UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities


Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No. )

 Filed by the Registrant

 Filed by a Party other than the Registrant

Check the appropriate box:

Preliminary Proxy Statement

CONFIDENTIAL, FOR USE OF THE COMMISSION ONLY (AS PERMITTED BY RULE 14a-6(e)(2))

Definitive Proxy Statement

Definitive Additional Materials

Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12

SYSCO CORPORATION

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

No fee required.

Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

(1)Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

(2)Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:

(3)Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set
(set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

(4)Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

(5)Total fee paid:

Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

(1)Amount Previously Paid:

(2)Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

(3)Filing Party:

(4)Date Filed:




Back to Contents




Back to Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents
INVITATION FROM OUR LEADERSHIP

4

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

5

PROXY SUMMARY

6

PROXY STATEMENT

10

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE MEETING AND VOTING

10

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

15
Stockholder Engagement

1415

Governance Enhancements

15
Board Leadership Structure

15

Board Meetings and Committees

16

Director Independence

1718

Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions

1819

Risk Oversight

1920

Codes of Conduct

21
Compensation Consultants

2021

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MATTERS

2122

Election of Directors at 20122015 Annual Meeting (Item 1)

2122

Board Composition

25

24

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

30
Overview of Non-Employee Director Compensation

2830

Directors Deferred Compensation Plan

30
Directors Stock Plans30
2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan31
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

33
Management Development and Succession Planning

3134

STOCK OWNERSHIP

35
Security Ownership of Officers and Directors

3335

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners

36
Stock Ownership Guidelines36
Stock Trading Restrictions37
SECTION 16(A) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCE

37

35

EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION

3537


Back to Contents

Back to Contents
COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

3638

Executive Summary

3638

Philosophy of Executive Compensation Program

3942

How Executive Pay Is Established

4244

What We Paid and Why – Compensation for NEOs

4446

Compensation of the Executive Chairman

51

Executive Compensation Governance and Other Information

54

52

Forward-Looking Statements

53

REPORT OF THE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

56

54

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

5457

Summary Compensation Table

57
Transaction Incentive Awards

5558

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

59
Employment Arrangements with Messrs. Bené and Shurts

5760

Cash Performance Unit Plan

58

Management Incentive Plan

60
Cash Performance Units

5962

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

6364

Option Exercises and Stock Vested

66

Pension Benefits

66

Fiscal 20122015 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

67
Pension Benefits

69

Quantification of Termination/Change in Control Payments

7172

Compensation Risk Analysis

76

75

ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION (ITEM 2)

77

76

REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE

77

FEES PAID TO INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

78

77

RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP AS INDEPENDENT AUDITORSREGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM (ITEM 3)

79

78

STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS

80
Presenting Business

7880

Nominating Directors for Election

80
Meeting Date Changes80
ANNEX I – NON-GAAP RECONCILIATIONS

7981


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

INVITATION FROM OUR LEADERSHIP

 

Dear Fellow Stockholder,

It is our pleasure to invite you to participate injoin us, our 2012Board of Directors, senior leadership and other associates at Sysco Corporation’s 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be held on Wednesday, November 14, 201218, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. at The Houstonian Hotel located at 111 North Post Oak Lane, Houston, Texas 77024.

Please vote right away

Our stockholder meeting is an opportunity for our senior management and Board of Directors to present Sysco’s performance and strategy, and to respond to your questions. By participating in our stockholder meeting, you play an active role in the future of your company. Please vote right away over the internet, by telephone or by signing and mailing the attached proxy card.

Enhanced stockholder communications

We are committed to ensuring that our proxy statement and associated materials are clear and easy to read. Our 20122015 proxy statement displays our ongoing commitment to clearly explain the matters to be addressed at our Annual Meeting of Stockholders. We encourage you to begin your review of this year’s document with our new proxy summary, which provides highlights of the detailed information included elsewhere in the proxy statement.

If you wish to receive future E-Proxy Notices electronically, which helps to reduce Sysco’s printing costs and aligns with our sustainability principles, please visithttp://enroll.icsdelivery.com/syy for additional information.

Board and Leadership Enhancement

We continuously strive for the bestmost effective Board and Leadership Structure to promote Sysco’s vision to be our customer’s most valued and trusted business partner and to represent the long-term interests of Sysco’s stockholders. In fiscal 2012, we elected Manny Fernandez to the role of Executive Chairman of the Board, and elected Jackie Ward as the Lead Director of the Board. We have active participation by all Directors, including eightten independent directors. We believe that the current structure of our Board, relying on leadership from both independent and non-independent directors, best positions Sysco to benefit from the respective strengths of our CEO Executiveand our independent Chairman and Lead Director.of the Board. You will find detailed information about the qualifications of all of our Directors beginning on page 22.

Thank you for your investmentinterest

We trust that enhanced communication about our annual stockholder meeting will reinforce our dialogue with stockholders, and encourage you to cast your vote right away. Thank you for your continued trust and confidence in Sysco.

Bill DeLaney, President and Chief Executive Officer

Manny Fernandez, Executive

Jackie Ward, Chairman of the Board

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    4


Back to Contents

1390 Enclave Parkway

Houston, Texas 77077-2099

Notice of Annual Meeting Ofof Stockholders

November 14, 201218, 2015

">10:00 a.m.

">The Houstonian Hotel located at 111 North Post Oak Lane, Houston, Texas 77024

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Sysco Corporation, a Delaware corporation, will be held on Wednesday, November 14, 201218, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. at The Houstonian Hotel located at 111 North Post Oak Lane, Houston, Texas 77024, for the following purposes:

1.

To elect as directors the three nominees named in the attached proxy statement to serve until the Annual Meeting of Stockholders in 2013;

2.

To hold an advisory vote to approve the compensation paid to Sysco’s named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement;

3.

To ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as Sysco’s independent accountants for fiscal 2013; and

4.

1.To elect as directors the twelve nominees named in the attached proxy statement to serve until the Annual Meeting of Stockholders in 2016;
2.To hold an advisory vote to approve the compensation paid to Sysco’s named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement;
3.To ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as Sysco’s independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal 2016; and
4.To transact any other business as may properly be brought before the meeting or any adjournment thereof.

Only stockholders of record at the close of business on September 17, 201221, 2015, will be entitled to receive notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting. For instructions on voting, please refer to the notice you received in the mail or, if you requested a hard copy of the proxy statement, on your enclosed proxy card. You may inspect a list of stockholders of record at the company’s headquarters during regular business hours during the 10-day period before the Annual Meeting. You may also inspect this list at the Annual Meeting.

October 4, 20127, 2015

Houston, Texas

By Order of the Board of Directors

Russell T. Libby

Senior Vice President,

General Counsel & Corporate Secretary

By Order of the Board of Directors

Russell T. Libby

Executive Vice President, Administration
and Corporate Secretary

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    5


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

Proxy Summary

This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this proxy statement. This summary does not contain all of the information that you should consider, and you should read the entire proxy statement carefully before voting. Page references (“XX”) are supplied to help you find further information in this proxy statement.

2012

2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders

Date and Time: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 at 10:00 a.m.
Location: The Houstonian Hotel located at 111 North Post Oak Lane, Houston, Texas 77024
Record Date: September 21, 2015

Date and Time: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 at 10:00 a.m.

Location: The Houstonian Hotel located at 111 North Post Oak Lane, Houston, Texas 77024

Record Date: September 17, 2012

Voting mattersMatters and Board Recommendations

Our Board Vote Recommendation

Election of ThreeTwelve Director Nominees (page 21)

22)

FOR each Director Nominee

Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (page 76)

77)

FOR

Ratification of AuditorsIndependent Registered Public Accounting Firm (page 78)

79)

FOR

Business Highlights

(For more detail please see our Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Form 10-K”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Our discussion below of our results includes certain non-GAAP financial measures that we believe provide important perspective with respect to underlying business trends. AnyOther than free cash flow, any non-GAAP financial measuremeasures will be denoted as an adjusted measuremeasures and, excludes expenses from our Business Transformation Project, withdrawalsexcept for free cash flow and measures provided pursuant to benefit plan formulas, will exclude the impact from multiemployer pension plans, restructuringwithdrawal charges, corporate-owned life insurance (COLI) policies,severance charges, integration planning, litigation costs and recognized tax benefits.termination costs in connection with the merger that had been proposed with US Foods, Inc. (“US Foods”), facility closure charges and merger related financing costs. More information on the rationale for the use of these measures can be found in our Form 10-K on pages 27-30 and reconciliations to GAAP numbers can be found in Annex I - Non-GAAP Reconciliations.)

High levels of product costs and an uneven economic recovery contributed to a challenging business environment

The foodservice industry performance in fiscal 2012. Our case volume growth has shown modest improvement in a low growth market environment. However, our earnings declined due to2015 was generally improved. Consumer confidence and the outlook of foodservice operators are at high levels, but have decreased slightly in the summer months of inflation2015. Fuel prices declined during fiscal 2015 and rising operating expenses, drivenare currently at lower levels, as compared to recent years, that may support higher consumer spending in part by our expenses relatedthe future. Spending at restaurants is generally improved, but customer traffic levels are generally unchanged. Overall, the market environment appears to our Business Transformation Project. Sysco’s management team has kept its full attention on servicing our customers and effectively managing expenses, resulting in solid financial performance for fiscal 2012, including the following:

Sales of $42.4 billion, the highest on record for a fiscal year.

Operating income of $1.9 billion.

Net earnings of $1.1 billion.

Basic and diluted earnings per share in fiscal 2012 were $1.91 and $1.90, respectively. Adjusted** diluted earnings per share were $2.13 in fiscal 2012.

We generated $1.4 billion in operating cash flow for fiscal 2012, a 29% increasebe modestly improved as compared to the prior year.

two years; however, uncertainty in industry growth remains for fiscal 2016. Amid these conditions, we provided our customers with excellent service, growing our business with both our locally and corporate managed customers and stabilizing our gross margins by successfully implementing several value-added commercial initiatives. We increasedimproved our expense management performance as the annual dividend by four percent; paid $623 million to our stockholders in dividend payments in 2012.

We successfully purchased companiesyear progressed, achieving greater success managing expenses in the US and Canada with total annual salessecond half of approximately $270 million.the year as compared to the first half.

Financial highlights from fiscal 2015 include the following:

Sales of $48.7 billion.
Operating income of $1.2 billion. Adjusted* operating income of $1.8 billion.
Net earnings of approximately $0.7 billion. Adjusted* net earnings of $1.1 billion.
Diluted earnings per share of $1.15. Adjusted* diluted earnings per share of $1.84.
Cash flow from operations of $1.6 billion and free cash flow* of $1.0 billion.
Increased our annual dividend, paying $695.3 million to our stockholders in dividend payments.

*See “Non-GAAP Reconciliations” for an explanation of these non-GAAP financial measures.

Governance Highlights (page 14)15)

Stockholder Engagement– We recently initiated a more formal engagement process with our stockholders regarding matters of corporate governance, as more fully described below.
Governance Enhancements– Our Board has committed to adopt the right of stockholders to call a special meeting and proxy access rights, as more fully described below.
Board Leadership Structure– Jackie M. Ward is our independent Chairman of the Board. Ms. Ward, a Sysco director since September 2001, was previously the Board’s lead director and chaired the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee. We have active participation by all Directors, including ten independent directors. We believe that the structure of our Board, relying on leadership from both independent and non-independent directors, positions Sysco to benefit from the respective strengths of our CEO and Chairman of the Board.
Director Independence– Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that at least a majority of our directors meet the criteria for independence that the New York Stock Exchange has established for continued listing, as well as the additional criteria set forth in the Guidelines. Additionally, we require that all members of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee be independent and that all members of the Audit Committee and Compensation Committee satisfy the additional requirements of the New York Stock Exchange and applicable rules promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).
Declassified Board– Each of Sysco’s twelve current directors has been nominated by the Board for election as director to serve a one-year term or until his or her successor is elected and qualified.

Board Leadership Structure – In fiscal 2012, we elected Manny Fernandez to the role of Executive Chairman of the Board, and elected Jackie Ward as the Lead Director of the Board. We have active participation by all Directors, including eight independent directors. We believe that the current structure of our Board, relying on leadership from both independent and non-independent directors, best positions Sysco to benefit from the respective strengths of our CEO, Executive Chairman and Lead Director.

Declassification of the Board – As previously planned and approved by stockholders in November 2011, beginning this year, the directors nominated for election at each annual meeting will be elected for a term of one year only.

Director Independence – Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that at least a majority of our directors meet the criteria for independence that the New York Stock Exchange has established for continued listing, as well as the additional criteria set forth in the Guidelines. Additionally, we require that all members of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee be independent and that all members of the Audit Committee satisfy the additional requirements of the New York Stock Exchange and applicable rules promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    6


Back to Contents

Current Members of Our Board of Directors and Board Nominees (page 24)25)

Name

Age

Age

Director since

Experience

Inde-

pendent

Experience

Inde-
pendent
Committee


Memberships(1)

Other Public
Company Boards
John M. Cassaday62November 2004Former President,
CEO and director of Corus
Entertainment Inc.
YesCompensation*
CG&N
Executive

Other Public  Manulife Financial Corporation

Company Boards

2012  Sleep Country Canada Holdings Inc.

Nominee  Spin Master Ltd.

John M. Cassaday

59

November 2004

President and CEO, as well as a director, of Corus Entertainment Inc.

Yes

Compensation*

CG&N

Executive

Manulife Financial Corporation

Corus Entertainment Inc.

Judith B. Craven, M.D.

66

70

July 1996

Served as

Former President of the United
Way of the Texas Gulf Coast

YesCompensation
CG&N
Sustainability*

Yes

CG&N Sustainability*

  Luby’s, Inc.

Belo Corporation

Luby’s

Sun America Funds, Inc.

VALIC

William J. DeLaney

56

59

January 2009

CEO of Sysco

NoExecutive
Finance

No

Finance

Executive

Express Scripts, Inc.

Manny A. Fernandez

Joshua D. Frank

66

November 2006

36

Executive Chairman

August 2015Partner of Sysco

Trian Fund Management
L.P.

No

Finance

Executive*

Yes

Brunswick Corporation

Flowers Foods, Inc.

Compensation
Finance

Larry C. Glasscock

64

67

September 2012

2010

Former Chairman of the Board of
Directors, CEO and President of
WellPoint, Inc.

YesCompensation
CG&N*
Executive
Sustainability

Yes

Compensation

CG&N

Sustainability

Simon Property Group, Inc.

Sprint Nextel Corp.

Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.

Jonathan Golden

75

78

February 1984

Partner of Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

No

Finance

Sustainability

No

Yes

Finance
Sustainability

Joseph A. Hafner, Jr.

67

70

November 2003

Former Chairman, CEO and President of Riviana Foods, Inc.

Audit

Executive

Finance*

Yes

Yes

Audit
Executive
Finance*
Sustainability

Hans-Joachim Koerber

66

69

January 2008

Served as the

Former chairman and CEO of METRO Group (Germany)

YesAudit
Finance

Yes

Audit

Finance

Air Berlin PLC

Esprit Holdings Limited

  Eurocash SA

Nancy S. Newcomb

67

70

February 2006

Served as

Former Senior Corporate Officer, Risk Management, of Citigroup

YesAudit
Finance
Nelson Peltz73August 2015Chief Executive Officer and a Founding Partner of Trian Fund Management L.P.YesCG&N

Yes

Audit  Mondeléz International, Inc.

Finance

  The Madison Square Garden Company

The DIRECTV Group, Inc.

