EBA published a benchmarking report on the diversity practices reported by competent authorities to EBA under the Capital Requirements Directive IV (CRD IV). Article 91(11) of CRD IV requires competent authorities to collect information disclosed on the diversity policy, monitor the extent to which these objectives and targets have been achieved in accordance with Article 435(2)(c) of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR), and use the collected information to benchmark diversity practices. The results of the benchmarking exercise reveal that, based on data as of September 2018, the overall representation of women in management bodies in their management function improved slightly while their representation in management bodies in their supervisory function improved significantly. However, the representation of women in management bodies is still relatively low and many institutions do not have a gender diverse board.
More diverse management bodies can help improve decision-making regarding strategies and risk-taking by incorporating a broader range of views, opinions, experiences, perceptions, values and backgrounds. All institutions are required to adopt a policy promoting diversity within their management bodies. The issue of diversity is not limited to gender; it also concerns the age, professional and educational background, and geographical provenance of the members of the management body. Despite the legal requirements, a significant proportion of institutions have still not adopted a diversity policy and not all institutions that have adopted a diversity policy promote gender diversity by setting a target for the under-represented gender. EBA calls on institutions and member states to consider additional measures for promoting a more balanced representation of both genders and on competent authorities to ensure institutions’ compliance with the requirement to adopt diversity policies.
The gender representation in institutions’ management bodies continued to differ significantly between member states. EBA analyzed whether there was, in 2018, a correlation between the profitability of a credit institution and the composition of the executive directors within the management body. Credit institutions that have executive directors of both genders seem to have a higher probability of a return on equity at or above the average of 6.42% than credit institutions with executive directors of only one gender. While 54.70% of the credit institutions with more gender-balanced management bodies in their management function have the return on equity at or above 6.42%, only 40.69% of those with executive directors of just one gender reach that return on equity level. EBA also collected data on remuneration for the management body to establish if there is a gender pay gap and found that the remuneration of male members of the management body is higher than that for female members.
Under the relatively recently revised Capital Requirements Directive or CRD5, EBA is mandated to benchmark gender-neutral remuneration practices and will carry out further work in this area. Therefore, EBA has revised and clarified its benchmarking methodology. Since the last exercise, benchmarks regarding employee representatives have been added and, as part of the 2019 exercise, EBA has performed a first benchmarking of the gender pay gap at the level of the management body.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Benchmarking Exercise, CRR/CRD, Operational Risk, Governance, Remuneration Practices, Disclosures, EBA
Previous ArticleFSI on Policy Options to Address Regulatory Fragmentation in Banking
Next ArticleEBA Launches the 2020 Stress Test for Banks in EU
PRA published the policy statement PS8/21, which contains the final supervisory statement SS3/21 on the PRA approach to supervision of the new and growing non-systemic banks in UK.
EBA published a report that sets out the final draft regulatory technical standards specifying the conditions according to which consolidation shall be carried out in line with Article 18 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
EBA updated the list of other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) in EU.
BCBS published two reports that discuss transmission channels of climate-related risks to the banking system and the measurement methodologies of climate-related financial risks.
UK Authorities (FCA and PRA) welcomed the findings of FSB peer review on the implementation of financial sector remuneration reforms in the UK.
PRA and FCA jointly issued a letter that highlights risks associated with the increasing volumes of deposits that are placed with banks and building societies via deposit aggregators and how to mitigate these risks.
MFSA announced that amendments to the Banking Act, Subsidiary Legislation, and Banking Rules will be issued in the coming months, to transpose the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5) into the national regulatory framework.
EC finalized the Delegated Regulation 2021/598 that supplements the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR or 575/2013) and lays out the regulatory technical standards for assigning risk-weights to specialized lending exposures.
OSFI launched a consultation to explore ways to enhance the OSFI assurance over capital, leverage, and liquidity returns for banks and insurers, given the increasing complexity arising from the evolving regulatory reporting framework due to IFRS 17 (Insurance Contracts) standard and Basel III reforms.
ECB published results of the benchmarking analysis of the recovery plan cycle for 2019.