of Incorporation requires that such matters be
approved by a majority of the votes that could be cast at the
meeting upon a given question (that is, by a majority of shares
present at the meeting). Most Delaware corporations include the
voting standard for other matters in their bylaws, not their
certificate of incorporation, and this amendment would likewise
remove the voting standard for such matters from the Certificate
of Incorporation. As a result, if shareowners approve this
Proposal No. 3, the board of directors intends to
amend Section 9 of Article II of the Bylaws to provide
that the voting standard for all matters other than the election
of directors is the vote of a majority of the voting power of
the shares present in person or by proxy at the meeting, unless
otherwise provided by the rules of any stock exchange upon which
the Companys securities are listed or unless otherwise
required by law, the Certificate of Incorporation, or these
Bylaws. This language carries over the standard currently set
forth in the Charter and clarifies its operation, including in
the context of stock exchange requirements.
The board
of directors recommends that shareowners vote FOR removing the
voting
standard from the Certificate of Incorporation so that the board
may provide for
majority voting in uncontested director elections
EQUITY
COMPENSATION PLANS
The following table sets forth information as of
December 31, 2009 concerning shares of our common stock
authorized for issuance under all of our equity compensation
plans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities Remaining
|
|
|
Number of Securities to
|
|
|
|
Available for Future Issuance
|
|
|
be Issued Upon Exercise
|
|
Weighted-Average Exercise
|
|
Under Equity Compensation
|
|
|
of Outstanding Options,
|
|
Price of Outstanding Options,
|
|
Plans (Excluding Securities
|
|
|
Warrants and Rights
|
|
Warrants and Rights
|
|
Reflected in Column (a))
|
Plan category
|
|
(a)
|
|
(b)
|
|
(c)
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders(1)
|
|
|
37,205,710
|
|
|
$
|
31.21
|
|
|
|
70,491,075
|
(2)
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
37,205,710
|
|
|
$
|
31.21
|
|
|
|
70,491,075
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes the 1999 Plan, the 2009 Plan and the Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, each of which has been approved by our
shareowners. No new awards may be issued under the 1999 Plan.
For the 2009 Plan there is a fungible share pool
approach that is used to account for authorized shares. With
respect to stock options and SARs, the number of shares
available for awards is reduced by one share for each share
covered by such award or to which the award relates. With
respect to awards other than stock options and SARs, the number
of shares available for awards is reduced by 2.76 shares
for each share covered by such award or to which such award
relates. Awards that do not entitle the holder to receive or
purchase shares and awards that are settled in cash are not
counted against the aggregate number of shares available for
awards under the 2009 Plan. |
|
(2) |
|
In addition to grants of options, warrants or rights, includes
up to 65,941,996 shares of common stock or other
stock-based awards that may be issued under the 2009 Plan, and
up to 4,549,079 shares of common stock that may be issued
under the Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Does not include shares
under the 1999 Plan because no new awards may be made under that
plan. |
The material features of these plans are described in the
Compensation Discussion and Analysis.
47
SECTION 16(a)
BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCE
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
requires our directors, executive officers and persons who own
beneficially more than 10% of either our class A or
class B common stock to file reports of ownership and
changes in ownership of such stock with the Securities and
Exchange Commission. These persons are required by SEC
regulations to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a)
forms they file with the SEC. To our knowledge, each of our
directors and executive officers complied during 2009 with all
applicable Section 16(a) filing requirements.
SOLICITATION
OF PROXIES
We will pay our costs of soliciting proxies. Directors, officers
and other employees, acting without special compensation, may
solicit proxies by mail, in person or by telephone. We will
reimburse brokers, fiduciaries, custodians and other nominees
for
out-of-pocket
expenses incurred in sending our proxy materials and Notice to,
and obtaining instructions relating to the proxy materials and
Notice from, beneficial owners. In addition, we have retained
BNY Mellon Shareowner Services to assist in the solicitation of
proxies for the 2010 annual meeting at a fee of approximately
$10,000, plus associated costs and expenses.
HOUSEHOLDING
We have adopted a procedure approved by the SEC called
householding under which multiple shareowners who
share the same last name and address and do not participate in
electronic delivery will receive only one copy of the annual
proxy materials or Notice. If you wish to opt out of
householding and continue to receive multiple copies of the
proxy materials or Notice at the same address, you may do so by
notifying us in writing or by telephone at: UPS Investor
Relations, 55 Glenlake Parkway, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30328,
(404) 828-6059.
You also may request additional copies of the proxy materials or
Notice by notifying us in writing or by telephone at the same
address or telephone number.