YesWendy’s Company

Richard G. Tilghman

72

75

November 2002

Former Vice Chairman and Director of SunTrust Banks

Yes

Audit*

Executive

Finance

Yes

Audit*
Executive
Finance

Jackie M. Ward(2)

74

77

September 2001

Former Chairman, President and CEO of Computer Generation Incorporated

YesCompensation
CG&N
Executive*

Yes

Compensation

CG&N*

Executive

Flowers Foods, Inc.

Sanmina-SCI Corporation

WellPoint, Inc.

(1)

Full committee names are as follows:

Audit – Audit Committee

Compensation – Compensation Committee

CG&N – Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee

Executive – Executive Committee

Finance – Finance Committee

Sustainability – Corporate Sustainability Committee

*

denotes committee chairperson

(2)

Ms. Ward serves as the Lead Director.Chairman of the Board. For more details see page 26

29.

Executive Compensation

Philosophy and Principles (page 39)42)

We believe our long-term success depends on our ability to attract, retain and motivate highly talented individuals who are committed to driving Sysco’s vision and strategy. One of the key objectives of our executive compensation program is to link executives’ pay to their performance and their advancement of Sysco’s overall performance and business strategies. Other objectives include aligning the executives’ interests with those of stockholders and encouraging high-performing executives to remain with Sysco over the course of their careers. We use the following key principles as the cornerstone of Sysco’s executive compensation philosophy to attract, develop and retain business leaders to drive financial and strategic growth and build long-term stockholder value:

Pay for Performance:Provide base salaries that reflect each named executive officer’s background, experience and performance, combined with variable incentive compensation that rewards executives at higher levels than at peer companies when superior performance is achieved, while subpar performance results in compensation below that of peer companies;
Competitiveness and Retention:Provide a competitive pay opportunity that attracts and retains the highest quality professionals;
Accountability for Short- and Long-Term Performance:Strike an appropriate balance between furthering both the short-term and longer-term interests of the business through short-term and long-term compensation; and
Alignment with Stockholders’ Interests:Link the interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders through significant at-risk equity based compensation.

Pay for Performance: Provide conservative base salaries combined with higher levels of variable, incentive compensation relative to the peer group, such that superior performance rewards executives at higher levels than at peer companies while subpar performance results in less compensation than would be the case at peer companies;

Competitiveness and Retention: Provide a competitive pay opportunity that attracts and retains the highest quality professionals;

Accountability for Short- and Long- Term Performance: Strike an appropriate balance between short-term and longer-term compensation and short- and longer-term interests of the business; and

Alignment with Stockholders’ Interests: Link the interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders through the risks and rewards of significant equity based compensation.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

Pay Mix (page 38)40)

The information in the charts below should be read in connection with the explanatory information contained on page 38,40, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such explanatory information.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    8


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

20122015 Executive Total Compensation Mix (page 55)57)

Set forth below is the 20122015 compensation for each Named Executive Officer (“NEO”) who was an officer of the company at the end of fiscal 2015, as determined under the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) rules. See the notes accompanying the Summary Compensation Table on page 5557 for more information.

Name and

Principal Position

Salary

Stock

Awards

Option

Awards

Non-Equity

Incentive Plan

Compensation

Change in Pension Value

and Nonqualified Deferred

Compensation Earnings

All Other

Compensation

Total

William J. DeLaney

President and Chief Executive Officer

$ 1,150,000

1,719,403

3,165,375

857,482

1,941,349

1,066

8,834,675

Robert C. Kreidler

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

600,000

523,297

963,375

304,195

142,678

7,096

2,540,641

Manuel A. Fernandez

Executive Chairman

615,385

2,685,010

2,425,000

--

47,874

190

5,773,459

Michael W. Green

Executive Vice President and Group President

650,000

526,412

969,109

386,688

1,419,955

211,021

4,163,135

Larry G. Pulliam

Executive Vice President and Group President

600,000

485,918

894,562

374,552

2,201,367

1,066

4,557,465

Name and
Principal Position
 Salary   Bonus Stock
Awards
 Option
Awards
 Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
 Change in
Pension Value and
Nonqualified Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
 All Other
Compensation
 Total 
William J. DeLaney
President and
Chief Executive Officer
 $1,220,583 $ $2,017,963 $3,322,980 $2,356,410 $251,301 $158,696 $9,327,933 
Robert C. Kreidler
Executive Vice President
and Former Chief
Financial Officer
  732,875    653,235  1,075,693  944,423  7,469  152,630  3,566,325 
Thomas L. Bené
Executive Vice President
and President, Foodservice
Operations
  681,250    530,226  873,127  1,050,851  1,883  93,341  3,230,678 
Russell T. Libby
Executive Vice President,
Administration and
Corporate Secretary
  538,125    411,145  677,011  693,458  3,337  110,322  2,433,398 
Wayne R. Shurts
Executive Vice President
and Chief Technology
Officer
  601,675    497,986  820,043  772,933  901  44,829  2,738,367 

Important Dates for 20132016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (page 78)80)

If you would like to present a proposal under Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act at our 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, send the proposal in time for us to receive it no later than June 9, 2016. If the date of our 2016 Annual Meeting is subsequently changed by more than 30 days from the date of this year’s Annual Meeting, we will inform you of the change and the date by which we must receive proposals.
If you want to present business at our 2016 Annual Meeting outside of the stockholder proposal rules of Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act and instead pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the company’s Bylaws, the Corporate Secretary must receive notice of your proposal by August 20, 2016, but not before July 11, 2016, and you must be a stockholder of record on the date you provide notice of your proposal to the company and on the record date for determining stockholders entitled to notice of the meeting and to vote.

Stockholder proposals submitted for inclusion in our 2013 proxy statement pursuant to SEC Rule 14a-8 must be received by June 5, 2013.

Notice of stockholder proposals to be raised from the floor of the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders outside Rule 14a-8 must be received by August 16, 2013.

If you would like to present a proposal under Rule 14a-8 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 at our 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, send the proposal in time for us to receive it no later than June 5, 2013. If the date of our 2013 Annual Meeting is subsequently changed by more than 30 days from the date of this year’s Annual Meeting, we will inform you of the change and the date by which we must receive proposals. If you want to present business at our 2013 Annual Meeting outside of the stockholder proposal rules of Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act and instead pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the company’s Bylaws, the Corporate Secretary must receive notice of your proposal by August 16, 2013, but not before July 7, 2013, and you must be a stockholder of record on the date you provide notice of your proposal to the company and on the record date for determining stockholders entitled to notice of the meeting and to vote.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    9


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

Sysco Corporation


1390 Enclave Parkway


Houston, Texas 77077-2099
October 7, 2015

October 4, 2012

PROXY STATEMENT

We are providing you with a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials and access to these proxy materials, which include this 20122015 Proxy Statement, the proxy card for the 20122015 Annual Meeting and our Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal 2012,2015, because our Board of Directors is soliciting your proxy to vote your shares at the Annual Meeting. Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “we,” “our,” “us,” the “company”“Company” or “Sysco”“Sysco,” as used in this proxy statement, refer to Sysco Corporation. Our Annual Meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 14, 201218, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. at The Houstonian Hotel located at 111 North Post Oak Lane, Houston, Texas 77024.

At the close of business on September 17, 2012,21, 2015, there were 587,019,262596,105,787 shares of Sysco Corporation common stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. All of our current directors and executive officers (19 persons) beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, an aggregate of 903,68846,300,635 shares, which was less than 1%approximately 7.77% of our outstanding common stock as of September 17, 2012.21, 2015.

Only owners of record of shares of Sysco’s common stock as of the close of business on the record date, September 17, 2012,21, 2015, are entitled to notice of, and to vote at the Annual Meeting or at any adjournments or postponements of the Annual Meeting. Each owner of record is entitled to one vote for each share owned on the record date on each matter presented at the Annual Meeting.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE MEETING AND VOTING

1.   What is a proxy statement and what is a proxy?

1.What is a proxy statement and what is a proxy?

A proxy statement is a document that Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”)regulations require us to give you when we ask you to sign a proxy designating individuals to vote on your behalf. A proxy is your legal designation of another person to vote the stock you own. That other person is called a proxy. If you designate someone as your proxy in a written document, that document also is called a proxy or a proxy card. We have designated three of our officers as proxies for the 20122015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. These three officers are William J. DeLaney, Chris KreidlerJoel T. Grade and Russell T. Libby.

2.   Why did I receive a one-page notice (the “E-Proxy Notice”) in the mail regarding the Internet availability of proxy materials instead of a full set of proxy materials?

2.Why did I receive a one-page notice (the “E-Proxy Notice”) in the mail regarding the Internet availability of proxy materials instead of a full set of proxy materials?

In accordance with rules and regulations adopted by the SEC, instead of mailing a printed copy of our proxy materials, including our annual report to stockholders, to each stockholder of record, we now generally furnish proxy materials, including our annual report to stockholders, to our stockholders on the Internet. Unless you have previously signed up to receive your materials in paper, you will receive a document entitled Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (which(which we also refer to as the E-Proxy Notice) and will not receive a printed copy of the proxy materials or the annual report to stockholders (unless you specifically request them). Instead, the E-Proxy Notice will instruct you as to how you may use the Internet to access and review all of the important information contained in the proxy materials, including our annual report to stockholders.

The E-Proxy Notice also instructs you as to how you may submit your proxy on the Internet. Instructions for requesting printed proxy materials are included in the E-Proxy Notice. E-Proxy Notices are distributed by mail, unless you previously signed up to receive your proxy materials electronically, in which case it will be emailed to you. Set forth below is a summary of delivery methods.

Stockholders who previously signed up to Receive Proxy Materials Electronically: If you previously signed up to receive proxy materials electronically, we will send the E-Proxy Notice to you via e-mail, to the last e-mail address you have supplied to us. We will e-mail electronic E-Proxy Notices on or aboutOctober 8, 2015.

Stockholders who previously signed up to Receive Proxy Materials Electronically: If you previously signed up to receive proxy materials electronically, we will send the E-Proxy Notice to you via e-mail, to the last e-mail address you have supplied to us. We will e-mail electronic E-Proxy Notices on or about October 5, 2012.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    10


Back to Contents

Stockholders who previously signed up to Receive Future Proxy Materials in Printed Format by Mail: If you previously submitted a valid election to receive all proxy materials in printed format, then we will send you a full set of printed proxy materials, including our annual report to stockholders. We will begin mailing these materials on or about October 4, 2012.

Back to Contents
Stockholders who previously signed up to Receive Future Proxy Materials in Printed Format by Mail: If you previously submitted a valid election to receive all proxy materials in printed format, then we will send you a full set of printed proxy materials, including our annual report to stockholders. We will begin mailing these materials on or aboutOctober 7, 2015.
All other Stockholders: If you have not submitted any elections, we will send you a printed E-Proxy Notice by mail. We will begin mailing E-Proxy Notices on or aboutOctober 7, 2015.

All other Stockholders: If you have not submitted any elections, we will send you a printed E-Proxy Notice by mail. We will begin mailing E-Proxy Notices on or about October 4, 2012.

Receiving Future Proxy Materials Electronically and Receiving the E-Proxy Notice by e-mail:If you previously elected to receive your proxy materials in printed format, but would like to receive an E-Proxy Notice only and use the Internet to access proxy materials, please visit http://enroll.icsdelivery.com/syy for additional information. This would significantly reduce our printing and postage costs and eliminate bulky paper documents from your personal files. To receive your E-Proxy Notice by e-mail, please visithttp://enroll.icsdelivery.com/syyfor additional information.

3.   What is the difference between holding shares as a stockholder of record and as a beneficial stockholder?

3.What is the difference between holding shares as a stockholder of record and as a beneficial stockholder?

These terms describe the manner in which your shares are held. If your shares are registered directly in your name with the Company’s registrar and transfer agent, American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, you are considered a “stockholder of record” with respect to those shares. If your shares are held in a brokerage account, bank, trust or other nominee as custodian on your behalf, you are considered the “beneficial owner” or “street name holder” of those shares. See questions 5, 6 and 9 below for important information for beneficial owners.

4.   How do I vote?

4.How do I vote?

You may vote your shares as follows:

In person at the Annual Meeting.All stockholders of record may vote in person at the meeting. Beneficial owners may vote in person at the meeting if they have a legal proxy, as described in the response to question 6.

By telephone or Internet(see the instructions atwww.ProxyVote.com). All stockholders of record also can vote by touchtone telephone from the U.S., Puerto Rico and Canada, using the toll-free telephone number on the proxy card, or through the Internet, using the procedures and instructions described on the proxy card. Beneficial owners may vote by telephone or Internet if their bank or broker makes those methods available, in which case the bank or broker will include the instructions with the proxy materials. Stockholders may also vote through the Internet via our stockholders forum located atwww.ProxyVote.com. The telephone and Internet voting procedures are designed to authenticate stockholders’ identities, to allow stockholders to vote their shares and to confirm that their instructions have been recorded properly.

By telephone or Internet (see the instructions at www.ProxyVote.com). All stockholders of record also can vote by touchtone telephone from the U.S., Puerto Rico and Canada, using the toll-free telephone number on the proxy card, or through the Internet, using the procedures and instructions described on the proxy card. Beneficial owners may vote by telephone or Internet if their bank or broker makes those methods available, in which case the bank or broker will include the instructions with the proxy materials. Stockholders may also vote through the Internet via our stockholders forum located at www.ProxyVote.com. The telephone and Internet voting procedures are designed to authenticate stockholders’ identities, to allow stockholders to vote their shares and to confirm that their instructions have been recorded properly.

By Written Proxy.All stockholders of record can vote by written proxy card. If you received a printed copy of these proxy materials by mail, you may vote by signing, dating and mailing the enclosed proxy card, or if you are a beneficial owner, you may request a written proxy card or a votevoting instruction form from your bank or broker.

5.How do I attend the meeting in person? What do I need to bring?

5.   How do I attend the meeting in person? What do I need to bring?

You need to bring documentation showing that you owned Common Stock on the record date, September 17, 2012. 21, 2015.You also will need to bring a photo ID to gain admission. admission. Please note that cameras, sound or video recording equipment cellular telephones, smartphones or other similar equipment, electronic devices, large bags, briefcases or packages willmay not be allowed in the meeting room. If you are a beneficial owner, bring the notice or voting instruction form you received from your bank, brokerage firm or other nominee for admission to the meeting. You also may bring your brokerage statement reflecting your ownership of Common Stock as of September 17, 201221, 2015 with you to the meeting.Please note that you will not be able to vote your shares at the meeting without a legal proxy, as described in the response to question 6.6

6.   How can I vote at the meeting if I am a beneficial owner?.

6.How can I vote at the meeting if I am a beneficial owner?

You will need to ask your broker, bank or other intermediary to furnish you with a legal proxy. You will need to bring the legal proxy with you to the meeting and hand it in with a signed ballot that will be provided to you at the meeting. You will not be able to vote your shares at the meeting without a legal proxy. If you do not receive the legal proxy in time, you can follow the procedures described in the response to question 5 to gain admission to the meeting. However, you will not be able to vote your shares at the meeting. Accordingly, we encourage you to vote your shares in advance, even if you intend to attend the meeting. Please note that, if you request a legal proxy, any previously executed proxy will be revoked and your vote will not be counted unless you appear at the meeting and vote in person or legally appoint another proxy to vote on your behalf.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    11


Back to Contents
7.What are my voting choices for each of the proposals to be voted on at the 2015 Annual Meeting?

Back to Contents

7.   What are my voting choices for each of the proposals to be voted on at the 2012 Annual Meeting?

Proposal

Voting Choices and Board Recommendation

Item 1:

Election of Three Director Nominees

vote in favor of all nominees

Election of Twelve Director Nominees

vote against all nominees;

vote for or against specific nominees;

abstain from voting with respect to all nominees; or

abstain from voting with respect to specific nominees.

