Reuters - Video

EDITION: U.S. | U.K. | IN

Freeland Fast Forward

The real question for JPMorgan shareholders

Tuesday, May 14, 2013 - 02:30

The issue as the big bank’s shareholders vote on splitting the chairman and CEO roles is less about corporate governance and more about whether they want to keep Jamie Dimon, says Rob Cox, editor of Reuters Breakingviews.

▲ Hide Transcript

View Transcript

Is the risk of Jamie leaving. Worth making it corporate governance. That is going to be the -- question for investors not whether they split the chairman and CEO roles but do they want -- to be charged this bank. This is the most existential moment for Jamie as CEO and chairman of bank. He's actually fighting if you will for his job. Jamie Dimon is still -- of the leading. Figure on Wall Street he is the one that people listen to he's one who when when when something needs to be said on behalf of the industry it will be Jamie he says it. In some ways that may of course be why there is this movement. To separate the roles or in some way to to to put some marine fencing around his his power. There isn't really a great history of people losing horse being stripped of the title and staying on it is not a storied a group of folks so it's. It's Ken Lewis of Bank of America lost the chairmanship. Gone it's Ken Thompson at Wachovia. Not only did he lose his job the banks gone it's part of Wells Fargo. Kerry Killinger was the chairman and CEO Washington Mutual stripped of his role lost the job Washington Mutual actually ironically. Is now part of JPMorgan. This is actually not about -- guy. It's really about corporate governance you know right now there's there's a huge surge. In in the philosophical belief that splitting the chairman CEO roles is better for the company it's come before a lot of banks and right now if you look at it. Sort of Wall Street in the big banks are sort of split right some like Citigroup. Do you have chairman CO rules separated it just so happens that. Jamie has had had had had a rough year it JPMorgan not so much this year but you know last year when you look at 2012 after the -- fail. And I think so it's become completed as a Jamie's story rather than a corporate governance story. I think the corporate governance arguments are good ones. But I do think that people are gonna have to decide whether or not -- -- that that they want to win one for corporate governance but actually lose one in the management of the company. He's playing very well he's playing very core way so in others we don't know what Jamie will do WW JD like what is -- gonna do. If he stripped them of the role.

The real question for JPMorgan shareholders

Tuesday, May 14, 2013 - 02:30

Top News »

The Exchange »

Moving Pictures »