To some people, Wall Street executive compensation has gone back to business as usual now that the financial crisis has waned. But there are subtle signs that shareholders are less willing to support pay packages that they see as unfair.

Investors holding about 79 percent of shares voted to approve Morgan Stanley's compensation for 2010, which seems like a resounding victory until you compare that with the more than 90 percent of the vote at last year's annual meeting, according to Bloomberg. At the Goldman Sachs annual meeting, the pay plan was approved with 73 percent of the vote, compared with 96 percent a year ago.

How meaningful are these vote tallies? Ballot measures are almost always decided in favor of management. True to form, this year, a mere fraction of pay plans have been rejected by shareholders. For whatever reason, the biggest shareholders have never really been willing to use their might to effect change in this area.

So the fact that these victories for management have come via less than resounding support is something that bank executives and boards should note.

However, I don't think any firms are in danger of actually having a pay plan rejected any time soon. Both Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs prevailed on the pay vote, despite the fact that ISS and other proxy advisory firms advised against them.    

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
Wall Street CEO compensation still excessive
Jamie Dimon's 2010 pay is tops on Wall Street
Constance Melrose discusses internal pressures on Wall Street pay