The Board recommends a voteFOReach of the nominees.

Item 2:

Advisory Proposal to Approve Executive Compensation

vote in favor of the advisory proposal;

Advisory Proposal to Approve Executive

vote against the advisory proposal; or

Compensation

abstain from voting on the advisory proposal.

The Board recommends a voteFORthe advisory voteproposal to approve executive compensation.

Item 3:

vote in favor of the ratification;
Ratification of the Appointment of Ernst &Young LLP as Independent Auditors

&

vote in favor of the ratification;

vote against the ratification; or

Young LLP as Independent Registered

abstain from voting on the ratification.

Public Accounting FirmThe Board recommends a voteFORthe ratification.

If you vote by proxy, the individuals named on the proxy card (your proxies) will vote your shares in the manner you indicate. Directors will be elected by a majority of the votes cast, either for or against, by the holders of the shares of Common Stock voting in person or by proxy at the meeting. In order to be approved, each other proposal will require approval by a majority of the votes cast, either for or against, by the holders of the shares of Common Stock voting in person or by proxy at the meeting. As an advisory vote, the proposal to approve executive compensation is not binding upon the Company. However, the Compensation Committee, which is responsible for designing and administering the Company’s executive compensation program, values the opinions expressed by stockholders and will consider the outcome of the vote when making future compensation decisions.

8.   What if I am a stockholder of record and do not specify a choice for a matter when returning a proxy?

8.What if I am a stockholder of record and do not specify a choice for a matter when returning a proxy?

Stockholders should specify their choices for each matter on the proxy card. If no specific instructions are given, proxies that are signed and returned will be voted:

FOR the election of the twelve nominees for director;
FOR the approval of the compensation paid to Sysco’s named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement; and
FOR the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal 2016.

FOR the election of the three nominees for director;

9.What if I am a beneficial owner and do not give voting instructions to my broker?

FOR the approval of the compensation paid to Sysco’s named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement;

FOR the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young as independent accountants for fiscal 2013.

9.   What if I am a beneficial owner and do not give voting instructions to my broker?

As a beneficial owner, in order to ensure your shares are voted in the way you would like, you must provide voting instructions to your bank, broker or other nominee by the deadline provided in the materials you receive from your bank, broker or other nominee. If you do not provide voting instructions to your bank, broker or other nominee, whether your shares can be voted by such person depends on the type of item being considered for vote.

Non-Discretionary Items.The election of Directors and the advisory proposal to approve executive compensation are non-discretionary items and may not be voted on by brokers, banks or other nominees who have not received specific voting instructions from beneficial owners.

Discretionary Items.The ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as Independent Auditorsthe independent registered public accounting firm is a discretionary item. Generally, brokers, banks and other nominees that do not receive voting instructions from beneficial owners may vote on this proposal in their discretion.

10.   What can I do if I want to revoke or change my vote?

10.What can I do if I want to revoke or change my vote?

You may revoke or change your proxy at any time prior to the completion of voting at the Annual Meeting by:

delivering written notice of revocation to Sysco’s Corporate Secretary in time for him to receive it before the Annual Meeting;

voting again by telephone, Internet or mail (provided that such new vote is received in a timely manner pursuant to the instructions above); or

delivering written notice of revocation to Sysco’s Corporate Secretary in time for him to receive it before the Annual Meeting;
voting again by telephone, Internet or mail (provided that such new vote is received in a timely manner pursuant to the instructions above); or
voting in person at the Annual Meeting.

The last vote that we receive from you will be the vote that is counted.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    12


Back to Contents
11.Is there a quorum requirement?

Back to Contents

11.   Is there a Quorum Requirement?

A quorum is necessary to hold a valid meeting. A quorum will exist if the holders of at least 35% of all the shares entitled to vote at the meeting are present in person or by proxy. All shares voted by proxy are counted as present for purposes of establishing a quorum, including those that abstain or as to which the proxies contain broker non-votes as to one or more items.

12.   What votes are Necessary for Action to be Taken?

12.What votes are necessary for action to be taken?

Sysco’s Bylaws and Corporate Governance Guidelines include a majority vote standard for uncontested director elections. Since the number of nominees timely nominated for the Annual Meeting does not exceed the number of directors to be elected, each director to be elected shall be elected if the number of votes cast “for” election of the director exceeds those cast “against.” Any incumbent director who is not re-elected will be required to tender his or her resignation promptly following certification of the stockholders’ vote. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee will consider the tendered resignation and recommend to the Board of Directors whether to accept or reject the resignation offer, or whether other action should be taken. The Board of Directors will act on the recommendation within 120 days following certification of the stockholders’ vote and will promptly make a public disclosure of its decision regarding whether to accept the director’s resignation offer.

Pursuant to Sysco’s Bylaws, the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast, either for or against, is required for the approval of:

the non-binding, advisory proposal to approve the compensation paid to Sysco’s named executive officers, as disclosed pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K; and
the ratification of the appointment of the independent registered public accounting firm.

The vote on compensation paid to Sysco’s named executive officers as disclosed pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K. This vote is being provided pursuant to Section 14A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.Act. In light of the stockholder recommendation at Sysco’s 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders regarding the frequency of the stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation, it is the current intention of the Sysco Board of Directors to conduct an annual stockholder advisory vote on executive compensation until the next required vote on the frequency of stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation that will occur at our 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

Pursuant to Sysco’s Bylaws, the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast, either for or against, is required for approval of the ratification of the appointment of the independent accountants.

Broker non-votes and abstentions will be disregarded with respect to the election of directors and each proposal.

13.   Who Will Count Votes?of the other proposals.

13.Who will count votes?

We will appoint one or more Inspectors of Election who will determine the number of shares outstanding, the voting power of each, the number of shares represented at the Annual Meeting, the existence of a quorum and whether or not the proxies and ballots are valid and effective.

The Inspectors of Election will determine, and retain for a reasonable period, a record of the disposition of any challenges and questions arising in connection with the right to vote, and will count all votes and ballots cast for and against and any abstentions or broker non-votes with respect to all proposals and will determine the results of each vote.

14.   How are abstentions and broker non-votes counted?

14.How are abstentions and broker non-votes counted?

Abstentions and broker non-votes are included in determining whether a quorum is present, but will not be included in vote totals and will not affect the outcome of the vote on any matter.present. A broker non-vote occurs when a broker holding shares for a beneficial owner does not vote on a particular proposal because the broker does not have discretionary voting authority and has not received voting instructions from the beneficial owner.

15.   How are proxies solicited Broker non-votes and what areabstentions will be disregarded with respect to the costselection of proxy solicitation?directors and each of the other proposals.

15.How are proxies solicited and what are the costs of proxy solicitation?

We will pay all of the cost of solicitation of proxies including preparing, printing and mailing this proxy statement and the E-Proxy Notice. Solicitation may be made personally or by mail, telephone or electronic data transfer by officers, directors and employees of the companyCompany (who will not receive any additional compensation for any solicitation of proxies).

We will also authorize banks, brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries to forward copies of proxy materials and will reimburse them for their costs in sending the materials. We have retained Georgeson Shareholder Communications to help us solicit proxies from these entities and certain other stockholders, in writing or by telephone, at an estimated fee of $12,000 plus reimbursement for their out-of-pocket expenses.

16.   Will any other matters be presented at the Annual Meeting?

16.Will any other matters be presented at the Annual Meeting?

We do not know of any matter that will be presented at the Annual Meeting other than the election of directors and the other proposals discussed in this proxy statement. However, if any other matter is properly presented at the Annual Meeting, your proxies will act on such matter in their best judgment.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    13


Back to Contents
17.Where can I access the Annual Report?

Back to Contents

17.   Where can I access the Annual Report?

We will furnish additional copies of our annual report to stockholders, which includes our Annual Report on Form 10-K, without exhibits, for the year ended June 30, 2012,27, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Annual Report on Form 10-K”), for no charge, upon your written request if you are a record or beneficial owner of Sysco Corporation common stock whose proxy we are soliciting in connection with the Annual Meeting. Please address requests for a copy of the annual reportAnnual Report on Form 10-K to the Investor Relations Department, Sysco Corporation, 1390 Enclave Parkway, Houston, Texas 77077-2099. The Annual Report on Form 10-K is also available on our website under “Investors — Financial Information”“Investors— Annual Reports and SEC FIlings” atwww.sysco.comwww.sysco.com..

18.   What is Householding and where can I get additional copies of proxy materials?

18.What is Householding and where can I get additional copies of proxy materials?

If your shares are held in the name of your broker or agent, and you share the same last name and address with another Sysco stockholder, you and the other stockholders at your address may receive only one copy of the E-Proxy Notice and any other proxy materials we choose to mail, unless contrary instructions are provided from any stockholder at that address. This is referred to as “householding.” If you prefer to receive multiple copies of the E-Proxy Notice and any other proxy materials that we mail, at the same address, additional copies will be provided to you promptly upon written or oral request, and if you are receiving multiple copies of the E-Proxy Notice and other proxy materials, you may request that you receive only one copy. Please address requests for a copy of the E-Proxy Notice and other proxy materials to the Investor RelationsBroadridge, Householding Department, Sysco Corporation, 1390 Enclave Parkway, Houston, Texas 77077-2099,51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, New York, 11717, or call the Investor Relations DepartmentBroadridge at 281-584-1308. The Annual Report on Form 10-K is also available on our website under “Investors — Financial Information” at www.sysco.com.(866) 540-7095.

If your shares are not registered in your own name, you can request additional copies of the E-Proxy Notice and any other proxy materials we mail or you can request householding by notifying your broker or agent in whose name your shares are registered.

19.Will the Company announce the voting results?

19.   Will the Company announce the voting results?

We will announce the preliminary voting results at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders. The Company will report the final results on our website and in a Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC.

20.   Does the Company have a policy about Directors’ attendance atSEC within four business days following the Annual Meeting of Stockholders?Meeting.

20.Does the Company have a policy about Directors’ attendance at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders?

It is the Board’s policy that directorsDirectors attend the Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to the extent practicable. In fiscal 2012, all directorsAll Directors who were in office at that time attended the Annual Meeting held in November 2011.2014.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement14

Back to Contents

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

We believe that good corporate governance is critical to achieving business success. The CompanyBoard has adopted certain documents, referred to herein as our Governance Documents, to provide a general framework for the Company and reflect our commitment to sound governance practices, including:

Sysco’s By-laws,

the Corporate Governance Guidelines adopted by the Board of Directors,

the charters of the Board’s committees,

the Code of Conduct, and

Sysco’s bylaws,
the Corporate Governance Guidelines,
the charters of the Board’s committees,
the Code of Conduct, and
the Code of Conduct for non-employee directors.

These Governance Documents outline the functions of the Board, each of the Board’s committees, director responsibilities, and various processes and procedures designed to ensure effective and responsive governance. The Corporate Governance Guidelines comply with the listing standards of the NYSE and include guidelines for determining director independence and qualifications. These guidelines also outline qualities and characteristics we consider when determining whether a member or candidate is qualified to serve on the Board, including diversity, skills, experience, time available and the number of other boards on which the member sits, on, in the context of the needs of the Board and Sysco. TheOur Corporate Governance Guidelines comply with the listing standards of the NYSE and include guidelines for determining director independence and qualifications. The Board and managementNominating Committee regularly review best practices in corporate governance and modifyreviews the Governance Documents policies and practices as warranted.recommends revisions to the Board from time to time to reflect developments in the law and corporate governance practices.

Copies of the Governance Documents can be accessed from the Corporate Governance pagecorporate governance section of the Company’s investor relations website at “Investors — Corporate Governance” atwww.sysco.com. These documents will also be provided without charge to any stockholder upon written request to the Corporate Secretary at Sysco Corporation, 1390 Enclave Parkway, Houston, Texas 77077.

Stockholder Engagement

Communicating with stakeholders, whether customers, employees or stockholders, has always been an important part of how Sysco does business. Earlier this year, in furtherance of these efforts, we began a more formal engagement process with our stockholders regarding matters of corporate governance. Over the past several months, at the direction of our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, senior leaders and subject matter experts from the company met with representatives at many of our top institutional stockholders to discuss Sysco’s governance practices, executive compensation, compliance programs, and other environmental, social, and governance related matters. Management reports regularly to the Board and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee concerning these meetings, including feedback on the concerns and issues raised by our stockholders. We are continuing this program of enhanced stockholder engagement during fiscal 2016, in addition to our customary participation at industry and investment community conferences, investor road shows, and analyst meetings.

Governance Enhancements

In recognition of recent developments in corporate governance practices and the feedback received through our engagement with stockholders, our Board has committed to implement the following governance enhancements, as recommended by our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee:

SYSCO CORPORATIONRight of Stockholders to Call a Special MeetingPrior to the Annual Meeting, our Board will adopt amendments to the Company’s bylaws to establish the right for holders of at least 25% of Sysco’s outstanding common stock who comply with certain procedural requirements to call a special meeting of stockholders.

2012 Proxy StatementAccess   14– Prior to the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders, our Board will adopt amendments to the Company’s bylaws to establish “proxy access” rights for stockholders who have beneficially owned 3% or more of Sysco’s outstanding common stock continuously for at least three years before submitting the nomination, subject to applicable limitations and procedural requirements.


Back to Contents

Board Leadership Structure

The Governance Documents provide the Board with the flexibility to select the appropriate leadership structure for the Company. Mr. Fernandez served as the non-executive Chairman of Sysco’s Board of Directors from June 2009 until April 2012, when he was elected as the Board’s Executive Chairman. Because in fiscal 2012, Mr. Fernandez served part of the year as non-executive Chairman of Sysco’s Board of Directors, and part of the year as a member of the management team as Executive Chairman, you will see reference to Mr. Fernandez in sections relating to the Board of Directors and in sections relating to the named executive officers. Following Mr. Fernandez’ election as Executive Chairman, the Board selected Ms. Ward as its Lead Director. Ms. Ward is an independent director, as was Mr. Fernandez throughout his tenure as non-executive Chairman. See “Director Independence” below for a discussion of our independence criteria.

BOARD LEADERSHIP

BOARD LEADERSHIP

Executive

Independent Chairman of the Board: Manuel A. Fernandez

Lead Director of the Board: Jackie M. Ward

Active participation by all Directors, including the CEO, William J. DeLaney

73%

83% independent directors

We believe that the current structure of our Board, relying on leadership from both independent and non-independent directors, best positions Sysco to benefit from the respective strengths of our CEO, our Executive Chairman and our Lead Director.

We believe that the structure of our Board, relying on leadership from both independent and non-independent directors, positions Sysco to benefit from the respective strengths of our CEO and Chairman of the Board.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement15

Back to Contents

Immediately preceding our 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, our Board named Jackie M. Ward as its Chairman of the Board. Ms. Ward, a Sysco director since September 2001, previously served as the Board’s lead director and chaired the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, and she has served continuously on the Compensation Committee, the Corporate Governance and Nominating and the Executive Committee for nearly ten years. The Board elected Mr. FernandezMs. Ward as its Executive Chairman so that he might, among other things,in order to provide additional supportexperienced, independent leadership for the Directors and to Sysco’s management team with his unique leadership and technological capability, particularly asfoster the company continues to implement its business transformation. Mr. Fernandez will also focus his time on strategic direction and business development. We believe having an Executive Chairman fosters, among other things, an appropriate levelBoard’s oversight of continuity and fluid communication between the Board and management. The Executive Chairman acts as a bridge between management and the Board, helping both to act with a common purpose. This also fosters consensus building and tactical execution of a Board-approved vision and strategy at the top levels within the Company.