OTHER
BUSINESS
Our board of directors is not aware of any business to be
conducted at the annual meeting of shareowners other than the
proposals described in this proxy statement. Should any other
matter requiring a vote of the shareowners arise, the persons
named in the accompanying proxy card will vote in accordance
with their best judgment.
Shareowners who, in accordance with
Rule 14a-8
of the Exchange Act, wish to present proposals for inclusion in
the proxy materials to be distributed in connection with the
2011 annual meeting of shareowners must submit their proposals
so that they are received by our Corporate Secretary at 55
Glenlake Parkway, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30328 no later than the
close of business on November 15, 2010. Any proposal also
will need to comply with SEC regulations regarding the inclusion
of shareowner proposals in company-sponsored material.
Shareowners who wish to propose business or nominate persons for
election to the board of directors at the 2011 annual meeting of
shareowners must provide a notice of shareowner business or
nomination in accordance with Section 10.1 of our Bylaws.
In order to be properly brought before the 2011 annual meeting
of shareowners, Section 10.1 of our Bylaws requires that a
notice of a matter the shareowner wishes to present (other than
a matter brought pursuant to
Rule 14a-8),
or the person or persons the shareowner wishes to nominate as a
director, must be received by our Corporate Secretary not less
than 120 days prior to the first anniversary of the date on
which we first mailed the proxy statement for the preceding
years annual shareowner meeting. Therefore, any notice
intended to be given by a shareowner with respect to the 2011
annual meeting of shareowners pursuant to our Bylaws must be
received our Corporate Secretary at 55 Glenlake Parkway, N.E.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30328 no later than November 15, 2010.
However, if the date of our 2011 annual meeting occurs more than
30 days before or 30 days after May 6, 2011, the
anniversary of the 2010 annual meeting, a shareowner notice will
be timely if it is received by our Corporate Secretary by the
later of (a) the close of business on the 120th day
prior to the date of the 2011 annual meeting and (b) the
close of business on the 10th day following the day on
which we first make a public announcement of the date of the
2011 annual meeting. To be in proper form, a shareowners
notice must include the specified information concerning the
proposal or nominee as described in Section 10.1 of our
Bylaws.
A copy of our 2009 annual report on
Form 10-K,
including financial statements, as filed with the SEC, may be
obtained without charge upon written request to: Corporate
Secretary, 55 Glenlake Parkway, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30328. It
is also available on our investor relations website at
www.investors.ups.com.
48
Annex I
Excerpt
from the UPS Corporate Governance Guidelines
Relating to Director Independence Standards
An independent director is a director whom the Board
has determined has no material relationship, other than as a
director of the Company, with the Company or any of its
consolidated subsidiaries, either directly, or as a partner,
shareholder or officer of an organization that has a
relationship with the Company. In addition, when determining
whether a director is independent, the Board applies the
categorical standards set forth below.
Under no circumstances is a director independent if:
1. the director is, or has been within the past three
years, an employee of the Company, or an immediate family member
of the director is, or in the past three years has been, an
executive officer of the Company, other than on an interim basis;
2. (A) the director or an immediate family member is a
current partner of a firm that is the Companys external
auditor; (B) the director is a current employee of such a
firm; (C) the director has an immediate family member who
is a current employee of such a firm and who personally works on
the Companys audit; or (D) the director or an
immediate family member was within the last three years (but is
no longer) a partner or employee of such a firm and personally
worked on the Companys audit within that time.
3. the director, or a member of the directors
immediate family, is or in the past three years has been, an
executive officer of another company where any of the
Companys present executives concurrently served on the
compensation committee;
4. the director, or a member of the directors
immediate family, has, in any twelve-month period within the
past three years, received any direct compensation from the
Company in excess of $120,000, other than compensation for
service on the Board or any of its committees, compensation
received by the directors immediate family member for
service as a non-executive employee of the Company, and pension
or other forms of deferred compensation for prior service with
the Company; or
5. the director is a current employee, or a member of the
directors immediate family is an executive officer, of
another company that makes payments to or receives payments from
the Company, or during any of the last three fiscal years has
made payments to or received payments from the Company, for
property or services in an amount that, in any single fiscal
year, exceeded the greater of $1 million or 2% of the other
companys consolidated gross revenues. For purposes of this
section, a contribution to a tax-exempt entity is not a
payment.
An immediate family member includes a
directors spouse, parents, children, siblings, mother and
father-in-law,
sons and
daughters-in-law,
brothers and
sisters-in-law,
and anyone (other than a domestic employee) who shares the
directors home.
Annex II
PROPOSED
AMENDMENT OF THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION SO
THAT THE BOARD MAY PROVIDE FOR MAJORITY VOTING
IN UNCONTESTED DIRECTOR ELECTIONS
The text below is the portion of the UPS Restated Certificate of
Incorporation, as amended, proposed to be amended by
Proposal No. 3. The proposed deletion is indicated by
strike-out.
