That is thanks mostly to increasing activism by super funds and the "two strike" rule on pay.

Under this rule, brought in three years ago, shareholders vote on whether to "spill" all board positions, where directors have to stand for re-election, if 25 per cent or more votes cast are against the remuneration report at two successive annual meetings.

Super funds voting as blocks and threatening to instigate a first strike on pay reports are having the desired effect on corporate excesses.

Westpac's Gail Kelly became the highest paid retail bank chief executive during the past financial year, with total remuneration of $12.8 million but this was on the back of a record $7.6 billion profit.

A company's remuneration report outlines the salaries and bonuses of senior executives and directors. Fewer companies are recording strikes against their pay reports as a result and pay levels have been steady for years, with more of the pay contingent on performance.

"We are voting against fewer and fewer of the big companies' [remuneration reports]," said Gordon Hagart, the chief executive of the Australian Council of Superannuation Investors (ACSI), which provides voting advice to its superannuation members, of which there are almost 40 funds. The funds mostly vote according to the advice from the council.

"Companies have responded to the two-strikes rule and to the regulatory change to termination pay," he said. Since 2009, companies wanting to pay their chief executive a "golden parachute", or termination payment, of more than 12 months' pay have had to seek shareholder approval.

The council represents about 13 per cent of shares, on average, of the largest 200 companies. "We can speak with a loud, single voice, as opposed to individual funds going and knocking on the doors [of companies]", Mr Hagart said