We have chosen

At times when our chairman is not independent or when otherwise appropriate, we utilize an independent Lead Director in order to ensure that the Board continues to maintain an independent thought process that ultimately benefits stockholders. The Lead Director, among other things, reviews meeting schedules and agendas with the Chairmanchairman of the Board and serves as the primary liaison between the independent directors and the Chairmanchairman of the Board.

The independent directors meet in executive session at least once a year, without the other directors present, and the Lead DirectorChairman of the Board presides at such meetings. The non-management directors meet regularly without the CEO or any other member of management present and in fiscal 20122015 met ninefour times. Mr. Fernandez presided at each of the sessions of the non-management and independent directors in fiscal 2012 that were held prior to his election as Executive Chairman. Ms. Ward, as Lead Director,Chairman of the Board, presided over the sessions of the non-management and independent directors in fiscal 2012 that were held following her election as Lead Director and will preside over these meetings in fiscal 2013.2015.

Communicating with the Board

Interested parties may communicate with the Lead Director,Chairman of the Board, the non-management directors or independent directors as a group and the individual members of the Board by confidential web submission or by mail. All such correspondence will be delivered to the parties to whom they are addressed. The Board requests that items unrelated to the duties and responsibilities of the Board not be submitted, such as product inquiries and complaints, job inquiries, business solicitations and junk mail. You may access the form to communicate by confidential web submission in the corporate governance section of Sysco’s website under “Investors — Corporate Governance — Contact the Board” atwww.sysco.com.www.sysco.com. You can contact any of our Directors by mail in care of the Office of the Corporate Secretary, Sysco Corporation, 1390 Enclave Parkway, Houston, Texas 77077.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   15


Back to Contents

Board Meetings and Committees

During fiscal 2012,2015, the Board held nine14 meetings, including fivefour regular meetings and fourten special meetings, and committees of the Board held a total of 3033 meetings. Overall attendance at such meetings was approximately 97%99%. Each director attended 75% or more of the aggregate of all meetings of the Board and the committees on which he or she served during fiscal 2012.2015. The Board has an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, a Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, a Corporate Sustainability Committee, an Executivea Finance Committee, and a Financean Executive Committee. Current copies of the written charters for the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, the Finance Committee and the Corporate Sustainability Committee are published on our website under “Investors — Corporate Governance — Committees”Governance” atwww.sysco.com. www.sysco.com. The current membership and primary responsibilities of the committees are summarized in the following table.

Committee Name and
& Current Members

Primary Responsibilities

Fiscal 2012

2015
Meetings

Audit(1)


Mr. Tilghman (Chair)


Mr. Hafner


Dr. Koerber


Ms. Newcomb

Oversees and reports to the Board with respect to various auditing and accounting matters, including the selection of the independent public accountants, the scope of audit procedures, the nature of all audit and non-audit services to be performed by the independent public accountants, the fees to be paid to the independent public accountants, and the performance of the independent public accountants

Oversees and reports to the Board with respect to Sysco’s accounting practices and policies

Responsible for discussing the Company’s policies with respect to risk assessment and risk management, including discussion of enterprise-wide guidelines and policies to govern the process by which risk assessment and management is undertaken

Oversees and reports to the Board with respect to compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, corporate accounting, reporting practices and the integrity of the financial statements of the Company

ten

9

Compensation(2)(3)(4)


Mr. Cassaday (Chair)


Dr. Craven


Mr. Frank
Mr. Glasscock


Ms. Ward

Establishes compensation policies that effectively attract, retain and motivate executive officers

Establish and approve all compensation of the CEO and the other senior officers, including the named executive officers

Oversees the administration of Sysco’s qualified and nonqualified benefit plans, incentive compensation plans, equity-based plans and Sysco’s group benefit medical plan

Appropriately delegates and oversees compensation and granting authority, except for decisions that impact the compensation of Sysco’s CEO and executive officers

Oversees administrative committees or individuals delegated oversight of employee and executive benefit plans

Amends, establishes or terminates any benefit plan that is maintained primarily for the benefit of Sysco’s senior officers

Resolves claims under any benefit plan with respect to any senior officer

seven

9

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement16

Back to Contents
Committee Name
& Current Members
Primary ResponsibilitiesFiscal 2015
Meetings

Corporate
Governance and
Nominating(2)(3)


Mr. Glasscock (Chair)
Mr. Cassaday
Dr. Craven
Mr. Peltz
Ms. Ward (Chair)

Mr. Cassaday

Dr. Craven

Mr. Glasscock

Proposes directors, committee members and officers to the Board for election or reelection

Oversees the evaluation of management, including the CEO

Reviews the performance of the members of the Board and its committees

Recommends to the Board the annual compensation of non-employee directors

Reviews related party transactions

Reviews and makes recommendations regarding the organization and effectiveness of the Board and its committees, the establishment of corporate governance principles, the conduct of meetings, succession planning and Sysco’s Governing Documents

Reviews and makes recommendations regarding changes to Sysco’s Codes of Conduct, periodically reviews overall compliance with the Codes and approves any waivers to the Codes given to Sysco’s executive officers and directors

Monitors compliance with and approves waivers to Sysco’s Policy on Trading in Company Securities.

six

8

Corporate
Sustainability


Dr. Craven (Chair)


Mr. Glasscock


Mr. Golden


Mr. Hafner

Reviews and acts in an advisory capacity to the Board and management with respect to policies and strategies that affect Sysco’s role as a socially responsible organization as well as Sysco’s long-term sustainability

Reviews, evaluates, and provides input on Sysco’s Sustainability Strategy, which focuses on Food, Operations, and Community, and on implementation of the strategy

Reviews philanthropic giving, agriculture programs, and warehouse and transportation initiatives designed to improve the environmental impact of the company

Reviews external disclosures on sustainability matters such as Sysco’s annual sustainability report and Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) surveys

three

3

Executive

Mr. Fernandez (Chair)

Mr. Cassaday

Mr. DeLaney

Mr. Hafner

Mr. Tilghman

Ms. Ward

Exercise all of the powers of the Board when necessary, to the extent permitted by applicable law

zero

Finance Committee


Mr. Hafner (Chair)


Mr. DeLaney


Mr. Fernandez

Frank
Mr. Golden


Dr. Koerber


Ms. Newcomb


Mr. Tilghman

Assist the Board in satisfying its fiduciary responsibilities relating to Sysco’s financial performance and financial planning

Reviews policies regarding capital structure, dividends and liquidity

Reviews and recommends the sale or issuance of equity and debt securities

Reviews acquisitions and financing alternatives

Reviews and approves certain capital expenditures

Reviews and recommends insurance risk management strategies as proposed by management;

Approves and monitors high-level investment and funding objectives and investment performance and funding of Sysco’s tax-qualified retirement plans and non-qualified retirement and deferred compensation plans

Reviews and oversees Sysco’s information technology and security matters

Assists the Audit Committee in reviewing and overseeing Sysco’s environmental, health and safety matters and related regulatory compliance

four

4
Executive
Ms. Ward (Chair)
Mr. Cassaday
Mr. DeLaney
Mr. Glasscock
Mr. Hafner
Mr. Tilghman

Exercise all of the powers of the Board when necessary, to the extent permitted by applicable law

0
(1)

Each member of the Audit Committee has been determined by the Board to be independent, as defined in the NYSE’s listing standards, Section 10A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines. Each member of the Audit Committee is financially literate and the Board has determined that Messrs. Hafner and Tilghman and Ms. Newcomb each meet the definition of an audit committee financial expert as promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. No Audit Committee member serves on the audit committees of more than two other companies.

(2)

Each member of the Compensation Committee and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has been determined by the Board to be independent, as defined in the NYSE’s listing standards and the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines.

(3)

Mrs. Phyllis S. Sewell, a former director of Sysco, served on the Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee until her retirement from the Board at the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Mr. Manuel A. Fernandez resigned from each of the Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee upon his election as Executive Chairman in April 2012. Each of Mrs. Sewell and Mr. Fernandez was determined by the Board to be independent, as defined in the NYSE’s listing standards and the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, during their respective tenures on each of the Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee.

(4)

Except for decisions that impact the compensation of Sysco’s CEO, the Compensation Committee is generally authorized to delegate any decisions it deems appropriate to a subcommittee. In such a case, the subcommittee must promptly make a report of any action that it takes to the full Compensation Committee. In addition, the Compensation Committee may delegate to any one or more members of the Board its full equity grant authority with respect to any equity-based grants other than grants made to officers that are subject to reporting obligations under Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.Act; and the Compensation Committee has delegated such authority to Mr. DeLaney with respect to certain non-executive employees, subject to specified limitations. In carrying out its duties, the Compensation Committee may also delegate its oversight of Sysco’s employee and executive benefit plans to any administrative committees of the respective plans or to such officers or employees of Sysco as the Compensation Committee deems appropriate, except that it may not delegate its powers to amend, establish or terminate any benefit plan that is maintained primarily for the benefit of Sysco’s senior officers, resolve claims under a benefit plan with respect to any senior officer, or modify the compensation of any senior officer as provided under any nonqualified or executive incentive compensation plan. For a detailed description of the Compensation Committee’s processes and procedures for consideration and determination of executive compensation, including the role of executive officers and compensation consultants in recommending the amount and form of executive compensation, see “— Compensation Consultants,” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    1617


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

Director Independence

Director Independence

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that at least a majority of our directors meet the criteria for independence that the New York Stock Exchange has established for continued listing, as well as the additional criteria set forth in the Guidelines. Additionally, we require that all members of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee be independent, and that all members of the Audit Committee satisfy the additional requirements of the New York Stock Exchange and applicable rules promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act, and that all members of 1934.the Compensation Committee satisfy the additional requirements of the New York Stock Exchange.

Under New York Stock Exchange listing standards, to consider a director to be independent, we must determine that he or she has no material relationship with Sysco other than as a director. The standards specify the criteria by which we must determine whether directors are independent, and contain guidelines for directors and their immediate family members with respect to employment or affiliation with Sysco or its independent public accountants.

In addition to the NYSE’s standards for independence, our Corporate Governance Guidelines contain categorical standards that provide that the following relationships will not impair a director’s independence:

if a Sysco director is an executive officer of another company that does business with Sysco and the annual sales to, or purchases from, Sysco are less than two percent of the annual revenues of the company he or she serves as an executive officer;

if a Sysco director is an executive officer of another company which is indebted to Sysco, or to which Sysco is indebted, and the total amount of either company’s indebtedness to the other is less than two percent of the total consolidated assets of the company he or she serves as an executive officer, so long as payments made or received by Sysco as a result of such indebtedness do not exceed the two percent thresholds provided above with respect to sales and purchases; and

if a Sysco director is an executive officer of another company that does business with Sysco and the annual sales to, or purchases from, Sysco are less than two percent of the annual revenues of the company for which he or she serves as an executive officer;
if a Sysco director is an executive officer of another company which is indebted to Sysco, or to which Sysco is indebted, and the total amount of either company’s indebtedness to the other is less than two percent of the total consolidated assets of the company for which he or she serves as an executive officer, so long as payments made or received by Sysco as a result of such indebtedness do not exceed the two percent thresholds provided above with respect to sales and purchases; and
if a Sysco director serves as an officer, director or trustee of a tax-exempt charitable organization, and Sysco’s discretionary charitable contributions to the organization are less than two percent of that organization’s total annual charitable receipts; Sysco’s automatic matching of employee charitable contributions will not be included in the amount of Sysco’s contributions for this purpose.

The Board of Directors has reviewed all relevant relationships of the directors with Sysco. The relationships reviewed included those described under “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions,” and several relationships that did not automatically make the individual non-independent under the NYSE standards or our Corporate Governance Guidelines, either because of the type of affiliation between the director and the other entity or because the amounts involved did not meet the applicable thresholds. These additional relationships include the following (for purposes of this section, “Sysco”, “we,” “us” and “our” include our operating companies):

Mr. Cassaday serves as a director of Irving Oil Limited (formerly Fort Reliance), which is one of our suppliers;

Dr. Craven serves as a member of the Board of Directors of Luby’s, Inc., which is one of our customers;

Mr. DeLaney, our CEO and a non-independent director, serves as a director of Express Scripts, Inc., which is our prescription drug service provider for our employees;

Mr. Fernandez, who became a non-independent director upon his election as Executive Director in April 2012, serves as a director of Flowers Foods, Inc., which is one of Sysco’s suppliers, and was former Chairman, President and CEO of Gartner, Inc., a technology firm that provides certain services to which we subscribe;

Mr. Glasscock serves as a director of Sprint Nextel Corp., which is one of our suppliers;

Mr. Hafner serves as a Trustee of The Kinkaid School, which is one of our customers; Mr. Hafner also serves on the boards or committees of several non-profit organizations to which Sysco makes donations; in addition, Mr. Hafner serves as a member of the President’s Advisory Council of the University of Houston — Downtown, which purchases our products through subcontracting arrangements;

Ms. Newcomb was a director of Moody’s Corporation during fiscal 2011, which provides credit ratings for certain of our debt obligations;

Mr. Tilghman is the former Chairman and a former trustee of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, a former director of the Colonial Williamsburg Company and a director of The Coral Bay Club; all three of these organizations are our customers;

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   17


Back to Contents

Ms. Ward is a director of Flowers Foods, Inc., which is one of our suppliers, serves as a director of WellPoint, Inc. which is paid by Sysco’s insurer for services rendered to covered Sysco employees, and her
Mr. Cassaday serves as a director of Irving Oil Limited (formerly Fort Reliance), which is one of our suppliers;
Mr. DeLaney, our CEO and non-independent director, serves as a member of the Board of Directors of Express Scripts, Inc., which is the prescription drug service provider for our employees;
Mr. Frank is a Partner of Trian Fund Management, L.P. which owns approximately 7% of Sysco’s outstanding common stock;
Mr. Hafner serves on the boards or committees of several non-profit organizations to which Sysco makes donations; in addition, Mr. Hafner serves on the Council of Overseers for the Jones Graduate School at Rice University, which is one of our customers;
Mr. Peltz is Chief Executive Officer and a Founding Partner of Trian Fund Management, L.P. which owns approximately 7% of Sysco’s outstanding common stock; he is also the non-executive Chairman of The Wendy’s Company, which is one of our customers;
Mr. Tilghman is a director of The Coral Bay Club, which is one of our customers; and
Ms. Ward’s granddaughter’s husband works for one of Sysco’s subsidiaries as a marketing associate.

After reviewing such information, the Board of Directors has determined that each of Mr. Cassaday, Dr. Craven, Mr. Frank, Mr. Glasscock, Mr. Hafner, Dr. Koerber, Ms. Newcomb, Mr. Peltz, Mr. Tilghman and Ms. Ward has no material relationship with Sysco and is independent under the NYSE standards and the categorical standards set forth in the Corporate Governance Guidelines and described above.

The Board also determined that Mr. Fernandez was also deemedDeLaney, who served as an executive officer of the Company during fiscal 2015, is not independent priorpursuant to the NYSE independence standards due to such service, and that Mr. Golden is not independent due to his election as Executive Chairman in April 2012. Mr. DeLaney, Mr. Fernandez and Mr.relationship to Arnall Golden are not currently considered to be independent. Gregory LLP. See “Transactions with Related Persons” below for further discussion.