Article IV:
(d) All rights to vote and all voting power shall be vested
exclusively in the holders of Common Stock, except as otherwise
expressly provided by the Board of Directors in connection with
the issuance of any shares of Preferred Stock pursuant to
Article Fifth of this Restated Certificate of Incorporation
or as otherwise expressly required by the law of the State of
Delaware. At every meeting of stockholders duly called
and held at which a quorum is present (i) in all matters
other than the election of directors, a majority of the votes
that could be cast at the meeting upon a given question and
(ii) in the case of the election of directors, a plurality
of the votes that could be cast at the meeting upon the
election, by the holders who are present in person or by proxy,
shall be necessary, in addition to any vote or other action that
may be expressly required by the provisions of this Restated
Certificate of Incorporation or by the law of the State of
Delaware, to decide the question or election.
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.
INVESTOR RELATIONS B1F7
55 GLENLAKE PARKWAY, N.E.
ATLANTA, GA 30328
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 on May 5, 2010. Have your
proxy card in hand when you access the web site and
follow the instructions to obtain your records and to
create an electronic voting instruction form.
ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF FUTURE SHAREHOLDER COMMUNICATIONS
If you would like to reduce the costs incurred by United Parcel Service, Inc.
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 shareholder communications
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 on May
5, 2010. 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 United Parcel Service, Inc. c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717.
If you vote by Internet or phone, you do not need to return this card.
|
|
|
|
|
TO VOTE, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS:
|
|
UPSRV1
|
|
KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS |
|
|
|
|
|
DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION ONLY |
THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. |
|
For All
|
|
Withhold All
|
|
For All Except
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
|
|
Election of ten directors nominated by the board of directors to serve until the 2011 annual meeting of shareowners:
|
|
o |
|
|
|
o |
|
|
|
o |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nominees: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01) F. Duane Ackerman |
06) William R. Johnson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
02) Michael J. Burns |
07) Ann M. Livermore |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03) D.Scott Davis |
08) Rudy Markham |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
04) Stuart E. Eizenstat |
09) John W. Thompson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
05) Michael L. Eskew |
10) Carol B. Tomé |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
|
|
|
Against
|
|
Abstain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
Ratification of the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as UPSs independent registered public accountants for the
year ending December 31, 2010. |
|
|
o |
|
|
|
o |
|
|
|
o |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
|
|
Approval of a proposal removing the voting standard from our certificate of incorporation so that the board may provide for majority voting in uncontested director elections. | o |
|
|
|
o |
|
|
|
o |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
|
|
In their discretion upon such other matters as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The board of directors recommends a vote FOR all the nominees for director in Proposal 1, FOR Proposal 2 and FOR Proposal 3. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please indicate if you plan to attend this meeting. |
|
o |
|
|
|
o |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sign
exactly as name appears hereon. For joint accounts, all
co-owners should sign.
Executors, administrators, custodians, trustees, etc. should so indicate when signing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX] |
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature (Joint Owners) |
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Meeting of Shareowners
Thursday, May 6, 2010, 8:00 a.m. (Eastern time)
Hotel du Pont
11th and Market Streets
Wilmington, Delaware 19801
Important Notice Regarding Internet Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting:
The Proxy Statement and Annual Report are available at www.proxyvote.com.
UPSRV2
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.
This Proxy is Solicited on Behalf of the Board of Directors
for the Annual Meeting of Shareowners to be held on May 6, 2010
I
hereby appoint D.SCOTT DAVIS and TERI P. McCLURE, or either of them, with power of substitution, as attorneys and proxies to vote all of the shares of stock outstanding in my name as of March 8, 2010 at the annual meeting of shareowners of United Parcel Service, Inc. to be held at the Hotel du Pont, 11th and Market Streets, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, on May 6, 2010, and at any or all adjournments or postponements
thereof, and I hereby instruct and authorize the attorneys to vote as stated on the reverse side. (If you sign and return this proxy but no direction is made, this proxy will be voted FOR the election of all nominees listed in Proposal 1, FOR Proposal 2 and FOR Proposal 3.)
If
I participate in the UPS Stock Fund, I direct the Trustee to vote the stock in the manner stated on the reverse side. (If you sign and return this proxy but no direction is made, the Trustee will vote the shares FOR the election of all nominees listed in Proposal 1, FOR Proposal 2 and FOR Proposal 3. If this card is not returned or is returned unsigned, the Trustee will vote the shares in the same proportion as the
shares for which voting instructions are received from other participants.)
(CONTINUED AND TO BE SIGNED ON THE REVERSE SIDE)