WPP Shareholders Vote Against Executive's Pay Package LONDON - Martin Sorrell, the chief executive of the advertising giant WPP, on Wednesday became the latest British executive to have his pay package rejected by a majority of shareholders. About 59 percent of WPP shareholders voted against the company's 2011 remuneration report and Mr. Sorrell's £6.8 million, or $10.5 million, pay package. The vote at the company's annual shareholder meeting in Dublin is nonbinding but it is increasing pressure on WPP to rethink its pay practices for senior executives. In a speech ahead of the vote, Philip Lader, the chairman of WPP, spoke at length about the company's earnings growth and its positive outlook for this year, but did not mention Mr. Sorrell's pay. After the vote, he said "our board exercised its best judgment in the context of the company's record year, international competitors, and the executives" performance." He said the company would take the vote on remuneration seriously, would "consult with many share owners, and will then move forward in the best interests of our share owners and our business." The shareholder objection came after 54 percent of shareholders in Aviva, the British insurance company, voted against the company's executive remuneration proposal in May, and 67 percent of investors in Cairn Energy rejected the oil company's compensation plans. Shareholders in WPP were expected to object to the remuneration report after shareholder advisory groups called on WPP investors to vote against the pay packages, calling them excessive. Mr. Sorrell's total pay, including base salary and bonus, rose 60 percent in 2011 from £4.2 million in 2010. WPP's share price fell 15 percent last year. The changes are "commensurate with the importance of Sir Martin Sorrell's contributions to the Group's success" and "the reward levels are properly calibrated to challenging performance conditions," Jeffrey Rosen, the chairman of WPP's compensation committee, wrote in the company's 2011 annual report in April. Mr. Sorrell had hit back at critics of his remuneration in a Financial Times editorial on June 5, headlined "Mea culpa - I act like the owner I am." "I find the controversy over my compensation deeply disturbing," he wrote, adding that "the most wounding comment, made anonymously, is that I deserve a "bloody nose" because I have been behaving as an owner, rather than as a "highly paid manager." Chief executives of the 100 largest publicly traded British companies received a median pay increase of 10 percent last year, to £3.7 million, according to a report published Tuesday by Manifest, a proxy voting agency, and MM&K, which advises on remuneration. That is higher than the British inflation rate of 3 percent and compares with a 5 percent drop for the FTSE 100 index.