The Board has also determined that each member of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is independent. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines also provide that no independent director who is a member of the Audit, Compensation or Corporate Governance and Nominating Committees may receive any compensation from Sysco other than in his or her capacity as a non-employee director or committee member. The Board has determined that no non-employee director (which includes Mr. Fernandez during the time prior to his election as Executive Chairman) received any compensation from Sysco at any time since the beginning of fiscal 2012,2015, other than in his or her capacity as a non-employee director, committee member, committee chairman lead director or non-executive Chairman of the Board.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement18

Back to Contents

Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions

Related Person Transactions Policies and Procedures

The Board has adopted written policies and procedures for review and approval or ratification of transactions with related persons. We subject the following related persons to these policies: directors, director nominees, executive officers, beneficial owners of more than five percent of our stock and any immediate family members of these persons.

We follow the policies and procedures below for any transaction, arrangement or relationship, or any series of similar transactions, arrangements or relationships in which Sysco was or is to be a participant, the amount involved exceeds $100,000, and in which any related person had or will have a direct or indirect material interest. These policies specifically apply without limitation to purchases of goods or services by or from the related person or entities in which the related person has a material interest, indebtedness, guarantees of indebtedness, and employment by Sysco of a related person. The Board of Directors has determined that the following do not create a material direct or indirect interest on behalf of the related person, and are, therefore, not related person transactions to which these policies and procedures apply:

Interests arising only from the related person’s position as a director of another corporation or organization that is a party to the transaction; or

Interests arising only from the direct or indirect ownership by the related person and all other related persons in the aggregate of less than a 10% equity interest, other than a general partnership interest, in another entity which is a party to the transaction; or

Interests arising from both the position and ownership level described in the two bullet points above; or

Interests arising solely from the ownership of a class of Sysco’s equity securities if all holders of that class of equity securities receive the same benefit on a pro rata basis, such as dividends; or

A transaction that involves compensation to an executive officer if the compensation has been approved by the Compensation Committee, the Board of Directors or a group of independent directors of Sysco performing a similar function; or

Interests arising only from the related person’s position as a director of another corporation or organization that is a party to the transaction; or
Interests arising only from the direct or indirect ownership by the related person and all other related persons in the aggregate of less than a 10% equity interest, other than a general partnership interest, in another entity which is a party to the transaction; or
Interests arising from both the position and ownership level described in the two bullet points above; or
Interests arising solely from the ownership of a class of Sysco’s equity securities if all holders of that class of equity securities receive the same benefit on a pro rata basis, such as dividends; or
A transaction that involves compensation to an executive officer if the compensation has been approved by the Compensation Committee, the Board of Directors or a group of independent directors of Sysco performing a similar function; or
A transaction that involves compensation to a director for services as a director of Sysco if such compensation will be reported pursuant to Item 402(k) of Regulation S-K.

Any of our employees, officers or directors who have knowledge of a proposed related person transaction must report the transaction to our General Counsel.chief legal officer. Whenever practicable, before the transaction goes effective or becomes consummated, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors will review and approve the proposed transaction in accordance with the terms of this policy. If the General Counselchief legal officer determines that it is not practicable to obtain advance approval of the transaction under the circumstances, the Committee will review and, in its discretion may ratify, the transaction at its next meeting. In addition, the Board of Directors has delegated to the Chair of the Committee the authority to pre-approve or ratify, as applicable, any related person transaction in which the aggregate amount involved is expected to be less than $500,000.

In addition, if a related person transaction is ongoing in nature and the Committee has previously approved it, or the transaction otherwise already exists, the Committee will review the transaction during its first meeting of each fiscal year to:

ensure that such transaction has been conducted in accordance with the previous approval granted by the Committee, if any;

ensure that Sysco makes all required disclosures regarding the transaction; and

ensure that such transaction has been conducted in accordance with the previous approval granted by the Committee, if any;
ensure that Sysco makes all required disclosures regarding the transaction; and
determine if Sysco should continue, modify or terminate the transaction.

We will consider a related person transaction approved or ratified if the transaction is authorized by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee or the Chair, as applicable, in accordance with the standards described below, after full disclosure of the related person’s interests in the transaction. As appropriate for the circumstances, the Committee will review and consider such of the following as it deems necessary or appropriate:

the related person’s interest in the transaction;
the approximate dollar value of the amount involved in the transaction;
the approximate dollar value of the amount of the related person’s interest in the transaction without regard to the amount of any profit or loss;
whether the transaction was undertaken in Sysco’s ordinary course of business;
whether the transaction with the related person is proposed to be, or was, entered into on terms no less favorable to Sysco than terms that could have been reached with an unrelated third party;
the purpose of, and the potential benefits to Sysco of, the transaction; and
any other information regarding the transaction or the related person in the context of the proposed transaction that would be material to investors in light of the circumstances of the particular transaction.

the related person’s interest in the transaction;

the approximate dollar value of the amount involved in the transaction;

the approximate dollar value of the amount of the related person’s interest in the transaction without regard to the amount of any profit or loss;

whether the transaction was undertaken in Sysco’s ordinary course of business;

whether the transaction with the related person is proposed to be, or was, entered into on terms no less favorable to Sysco than terms that could have been reached with an unrelated third party;

the purpose of, and the potential benefits to Sysco of, the transaction; and

any other information regarding the transaction or the related person in the context of the proposed transaction that would be material to investors in light of the circumstances of the particular transaction.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   18


Back to Contents

The Committee will review such additional information about the transaction as it in its sole discretion shall deem relevant. The Committee may approve or ratify the transaction only if the Committee determines that, based on its review, the transaction is in, or is not inconsistent with, the best interests of Sysco. The Committee may, in its sole discretion, impose such conditions as it deems appropriate on Sysco or the related person when approving a transaction. If the Committee or the Chair, as applicable, does not ratify a related person transaction, we will either rescind or modify the transaction, as the Committee or the Chair, as applicable, directs, as soon as practicable following the failure to ratify the transaction. The Chair will report to the Committee at its next regularly scheduled meeting any action that he or she has taken under the authority delegated pursuant to this policy. If any director has an interest in a related person transaction, he or she is not allowed to participate in any discussion or approval of the transaction, except that the director is required to provide all material information concerning the transaction to the Committee.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement19

Back to Contents

Transactions with Related Persons

Mr. Golden, one of our directors, is the sole stockholder of Jonathan Golden, P.C., a partner in the law firm of Arnall Golden Gregory LLP, Atlanta, Georgia, which provided legal services to Sysco during fiscal 20122015 and continues to do so in fiscal 2013.2016. During fiscal 2012,2015, Sysco incurred approximately $3.0$1.8 million in legal fees and disbursements related to these services. We believe the amounts were fair and reasonable in view of the level and extent of services rendered. Due to this relationship, Mr. Golden is not considered to be an independent director under the NYSE standards or the categorical standards set forth in Sysco’s Corporate Governance Guidelines.

Michael W. Green’s brother-in-law works for Red Gold, Inc., which supplies tomato products to Sysco. Sysco paid Red Gold approximately $42.3 million during fiscal 2012. Mr. Green serves as our Executive Vice President and Group President.

Ms. Twila Day who is not an executive officer, is the wife of William Day, our Executive Vice President, Merchandising and Supply Chain.Merchandising. Ms. Day previously served as Sysco’s Vice President and Chief Information Officer from December 2005 until January 2010, when she was promoted to her current position of Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer.Officer, and served in this position until her departure from Sysco effective June 29, 2013. Following her departure from Sysco, Ms. Day accepted a position as a managing director of the consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal, which has over 20 years of experienceprovided consulting services to Sysco since 2004. Sysco and its affiliates purchased approximately $12.4 million in Sysco’s information technology department and has been a corporate officer since 2000. With respect toconsulting services from this firm in fiscal 2012, we paid2015, although Ms. Day did not personally provide any services to Sysco, nor did she receive any compensation as a base salaryresult of $375,000,these services.

The brother-in-law of Michael W. Green, our former Executive Vice President and she receivedPresident of Foodservice Operations who retired in December 2014, is employed by, and handles the account for, Red Gold, Inc., a MIP bonuscompany that supplies tomato products to Sysco. Sysco paid Red Gold approximately $62.2 million during fiscal 2015. Mr. Green’s sister and brother-in-law own Sunrise Café, one of $125,625, which we paidSysco’s customers. Sysco and its affiliates sold approximately $161,000 in August 2012. Ms. Day received a CPU grant in November 2011 of 250,000 units with a target value of $1.00 each, which will be payable following conclusion ofproduct to Sunrise Café during fiscal 2014 if all specified criteria are met. See “Executive Compensation — Cash Performance Unit Plan.” In November 2011, Ms. Day received a grant of stock options to purchase 62,500 shares of common stock, and a grant of 9,012 restricted stock units pursuant to our 2007 Stock Incentive Plan. The options had a grant date fair value as calculated in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 718, “Compensation — Stock Compensation” of $229,375 and the restricted stock units were valued at $249,182, based on the closing price of Sysco common stock on the last business day prior to grant of $27.65 per share. In November 2011, 1,000 restricted stock units and 2,834 restricted stock units that were granted to Ms. Day in November 2009 and 2010, respectively, fully vested. Ms. Day is included with other MIP participants under the fiscal 2013 MIP program, with threshold, target and maximum bonus percentages equal to those of the named executive officers. See “Executive Compensation — Management Incentive Plan.” She is also a participant in the SERP, the EDCP and other regular and customary employee benefit plans, programs and benefits generally available to our officers, including those described in the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section, under the heading “What We Paid and Why.”2015.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has approved alleach of the above transactions in accordance with the disclosed policies and procedures.

Risk Oversight

One of the primary oversight functions of the Board is to ensure that Sysco has an appropriate risk management process in place that is commensurate with both the short and long-term goals of the company.Company. In order to effectively fulfill this oversight role, the Board relies on various individuals and committees within management and among our Board members. See “Board of Directors Matters — Election of Directors at 20122015 Annual Meeting (Item I) — Director Qualifications” and “Board of Directors Matters — Board Composition” below for a description of individual director qualifications, including risk management experience.

Management is responsible for identifying, managing and mitigating risks, and reports directly to the Audit Committee and the Board on a regular basis with respect to risk management. As discussed above under “Board Meetings and Committees of the Board,” the Audit Committee reviews Sysco’s process by which management assesses and manages the company’sCompany’s exposure to risk. The Audit Committee also makes recommendations to the Board of Directors with respect to the process by which members of the Board and relevant committees will be made aware of the company’sCompany’s significant risks, including recommendations regarding what committee of the Board would be most appropriate to take responsibility for oversight of management with respect to the most material risks faced by the company.Company. On an annual basis management reviews with the Board the key enterprise risks identified in the process, such as strategic, operational, financial, compliance and reputation risks, as well as management’s process for addressing and mitigating the potential effects of such risks. Through this process Sysco has developed enhanced risk management procedures that include frequent discussion and prioritization of key risk issues by the executive management team, enhanced tracking and monitoring of risk information and identification of particular risks for which management intends to develop or enhance Sysco’s management and mitigation plans.

The Board’s Committeescommittees help oversee the risk management process within the respective areas of the committees’ delegated oversight authority. The Audit Committee is primarily responsible for hiring and evaluating our independent auditor, review of our internal controls, oversight of our internal audit function, oversight of customer credit risk, reviewing contingent liabilities that may be material to the companyCompany and various regulatory and compliance oversight functions. The Compensation Committee is responsible for ensuring that our executive compensation policies and practices do not incentivize excessive or inappropriate risk-taking by employees. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee monitors risk by ensuring that proper corporate governance standards are maintained, that the Board is comprised of qualified Directors, and that qualified individuals are chosen as senior officers. The Finance Committee oversees risks involving capital structure of the enterprise, including borrowing, liquidity, allocation of capital, major capital transactions and expenditures, funding of benefit plans, credit/counterparty risk and investment risk. The Chairman of the Board and the Lead Director work together to coordinatecoordinates the flow of information regarding risk oversight from each respective committee to the independent Directors and participateparticipates in the review of the agenda for each Board and Committee meeting. As the areas of oversight among committees sometimes overlap, committees may hold joint meetings when appropriate and address certain risk oversight issues at the full Board level. The Board considers risk in evaluating the company’sCompany’s strategy, including specific strategic and emerging risks, and annually reviews and approves corporate goals and capital budgets. The Board also monitors any specific risks for which it has chosen to retain oversight rather than delegating oversight to one of its committees, such as risks related to our Business Transformation Project.cyber-security, technology platform development and succession planning.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    1920


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

Codes of Conduct

We require all of our officers and employees, including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and controller, to comply with our Code of Conduct applicable to Sysco employees to help ensure that we conduct our business in accordance with the highest standards of moral and ethical behavior. This Code of Conduct addresses the following, among other topics:

professional conduct, including customer relationships, equal opportunity, payment of gratuities and receipt of payments or gifts,

competition and fair dealing,

compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,

political contributions,

antitrust,

conflicts of interest,

legal compliance, including compliance with laws addressing insider trading,

financial disclosure,

intellectual property, and

professional conduct, including customer relationships, equal opportunity, payment of gratuities and receipt of payments or gifts,
competition and fair dealing,
compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,
political contributions,
antitrust,
conflicts of interest,
legal compliance, including compliance with laws addressing insider trading,
financial disclosure,
intellectual property, and
confidential information.

Our Code, which was amendedis reviewed annually by our Corporate Governance and restated in August 2010, effective as of November 1, 2010,Nominating Committee, requires strict adherence to all laws and regulations applicable to our business and requires employees to report any violations or suspected violations of the Code. In August 2010, we also adopted a separate Code of Conduct applicable to non-employee directors that is similar in scope to the employee Code but is tailored to the issues and concerns facing Sysco directors. We have published the Codes of Conduct for employees and non-employee directors on our website under “Investors — Corporate Governance” at www.sysco.com.www.sysco.com. We intend to disclose any future amendments to or waivers of our Code applicable to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and controller, as well as any employees performing similar functions, on our website atwww.sysco.com under the heading “Investors — Corporate Governance.”

Reporting a Concern or Violation

Our Code of Conduct explains that there are multiple channels for an employee to report a concern, including to his or her manager, human resource professional or legal counsel, to our internal audit department, or to the Sysco Associate Hotline, which is monitored by Global Compliance. Our Global Compliance Hotline is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to receive calls or web submissions from anyone wishing to report a concern or complaint, anonymous or otherwise. Our HotLine contact information can be found on our website atwww.sysco.comunder the heading “Investors — Corporate Governance — Contact the Board.”

Any report to any one of our multiple channels for reporting concerns that raise a concern or allegation of impropriety relating to our accounting, internal controls or other financial or audit matters is immediately forwarded to our Executive Vice President, Administration and Corporate Secretary, who is then responsible for reporting such matters, unfiltered, to the Chair of our Audit Committee. All such matters are investigated and responded to in accordance with the procedures established by the Audit Committee to ensure compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Compensation Consultants

Since September 2009, the

The Compensation Committee has retained Compensation Advisory Partners (“CAP”) from September 2009 through October 2014 as its executive compensation consultant. Retained by and reporting directly to the Compensation Committee, CAP has provided the Committee with assistance in evaluating Sysco’s executive compensation programs and policies, and, where appropriate, has assisted with the redesign and enhancement of elements of the programs. The scope of CAP’s assignments inwith regard to fiscal 2012 included:

Assistance with proxy disclosure issues;

Review of long-term incentive program design and assistance with determination of awards;

Provision of external perspective on2015 executive compensation including development of key trends reports regarding executive compensation, evolving best practices and relevant regulatory changes;included:

Review of total compensation program, including competitive peer group comparisons and analysis, and analysis of executive benchmark positions and competitive levels in relation to broader market survey data, and assessment of annual NEO pay and performance relationship versus the peer group; and

Review of long-term incentive program design and assistance with determination of awards;
Provision of external perspective on executive compensation, including preparation of annual comparative executive compensation studies and development of key trends reports regarding executive compensation, evolving best practices and relevant regulatory changes;
Review of the total compensation program, including competitive peer group comparisons and analysis, and analysis of executive benchmark positions and competitive levels in relation to broader market survey data, and assessment of annual NEO pay and performance relationship versus the peer group; and
Periodic compensation consulting at the request of the Compensation Committee and management.

CAP has also advisesadvised the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee with respect to non-employee director compensation. At the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee’s request, CAP has provided data regarding the amounts and type of compensation paid to non-employee directors at the companies in Sysco’s peer group, and has also identified trends in director compensation. All decisions regarding non-employee director compensation are recommended by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and approved by the Board of Directors. In addition to providing background information and written materials, CAP representatives attendattended meetings at which the Committee Chairmen believe that their expertise would be beneficial to the Committees’ discussions. Neither CAP nor any of its affiliates provided any additional services to Sysco and its affiliates in fiscal 20122015, or any services in fiscal 20132016 through the date of the proxy statement. Sysco does not expect CAP to provide any such services to Sysco duringin the remainderfuture. The Compensation Committee has determined CAP to be independent from the Company and that no conflicts of fiscal 2013.interest exist related to CAP’s services provided to the Compensation Committee. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – CompensationAnalysis–How Executive Pay is Established — Committee Oversight.”

The Committee determined in May 2014 to review its executive compensation consultant arrangement and invite proposals from other firms. Following consideration of seven firms, in November 2014, the Committee engaged

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement21

Back to Contents

Exequity LLP (“Exequity”) as its executive compensation consultant. Due to the timing of this engagement, Exequity did not have an opportunity to assist the Committee with the design and development of the Executive Chairman.”executive compensation programs for fiscal 2015. Exequity has provided assistance to the Committee with respect to proxy disclosure issues, and the scope of its assignments for fiscal 2016 executive compensation was substantially similar to those of CAP described above.

Since September 2010, the senior human resources officer and his Human Resources department (“HR”) have retained the services of Towers Watson (“TW”) has provided advice directly to Sysco’s management teamprovide assistance to HR and has assistedSysco management in making recommendations to the Compensation Committee and the Board of Directors with respect to certain aspects of executive compensation. In this capacity, TWTowers Watson has provided advice directly to Sysco’s management team and has consulted directly with management and provided, among other things, reports based on TW’stheir proprietary data and information regarding market benchmarks. TheWhile Towers Watson did not provide the Committee with any direct advice regarding any of the NEOs, the Compensation Committee’s decisions arewere indirectly impacted by input from TWTowers Watson that iswas presented by management, and such information iswas used by the Committee in its dialogue with CAP representatives.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   20


Back to Contents

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MATTERS

We believe that our directors should possess the highest personal and professional ethics, integrity and values, and be committed to representing the long-term interests of Sysco’s stockholders. They must also have an inquisitive and objective perspective, practical wisdom and mature judgment. We endeavor to have a Board representing a range of backgrounds and experiences in areas that are relevant to the company’s activities so that the Board, as a whole, possesses the combination of skills, professional experience, and diversity of backgrounds necessary to oversee Sysco’s business. In particular, we place a high level of importance on knowledge and experience specific to and relevant in our industry, with nine directors with direct food industry experience.

All of our Directors possess all of the following characteristics:

1. Integrity and Accountability: Directors must have demonstrated high ethical standards and integrity in their personal and professional dealings, and must be willing to act on – and remain accountable for – their boardroom decisions.

2. Informed Judgment: Directors must be able to provide wise, thoughtful counsel on a broad range of issues and must possess high intelligence and wisdom which is applied in decision making.

3. Financial Literacy: Directors must be financially literate and should know how to read a balance sheet, an income statement and a cash flow statement, and they should understand the use of financial ratios and other indices for evaluating Company performance.

4. Mutual Confidence: Directors must value Board and team performance over individual performance, must possess respect for others, be open to other opinions and be willing to listen. Directors must be assertive, responsible and supportive while being willing to raise tough questions in a manner that encourages open discussion.

5. High Performance Standards: Directors must have a history of achievements that reflect high standards of performance by themselves and the persons they lead.

Election of Directors at 20122015 Annual Meeting (Item 1)

Election Process

The company’s Bylawsbylaws provide for majority voting in uncontested director elections. Majority voting means that directors are elected by a majority of the votes cast — that is, the number of shares voted “for” a director must exceed the number of shares voted “against” that director. Any incumbent director who is not re-elected in an election in which majority voting applies shall tender his or her resignation promptly following certification of the stockholders’ vote. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee shall consider the tendered resignation and recommend to the Board whether to accept or reject the resignation offer, or whether other action should be taken. The director who tenders his or her resignation shall not participate in the recommendation of the committee or the decision of the Board with respect to his or her resignation. The Board shall act on the recommendation within 120 days following certification of the stockholders’ vote and shall promptly disclose its decision regarding whether to accept the director’s resignation offer. In contested elections, where there are more nominees than seats on the Board as of the record date of the meeting at which the election will take place, directors are elected by a plurality vote. This means that the nominees who receive the most votes of all the votes cast for directors will be elected.

Nomination Process

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for identifying and evaluating candidates for election to Sysco’s Board of Directors.

Director Candidates Identified by the Board and Management.In consideringidentifying candidates for election to the Board, the Committee will determine which of the incumbent directors whose terms expirewish to be renominated for election at the upcoming Annual Meeting and who wish to continue their service on the Board.next meeting of stockholders. The Committee will also identify and evaluate new candidates for election to the Board for the purpose of filling vacancies. The Committee will solicit recommendations for nominees from persons that the Committee believes are likely to be familiar with qualified candidates. These persons may includecandidates, including current members of the Board and Sysco’s management and stockholders who beneficially own individually or as a group at least five percent of Sysco’s outstanding shares for at least one year and who have expressed an interest in recommending director candidates. In evaluating candidates, the Committee will consider the absence or presence of material relationships with Sysco that might impact independence, as well as the diversity, age, skills, experience, time available and the number of other boards the candidate sits on in the context of the needs of the Board and Sysco, and such other criteria as the Committee shall determine to be relevant at the time.management. The Committee may also determine to engage a professional search firm to assist in identifying qualified candidates. WhereWhen such a search firm is engaged, the Committee shall set its fees and scope of engagement.

Director Candidates Recommended by Stockholders.The Committee will also consider candidates recommended by stockholders. The Committee will evaluate such recommendations using the same criteria that it uses to evaluate other director candidates. Stockholders can recommend candidates for consideration by the Committee by writing to the Corporate Secretary, 1390 Enclave Parkway, Houston, Texas 77077, and including the following information:

the name and address of the stockholder;
the name and address of the person to be nominated;
a representation that the stockholder is a holder of the Sysco stock entitled to vote at the meeting to which the director recommendation relates;
a statement in support of the stockholder’s recommendation, including a description of the candidate’s qualifications;
information regarding the candidate as would be required to be included in a proxy statement filed in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission; and
the candidate’s written, signed consent to serve if elected.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   21


Back to Contents

the name and address of the stockholder;

the name and address of the person to be nominated;

a representation that the stockholder is a holder of the Sysco stock entitled to vote at the meeting to which the director recommendation relates;

a statement in support of the stockholder’s recommendation, including a description of the candidate’s qualifications;

information regarding the candidate as would be required to be included in a proxy statement filed in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission; and

the candidate’s written, signed consent to serve if elected.

The Committee typically recommends director candidates to the Board in early July of each year. The Committee will consider in advance of Sysco’s next Annual Meetingannual meeting of stockholders those director candidate recommendations that the Committee receives by May 1,st. 2016.

With respect to all incumbent and new candidates that the Committee believes merit consideration, the Committee will:

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement22

cause to be assembled information concerning the background and qualifications of the candidate, including information required to be disclosed in a proxy statement under the rules of the SEC or any other regulatory agency or exchange or trading system on which Sysco’s securities are listed, and any relationship between the candidate and the person or persons recommending the candidate;

determine if the candidate satisfies the qualifications required by the company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines of candidates for election as director, as set forth above;

determine if the candidate possesses qualities, experience or skills that the Committee has determined to be desirable;

consider the contribution that the candidate can be expected to make to the overall functioning of the Board;

consider the candidate’s capacity to be an effective director in light of the time required by the candidate’s primary occupation and service on other boards;

consider the extent to which the membership of the candidate on the Board will promote diversity among the directors; and

consider, with respect to an incumbent director, whether the director satisfactorily performed his or her duties as director during the preceding term, including attendance and participation at Board and Committee meetings, and other contributions as a director.

Back to Contents

In its discretion, the Committee may designate one or more of its members, or the entire Committee, to interview any proposed candidate. Based on all available information and relevant considerations, the Committee will recommend to the full Board for nomination those candidates who, in the view of the Committee, are most suited for membership on the Board.

The Committee has not received any recommendations for director nominees for election at the 2012 annual stockholders meeting from any Sysco security holder or group of security holders beneficially owning more than five percent of Sysco’s outstanding common stock.

Ifaddition, if we receive by June 6, 20139, 2016, a recommendation of a director candidate from one or more stockholders who have beneficially owned at least five percent of our outstanding common stock for at least one year as of the date the stockholder makes the recommendation, then we will disclose in our next proxy materials relating to the election of directors the identity of the candidate, the identity of the nominating stockholder(s) and whether the Committee determined to nominate such candidate for election to the Board. However, we will not provide this disclosure without first obtaining written consent of such disclosure from both the nominating stockholder and the candidate it is planning to identify.recommend. The Committee will maintain appropriate records regarding its process of identifying and evaluating candidates for election to the Board.

Director Qualifications

TheIn August 2015, we engaged in collaborative discussions with representatives of Trian Fund Management, L.P. (“Trian”), a management company for various investment funds and accounts and Sysco’s largest stockholder, as a result of which the Board determined to appoint Messrs. Peltz and Frank, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee consider the qualification of directors and director candidates individually and in the broader context of the Board’s overall composition and the company’s current and future needs. Below we identify and describe some of the key experience, qualifications and skills that our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee believes individuals serving as directors of Sysco should collectively bringrecommended by Trian, to the Board in additionand to nominate them for re-election at the Annual Meeting. The Committee has not received any other recommendations for director nominees for election at the 2015 annual stockholders meeting from any Sysco stockholders beneficially owning more than five percent of Sysco’s outstanding common stock.

Evaluation of Director Candidates.In evaluating all incumbent and new director candidates that the Committee believes merit consideration, the Committee will:

cause to be assembled information concerning the background and qualifications of the candidate, including information required to be disclosed in a proxy statement under the rules of the SEC or any other regulatory agency or exchange or trading system on which Sysco’s securities are listed, and any relationship between the candidate and the person or persons recommending the candidate;
determine if the candidate demonstrates the characteristics described below, including the highest personal and professional ethics, integrity and values;
consider the candidate’s skils, experience and qualifications in the context of the composition of the Board as a whole and the company’s evolving strategic priorities (see “Director Qualifications” below for a discussion of the key qualifications considered by the Committee in evaluating candidates);
consider the absence or presence of material relationships with Sysco that might impact independence;
consider the contribution that the candidate can be expected to make to the overall functioning of the Board;
consider the candidate’s capacity to be an effective director in light of the time required by the candidate’s primary occupation and service on other boards;
consider the extent to which the membership of the candidate on the Board will promote diversity among the directors; and
consider, with respect to an incumbent director, whether the director satisfactorily performed his or her duties as director during the preceding term, including attendance and participation at Board and Committee meetings, and other contributions as a director.

In its discretion, the Committee may designate one or more of its members, or the entire Committee, to interview any proposed candidate. Based on all available information and relevant considerations, the Committee will recommend to the key characteristics described above, and that are importantfull Board for nomination those candidates who, in light of our business and structure. The priorities and emphasis of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and of the Board with regard to these factors may change from time to time to take into account changes in our business and other trends, as well as the portfolio of skills and experience of current and prospective Board members.

Leadership, Corporate Strategy and Development Experience — The Board believes that experience as a senior executive in a large and complex public, private, government or academic organization enables a director to better oversee the management of the company. Such individuals also bring perspective in analyzing, shaping and overseeing the execution of important operational and policy issues at a senior level, and tend to demonstrate a practical understanding of organizations, strategy, risk management and the methods to drive change and growth. Finally, directors with experience in significant leadership positions generally possess the ability to identify and develop leadership qualities in others, including members of our management team.

Foodservice Industry or Marketing Experience — Directors with experience as executives, directors or in other leadership positions in various aspects of the foodservice industry gain extensive knowledge that is valuable to Sysco’s operating plan and strategy, including ways in which Sysco can better fulfill the needs of its customers and suppliers. In addition, as the foodservice market continues to mature, directors with marketing knowledge provide valuable insights as we focus on ways in which Sysco can grow organically by identifying and developing new markets.

Technology, e-Commerce and Enterprise Resource Planning Experience — Technology is already an integral part of Sysco’s distribution and supply chain. In addition, we are in the process of implementing a multi-year Enterprise Resource Planning (“ERP”)/Business Transformation Project, a component of which is designed to combine the systems of many Sysco operating companies into a single system. The use of a single system is expected to drive efficiencies and cost savings through consolidation and standardization, allow us to leverage data to make better decisions as we develop a better enterprise-wide view of the business and enhance our customers’ experience through improved online ordering and customer support systems. Directors with experience in the areas of technology and ERP implementation can provide valuable insights to guide these efforts.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   22


Back to Contents

Distribution/Supply Chain Experience — Directors that have experience in distribution logistics and supply chain management can help us find ways to optimize warehouse and delivery activities across the Sysco organization to achieve a more efficient delivery of products to our customers.

Global Experience/Broad International Exposure — Although Sysco’s primary focus is on growing and optimizing the core foodservice distribution business in North America we continue to explore and identify opportunities to grow our global capabilities in, and source products directly from, international markets. We benefit from the experience and insight of directors with a global business perspective as we identify the best strategic manner in which to expand our operations outside of North America. As Sysco’s reach becomes more global, directors with international business experience can assist us in navigating the business, political, and regulatory environments in countries in which Sysco does, or seeks to do, business.

Accounting, Finance and Financial Reporting Experience — An understanding of accounting, finance and financial reporting processes is importantCommittee, are most suited for our directors to evaluate our financial statements and capital investments. Although we expect all of our directors to be financially knowledgeable, many of our directors have developed much more extensive experience in accounting and financial matters through their executive leadership roles in the public and private sector.

Risk Management — The Board oversees management’s efforts to understand and evaluate the types of risks facing Sysco and its business, evaluate the magnitude of the exposure, and enhance risk management practices. Directors with risk management experience can provide valuable insights as Sysco seeks to strike an appropriate balance between enhancing profits and managing risk.

Public Company Board Experience — Directors who have served on other public company boards can offer advice and insights with regard to the dynamics and operation of the Board, board practices of other public companies and the relationship between the Board and the management team. Most public company directors also have corporate governance experience to support our goals of Board and management accountability, greater transparency, legal and regulatory compliance and the protection of stockholder interests. Many of our directors currently serve, or have previously served,membership on the boards of directors of other public companies.Board.

Diversity — Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for reviewing with the Board, on an annual basis, the requisite skills and characteristics new Board members should possess as well as the composition of the Board as a whole. This review includes consideration of diversity, age, skills, experience, time available and the number of other boards the member sits on in the context of the needs of the Board and the company, and such other criteria as the Committee shall determine to be relevant at the time. While the Board has not prescribed standards for considering diversity, as

As a matter of practice, itthe Board looks for diversity in nominees such that the individuals can enhance perspective and experience through diversity in race, gender, ethnicity, cultural background, age, geographic origin, education, and professional and life experience. Because we value gender and racial diversity among our Board members, three of our current Board members are women, including one African American and the Chairman of the Board, is Hispanic and two of our current Board members are from outside the United States.

Director Qualifications and Board Succession

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for reviewing with the Board, on an annual basis, the requisite characteristics, skills and qualifications that directors and director candidates should possess individually and in the broader context of the Board’s overall composition and the company’s business and structure. This review includes consideration of diversity, skills, experience, time available and the number of other boards for which the individual serves as a director, and such other criteria as the Committee shall determine to be relevant at the time. The Committee is also responsible for developing a succession plan for the Board and making recommendations to the Board regarding director succession matters.

Key Characteristics of All Nominees.We expect that each director nominee should demonstrate, and we believe that our incumbent directors possess, all of the following characteristics:

Integrity and Accountability:Directors must have demonstrated high ethical standards and integrity in their personal and professional dealings, and must be willing to act on – and remain accountable for – their boardroom decisions.
Intelligence, Wisdom and Judgment:Directors must be able to provide wise, thoughtful counsel on a broad range of issues and possess high intelligence, practical wisdom and mature judgment.
Financial Literacy:Directors must be financially literate and capable of understanding a balance sheet, an income statement and a cash flow statement, and capable of using financial ratios and other indices to evaluate a company’s financial performance.
Teamwork:Directors must possess a willingness to challenge management and other directors while working collaboratively as part of a team in an environment that encourages open, candid discussion.
Diversity:A director’s membership on the Board must promote diversity among the directors, including diversity of experience, views, gender, race, ethnicity and age.
High Performance Standards:Directors must have achieved prominence in their respective business, governmental, or professional activities, including a history of achievements reflecting high standards of performance.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement23

Back to Contents
Representing Stockholder Interests:Directors must have demonstrated their willingness and ability to effectively, consistently and appropriately represent the best interests of the company’s stockholders.
Commitment:Directors must have the ability and willingness, in light of their principal occupation and other board service, to commit the time and energy necessary to be fully prepared for, and to participate in, meetings and consultations on Company matters.
Conflicts:Directors must not have an interest in any agreement, arrangement or understanding with any person or entity that might limit or interfere with their ability to comply with their fiduciary duties to the Company and its stockholders.
Company Policies:Directors must recognize and affirm their obligation to comply with the company’s Code of Conduct, Corporate Governance Guidelines and other policies and guidelines of the company applicable to them.

Director Qualifications.During fiscal year 2015, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee implemented several enhancements to its process for identifying the portfolio of skills, characteristics and qualifications necessary for the Board to successfully establish and oversee management’s execution of the company’s evolving strategic priorities. The Committee surveyed director qualifications as recently disclosed by each of the Fortune 100 companies and developed a comprehensive list of qualification categories. At the request of the Chairman of the Board and the Committee, senior management reviewed this list of qualification categories and identified the relative significance of each category to the ability of the Board as a whole to guide the company in the achievement of its strategic priorities. Subsequently, each then-current director was requested to engage in a similar review of the qualification categories in light of the company’s strategic priorities. Additionally, the Board retained an independent law firm to collect and analyze the feedback from the individual directors concerning the qualification categories and report to the Committee and the Board. The Committee, together with the Board as a whole, utilized this feedback from senior management and the individual directors to identify the director qualifications that the Board has endorsed as most significant for the Board to possess, collectively, and which are described below.

Executive Leadership/Management— Experience as a senior executive in a large and complex public, private, government or academic organization enables a director to better oversee the management of the company. Such individuals also bring perspective in analyzing, shaping and overseeing the execution of important operational and policy issues at a senior level, and tend to demonstrate a practical understanding of organizations, strategy, risk management and methods to drive change and growth. Finally, directors with experience in significant leadership positions generally possess the ability to identify and develop leadership qualities in others, including members of our management team.
Strategy Development— Directors who have served as a senior executive for large and complex public, private, governmental or academic organizations with responsibility for strategic planning and development are particularly well suited to advise and oversee management in establishing and executing the company’s key strategic initiatives, as well as in evaluating the success of those initiatives.
Business Operations— Directors with experience in leadership positions with responsibility for managing or overseeing operations of a company or business unit gain extensive knowledge that is valuable to Sysco’s operating plan and strategy, including ways in which Sysco can better fulfill the needs of its customers and suppliers.
Accounting/Audit/Financial Reporting— An understanding of accounting, audit and financial reporting processes is important for our directors to establish appropriate financial performance objectives for the company and senior management in the context of Sysco’s strategic priorities, and to evaluate financial performance as compared to those objectives.
Risk Oversight/Risk Management— The Board oversees management’s efforts to understand and evaluate the types of risks facing Sysco and its business, evaluate the magnitude of the exposure, and enhance risk management practices. Directors with risk management experience can provide valuable insights as Sysco seeks to strike an appropriate balance between enhancing profits and managing risk.
Public Company Board Service— Directors who have served on other public company boards can offer advice and insights with regard to the dynamics and operation of the Board, board practices of other public companies and the relationship between the Board and the management team. Most public company directors also have corporate governance experience to support our goals of Board and management accountability, greater transparency, legal and regulatory compliance and the protection of stockholder interests. Many of our directors currently serve, or have previously served, on the boards of directors of other public companies and served in leadership positions on those boards.
Finance— Directors with an understanding of financial markets and financing and funding operations can provide valuable advice and insights to the Finance Committee and the Board with respect to the establishment of a successful capital strategy for the company and the evaluation of proposed capital transactions in light of that strategy.
Communications/Investor Relations— Directors experienced with investor and/or public relations functions of a public company are capable of guiding management in its engagement with media, investors, the financial community and other constituencies, and can provide advice and insights in connection with the development of consistent messaging concerning important matters, especially Sysco’s financial performance and strategic priorities.
HR/Talent Management/Large Workforce— Directors with human resources experience can offer guidance on Sysco’s talent management strategy, particularly in connection with recruiting, assessing, incentivizing and rewarding corporate executives and other senior leadership.
International/Global— Although Sysco’s primary focus is on growing and optimizing the core foodservice distribution business in North America, we continue to explore and identify opportunities to grow our global capabilities in, and source products directly from, international markets. We benefit from the experience and insight of directors with a global business perspective as we identify the best strategic manner in which to expand our operations outside of North America. As Sysco’s reach becomes more global, directors with international business experience can assist us in navigating the business, political, and regulatory environments in countries in which Sysco does, or seeks to do, business.
Foodservice Industry Experience— Experience serving as an executive, director or in another leadership position with a company in the foodservice industry enables a director to oversee more effectively our operations and to provide advice and guidance on issues impacting our business. In addition, as the foodservice market continues to mature, directors with industry experience can provide valuable insights as we focus on ways in which Sysco can grow organically by identifying and developing new markets.
Technology/e-Commerce— We use technology in substantially all aspects of our business operations, and we expect to continue employing technology in furtherance of our strategic priorities. Directors with experience in technology and e-commerce are well suited to oversee management’s selection and implementation of key technological solutions and its approach to privacy issues and cyber security risks.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement24

Back to Contents

In selecting the director nominees, the Committee and the Board reviewed each of the incumbent directors in light of these qualifications and the company’s strategic priorities and concluded that each of the nominees contributed significantly to the portfolio of requisite skills, characteristics and qualifications and to the Board’s overall composition. The Committee and the Board will also apply these key qualifications in connection with its Board succession planning efforts to identify appropriate candidates for future Board service.

The priorities and emphasis of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and of the Board with regard to these qualifications will likely change from time to time as the company’s strategic priorities and the composition of the Board evolve. Included in the individual biographies below is a discussion of the most significant aspects of each director’s background that strengthen the Board’s collective qualifications, skills and experience and that the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Board considered in reaching their conclusion that he or she should continue to serve as a director of Sysco.

Nominees for Election as Directors at the 20122015 Annual Meeting

Three directors are to be elected at the meeting. The Board of Directors currently consists of 11 members. The Board of Directors is currently divided into three classes, and previously the directors of only one of the three classes were elected at each annual meeting, for a three-year term. However, at last year’s annual meeting of stockholders, the stockholders approved an amendment to the Bylaws to provide for the staggered de-classification of the Board, beginning this year.

This year, three directors are nominated for election at the annual meeting, for a term of one year only. The Board’s nominees are those directors who were previously designated as Class II directors, whose terms expire at this year’s annual meeting. The terms of those directors designated as Class III directors will expire at the 2013 annual meeting, and the terms of those directors designated as Class I directors will expire at the 2014 annual meeting. Beginning with the 2014 Annual Meeting, all directors will be elected for a one-year term.

The Board of Directors has nominated the following threetwelve persons for election as directors to serve for one-year terms or until their successors are elected and qualified:

Jonathan Golden

Joseph A. Hafner, Jr.

John M. Cassaday
Judith B. Craven, M.D.
William J. DeLaney
Joshua D. Frank
Larry C. Glasscock
Jonathan Golden
Joseph A. Hafner, Jr.
Hans-Joachim Koerber
Nancy S. Newcomb
Nelson Peltz
Richard G. Tilghman
Jackie M. Ward

Each of the nominees is currently serving as a director of Sysco and was previously designated as a Class II director.Sysco. Each of the nominees has consented to serve if elected. Although management does not contemplate the possibility, in the event any nominee is not a candidate or is unable to serve as a director at the time of the election, the proxies will vote for any nominee who is designated by the present Board of Directors to fill the vacancy.

The Board believes that the combination of the various qualifications, skills and experiences of the nominees for election as Directors at the 20122015 Annual Meeting would contribute to an effective and well-functioning Board. Set forth below is biographical information for each director, includingof the nominees for election as a director at the 20122015 Annual Meeting. Unless otherwise noted, the persons named below have been engaged in the principal occupations shown for the past five years or longer. In addition to the information described below, many of our directors serve as trustees, directors or officers of various non-profit, educational, charitable and philanthropic organizations.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR each of the nominees listed above.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   23


Back to Contents

Board Composition

Nominees for Election as Directors at the 2012 Annual Meeting (Previously Designated as Class II Directors):

  Jonathan Golden

Age: 75

Director Since: February 1984

Committees: Finance Committee, Corporate Sustainability Committee

Primary Occupation: Mr. Golden is a partner of Arnall Golden Gregory LLP, counsel to Sysco.

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Golden is a graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School. He also has served as an adjunct professor at Emory Law School in Atlanta for nine years. Mr. Golden, who is not considered an independent director, has developed an extensive knowledge of Sysco’s business through his service as a director of the company since 1984 and through Arnall Golden Gregory LLP, a firm that has served as legal advisor to the company on numerous transactions. Mr. Golden has served as Chairman of that firm for approximately eleven years. He personally has a long history of representing participants in the food industry, including manufacturers, distributors and food industry trade associations. Mr. Golden has gained further experience regarding the distribution and supply chain of foodservice companies as a member of the Board of Directors of a major privately-held food manufacturer that is the leader in the frozen food industry and sells to foodservice customers, particularly in-store bakeries and retail marketplaces. In addition to his legal and regulatory experience and focus on corporate responsibility, Mr. Golden has developed a knowledge of other public company Board practices through his past service on the Boards of The Profit Recovery Group International, Inc., Intermedics, Inc., Automatic Service Company and Butler Shoe Corp.

  Joseph A. Hafner, Jr.

Age: 67

Director Since: November 2003

Committees: Finance Committee (Chair), Audit Committee, Corporate Sustainability Committee

Primary Occupation: Mr. Hafner retired as Chairman of Riviana Foods, Inc. in 2006, a position he had held since March 2005. He served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Riviana from 1984 until March 2004.

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Hafner attended Dartmouth College, where he graduated cum laude, then earned a master of business administration degree with high distinction from Dartmouth’s Amos Tuck School of Business Administration. After graduation, Mr. Hafner served for two years in the Latin American Internship Program of Cornell University and the Ford Foundation in Lima, Peru, followed by two years with the Arthur Andersen & Co. accounting firm in Houston. In 1972, Mr. Hafner began his career with Riviana Foods, Inc. in Guatemala City as Controller of Riviana’s Central American Division. For over 30 years, Mr. Hafner worked in positions of increasing authority for Riviana, a company that processed, marketed and distributed rice products in the U.S. and Europe, as well as other food products in Central America and Europe. Mr. Hafner continued his international exposure through the oversight of Riviana’s rice operations in South Africa and Australia. His career culminated in his service as President and CEO of Riviana for over 20 years, providing him with experience in the areas of leadership, corporate strategy and development, the foodservice industry, distribution and supply chains, finance and accounting and international operations. In addition, Mr. Hafner has developed finance and accounting expertise during his career at Arthur Andersen and Riviana and is a member of the American Institute of Certified Professional Accountants.

  Nancy S. Newcomb

Age: 67

Director Since: February 2006

Committees: Audit Committee, Finance Committee

Primary Occupation: Ms. Newcomb served as Senior Corporate Officer, Risk Management, of Citigroup from May 1998 until her retirement in 2004. She served as a customer group executive of Citicorp (the predecessor corporation of Citigroup) from December 1995 to April 1998, and as a division executive, Latin America from September 1993 to December 1995. From January 1988 to August 1993 she was the principal financial officer, responsible for liquidity, funding and capital management.

Other Boards: Ms. Newcomb is a director of The DIRECTV Group, Inc., and during the last five years, was a director of Moody’s Corporation.

Key Director Qualifications: Ms. Newcomb is a graduate of Connecticut College and received a Master’s Degree in Economics from Boston University. She also graduated from Harvard Business School’s Program for Management Development. Ms. Newcomb’s 35-year career with Citigroup, a major international financial services company, and its predecessors Citicorp and Citibank, provided her with experience in the areas of leadership, corporate strategy and development, finance, risk management and international operations. Ms. Newcomb developed extensive risk management experience throughout her career, including holding the position of Citigroup’s Senior Corporate Officer of Risk Management for the last six years of her career. In the area of Finance and International Operations, Ms. Newcomb served as Citigroup’s Principal Financial Officer, responsible for liquidity, funding and capital management. She has had extensive international experience as head of worldwide treasury operations in over 100 countries, and co-head of Citigroup’s global, multinational customer business.

Directors whose terms expire at the 2013 Annual Meeting (Class III Directors):

John M. Cassaday

Age: 5962

Director Since: November 2004

Committees: Compensation Committee (Chair), Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee

Primary Occupation: Since September 1999, Mr. Cassaday has served as President and Chief Executive Officer as well as a director, of Corus Entertainment Inc., a media and entertainment company based from September 1999 until his retirement in Canada.March 2015.

Other Boards: Mr. Cassaday is a director of Manulife Financial Corporation, Sleep Country Canada Holdings Inc. and Spin Master Ltd. and a director of Corus Entertainment Inc.one privately held company: Irving Oil Limited.

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Cassaday earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Western Ontario and a Master of Business Administration Degree with honors from the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management. Prior to his current positionmore than 15 years of service as the founding President and CEOChief Executive Officer of Corus Entertainment Inc., a Canadian leader in radio and specialtycable television, Mr. Cassaday served as President and CEO of CTV Television Network Ltd. Mr. Cassaday’s career prior to broadcasting included executive positions in a number of leading packaged goods companies, including RJR-Macdonald, Inc., General Foods Corporation and Campbell Soup Company, where he gained food processing and food safety experience while advancing through positions in sales, marketing, and strategic planning in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. His career at Campbell’s culminated in service as President of Campbell Soup Company’s operations in Canada and then the United Kingdom. Mr. Cassaday gained additional foodservice experience through his service as a director of Loblaw Companies Limited, Canada’s largest food distributor, and of J.M. Schnieder, a meat processing company. This background has provided Mr. Cassaday with extensive experience and knowledge in the areas of leadership, corporate strategy and development, the foodservice industry, distribution and supply chains, marketing, international operations, accounting, finance and financial reporting. In addition, Mr. Cassaday’s service on the Board of Directors of Manulife Financial Corporation has provided a greater understanding of risk management and global compensation considerations. Mr. Cassaday has received many business, industry and charitable honors, including designation as the most distinguished alumni of the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management in 1998, receipt of the Gold Medal from the Association of Canadian Advertisers in 2004 (which recognizes individuals who have made an outstanding contribution to the advancement of marketing communications in Canada) and, induction in the Marketing Hall of Legends of Canada in 2006.2006 and induction into the Canadian Broadcast and Music Hall of Fame in 2015. In 2013, Mr. Cassaday was inducted into the Order of Canada, Canada’s highest civilian honor.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    2425


Back to Contents

  Manuel A. Fernandez

Age: 66

Director Since: November 2006 (Mr. Fernandez has served as the Executive Chairman of the Board since April 2012, and prior to April 2012, he served as non-executive Chairman of the Board since June 2009)

Committees: Mr. Fernandez was a member of Sysco’s Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and Compensation Committee until April 2012, when he was elected Executive Chairman of the Board. He currently serves on the Finance Committee.

Primary Occupation: Mr. Fernandez has served as Executive Chairman of Sysco since April 2012. Prior to his present positions, Mr. Fernandez was Chairman, President, and CEO of Gartner, Inc., a leading information technology research and consulting company and the Managing Director of SI Ventures, a venture capital firm focusing on information technology and communications infrastructure companies that enable e-business.

Other Boards: Mr. Fernandez also serves on the board of directors of Brunswick Corporation and Flowers Foods, Inc., and during the last five years was a director of Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. and of its predecessor the Black & Decker Company.

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Fernandez earned a Bachelor’s Degree in electrical engineering from the University of Florida and completed post-graduate studies in solid state engineering. He began his career in engineering positions, eventually becoming a Group Executive Vice President of Fairchild Semiconductor with direct oversight for operations and manufacturing facilities in the US and in several foreign countries. Among the engineering breakthroughs in his career, Mr. Fernandez was part of a design team at Harris Semiconductors that developed the first programmable memory. He later served as President and CEO of three technology-driven companies, including Zilog Incorporated (a publicly-traded semiconductor manufacturer and a leader in the microprocessor industry, with operations in over 20 countries), Gavilan Computer Corporation (a technology company he founded that developed one of the first battery-operated laptop computers in 1982) and Dataquest (an information services company that was later acquired by Gartner). During Mr. Fernandez’s service as CEO and later Chairman of the Board of Gartner, he oversaw the company’s dramatic growth, from a research boutique with revenue of $46 million in 1991 to a global technology research and advisory firm with over $950 million of revenue in 2001, including taking the company public in 1994. At the time of his retirement, Gartner had locations in over 40 international locations serving customers in 80 countries. Together, these positions provided Mr. Fernandez with extensive leadership, corporate strategy and development, information technology, IT strategy, strategic planning and international experience.

Mr. Fernandez has gained knowledge of distribution and supply chains as a member of the Board of Directors of:

Brunswick Corporation, a leading global manufacturer and marketer of recreation products including marine engines, boats, fitness equipment and bowling and billiards equipment, where he currently serves as Lead Director and a member of the Human Resources and Compensation Committee (which he previously chaired) and previously served as chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee;

The Black & Decker Corporation, a leading global manufacturer and marketer of power tools and accessories, hardware and home improvement products, and technology-based fastening systems, where he previously served as Lead Director and Chairman of the Corporate Governance Committee; and

Stanley Black & Decker, Inc., a diversified global supplier of hand tools, power tools and related accessories, mechanical access solutions and electronic security solutions, where he served on the Finance and Pension Committee and the Corporate Governance Committee.

Mr. Fernandez’s service on the Board of Directors of Flowers Foods, Inc., one of the largest producers and marketers of bakery products in the United States, has provided him with extensive knowledge of the foodservice industry. At Flowers Foods he also serves as chairman of the Compensation Committee and a member of the Corporate Governance Committee.

Mr. Fernandez has invested in over 20 start-up companies in the information technology field, has served on the Boards of Directors of multiple public and private companies and was appointed by the President of the United States as a member of the Presidential Information Technology Action Committee. He is a former Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the University of Florida.

  Hans-Joachim Koerber

Age: 66

Director Since: January 2008

Committees: Audit Committee, Finance Committee

Primary Occupation: Dr. Koerber served as the chairman and chief executive officer of METRO Group, Germany’s largest retailer, from 1999 until his retirement in October 2007.

Other Boards: Dr. Koerber is chairman of the board of directors of Air Berlin PLC and Esprit Holdings Limited, as well as a director of several private European companies, including Klüh GbR, WEPA Industrieholding SE and Deutsche Amphibolin-Werke von Robert Murjahn Stiftung GmbH & Co KG.

Key Director Qualifications: Dr. Koerber earned a degree as a Master Brewer in Brewing Technology and a Ph.D. in Business Management from the Technical University of Berlin. Dr. Koerber began his career in the beverage industry, including management positions in which he was responsible for finance and accounting, information technology, purchasing and personnel. He first became involved with the company that would eventually become METRO when he joined the predecessor company’s cash-and-carry, self-service wholesale company in charge of finance and accounting, controlling, logistics and information technology. His responsibilities continued to expand to include international cash-and-carry activities in six countries. When METRO AG was formed in 1996, Dr. Koerber became part of the METRO management board. His responsibilities included corporate development, corporate communications and investor relations and he became chairman and chief executive officer in 1999. Dr. Koerber introduced a new management style, streamlined the company to focus on four of the original 16 business divisions in order to remain competitive and achieve profitability, adopted international accounting standards and rapidly developed METRO’s international presence, including hands-on experience in expanding METRO into Eastern Europe and Asia, including China and India. These efforts helped make METRO Germany’s largest retailer, operating wholesale cash & carry stores, supermarkets, hypermarkets, department stores and consumer electronics shops throughout the world. Throughout his career, Dr. Koerber developed experience and qualifications in the areas of leadership, corporate strategy and development, the foodservice industry, distribution and supply chains, marketing and risk management. Dr. Koerber’s insights on running and expanding a foodservice business with international operations have been, and will continue to be, particularly helpful to Sysco. Dr. Koerber’s career at METRO AG, combined with his 10 years of service on the Board of Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (the parent company of the SEB Group, a North European banking concern catering to corporations, institutions, and private individuals) and the Board of Directors of several other international companies, has provided him with financial expertise, particularly with regard to international financial accounting standards. His service on the Board of Air Berlin PLC (Germany’s second largest airline) has deepened his experience in marketing.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   25


Back to Contents

  Jackie M. Ward

Age: 74

Director Since: September 2001 (Lead Director since May 2012)

Committees: Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee (Chair), Compensation Committee

Primary Occupation: Ms. Ward is the former Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Computer Generation Incorporated (CGI), a company she founded in 1968 that was acquired in December 2000 by Crescent Capital and later Intec Telecom Systems PLC, a technology company based in the United Kingdom.

Other Boards: Director of Flowers Foods, Inc., Sanmina-SCI Corporation and WellPoint, Inc. In the last five years, Ms. Ward also served as a director of Bank of America Corporation and Equifax Inc.

Key Director Qualifications: Ms. Ward attended Georgia State College for Women and the University of Georgia Extension Center, where she majored in psychology and mathematics. She later attended the London School of Business and was awarded a Doctor of Laws from Mercer University. Early in her career, Ms. Ward held programming, engineering, marketing and management positions with UNIVAC (a division of Sperry Corporation), General Electric Company and J.P. Stevens Company. Ms. Ward then founded, was elected chairman, president and chief executive officer, and had over 30 years of experience with Computer Generation Incorporated (CGI), a provider of software/hardware solutions to the telecommunications and general industry with operations in the U.S., England and much of Europe, Australia, South Africa, Mexico and Latin America. Ms. Ward’s lengthy career has provided her with extensive leadership, information technology, retail/mass marketing, corporate strategy and development, finance, banking, and international experience. In addition, significant projects undertaken by CGI for governmental and private entities provided unique experience for Ms. Ward in developing and implementing supply chain inventory control systems, fraud detection systems and software/hardware to handle generalized and specific accounting functions. Ms. Ward has gained knowledge of the foodservice industry through her membership on the Board of Directors of Flowers Foods, Inc., one of the largest producers and marketers of bakery products in the U.S., as well as developing systems for related food clients, such as Edwards Baking Company and Eastern Food Services. She also has significant public company board experience as a current or former member of numerous Boards of Directors where she served in various leadership positions, including lead director, presiding director and the chairman of various committees. With respect to Flowers Foods, Ms. Ward currently serves as the Chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and a member of the Compensation and Executive Committees. With respect to WellPoint, Ms. Ward currently serves as Chairman of the Board, Chair of the Corporate Governance Committee and Executive Committee, and a member of the Compensation Committee. She also serves on the Nominating and Governance Committee of Sanmina-SCI Corporation. Ms. Ward furthered her expertise in the areas of finance and risk management as Chairman of the Asset Quality Committee of Bank of America’s Board of Directors for 15 years and her expertise in the areas of accounting and internal audit as a member of the Board of PRG-Schultz International, Inc., which provides recovery audit services to organizations with high volumes of payment transactions, including retail and wholesale businesses, manufacturers, health care, and government agencies.

Directors whose terms expire at the 2014 Annual Meeting (Class I Directors):

Judith B. Craven, M.D.

Age: 6670

Director Since: July 1996

Committees: Corporate Sustainability Committee (Chair), Compensation Committee, Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee Compensation Committee

Primary Occupation: Dr. Craven served as President of the United Way of the Texas Gulf Coast from 1992 until her retirement in September 1998.

Other Boards: Director of Belo Corporation, Luby’s, Inc., Sun America Funds and VALIC. In the last five years, Dr. Craven served as a director of Belo Corporation.

Key Director Qualifications:Dr. Craven earned a B.S. degree in Biology and English from Bowling Green State University, then completed premedical requirements at Texas Southern University before earning a Doctor of Medicine from Baylor College of Medicine and a Master of Public Health from the University of Texas School of Public Health. She also completed the Harvard University Program for Senior Managers in Government at the John F. Kennedy School of Government. Dr. Craven provides a unique viewpoint on Sysco’s Board as a medical doctor and distinguished public health expert. She gained a distinctive understanding of the foodservice industry after serving as Director of Public Health for the City of Houston from 1980 through 1983, which included responsibility for the regulation of all foodservice establishments in the City of Houston, including an emphasis on food safety and food handling. Following this appointment, Dr. Craven served as Dean of the University of Texas School of Allied Health Sciences from 1983 to 1992. She also serves on the Board of Directors of Luby’s, Inc., which operates almost 100 restaurants and provides food services to select hospital and other medical institutions in Texas. Dr. Craven also has a strong commitment to diversity and social responsibility, having led many initiatives to help increase and incorporate diversity in schools, the workplace and the community. Dr. Craven served as Vice President for Multicultural Affairs for the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston from 1987 to 1992, and served as Chair of the Committee on Diversity for the University of Texas Board of Regents for six years. Under Dr. Craven’s leadership as president for six years, The United Way of The Texas Gulf Coast won the first National Award for diversity from the United Way of America. She has also served as a member of the Board of Directors of Compaq Corporation and the Houston Branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Dr. Craven has received numerous awards and honors, including the NAACP VIP Award for Community Service, Houston’s Thirty Most Influential Black Women Award and induction into the Texas Women’s Hall of Fame in 1989.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   26


Back to Contents

William J. DeLaney

Age: 5659

Director Since: January 2009

Committees: Finance Committee

Primary Occupation: Mr. DeLaneybegan servingDeLaney has served as Sysco’s Chief Executive Officer insince March 2009. He assumed the additional title of2009 and President insince March 2010. Mr. DeLaney began his Sysco career in 1987 as Assistant Treasurer at the company’s corporate headquarters. He was promoted to Treasurer in 1991, and in 1993 he was named a Vice President of the company, continuing in those responsibilities until 1994. Mr. DeLaney joined Sysco Food Services of Syracuse in 1996 as chief financial officer, progressed to senior vice president in 1998 and executive vice president in 2002. In 2004, Mr. DeLaney was appointed president and chief executive officer of Sysco Food Services of Charlotte. He held that position until December 2006, when he was named Sysco’s Senior Vice President of Financial Reporting. Effective July 1, 2007, Mr. DeLaney was promoted to the role of Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and continued to serve in such position following his promotion to CEO until October 2009.

Other Boards: Mr. DeLaney is a director of Express Scripts, Inc. and serves on the Compensation Committee and the Audit Committee of the Express Scripts, Inc. Board of Directors.

Key Director Qualifications:Mr. DeLaney earned a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from the University of Notre Dame, and a Master of Business Administration degree from the Wharton Graduate Division of the University of Pennsylvania. Mr. DeLaney has worked in various capacities at Sysco and its subsidiaries for more than 2025 years. Through various accounting, finance, operations and management positions within Sysco and its operating companies, Mr. DeLaney has gained valuable insight into the foodservice industry, as well as Sysco’s competitive advantages and how to further build upon them. Throughout his career, Mr. DeLaney has developed experience and knowledge in the areas of leadership and management development, corporate strategy and development, finance and accounting and distribution and supply chain management. Further, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Board believe that it is appropriate and beneficial to Sysco to have its Chief Executive Officer serve as management’s voice on the Board.

Joshua D. Frank

Age: 36

Director Since: August 2015

Committees: Compensation Committee, Finance Committee

Primary Occupation: Mr. Frank is a Partner at Trian Fund Management, L.P. and has been a member of the Trian investment team since Trian’s formation in 2005.

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Frank has played a leading role in many of Trian’s investments in the consumer sector, including investments in Mondelēz International, Inc., H.J. Heinz Company and PepsiCo, Inc., as well as numerous investments across other industries. Mr. Frank was previously an Associate, Corporate Development, of Triarc Companies, Inc. (now known as The Wendy’s Company) (“Triarc”). Prior to joining Triarc in 2003, Mr. Frank worked at Credit Suisse First Boston from 2001 to 2003, where he spent time in both the mergers & acquisitions and healthcare investment banking groups. Throughout his career, Mr. Frank has developed experience and knowledge in the areas of corporate strategy development, finance, accounting, mergers and acquisitions, foodservice and the broader consumer sector. Mr. Frank graduatedcum laude from Yale University with a B.A. in Economics.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement26

Back to Contents

Larry C. Glasscock

Age: 6467

Director Since: September 2010

Committees: Compensation Committee, Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee (Chair), Compensation Committee, Corporate Sustainability Committee

Primary Occupation: In March 2010, Mr. Glasscock retired from his position as Chairman of the Board of Directors of WellPoint, Inc., one of the largest health benefits companies in the United States, (now Anthem, Inc.) after serving in the role since November 2005. He also served as WellPoint’s President and CEO from November 2004 until July 2007.

Mr. Glasscock previously served as Chairman, President and CEO of Anthem, Inc., a health benefits company, from 2001 to 2004, assuming additional responsibilities as Chairman from 2003 to 2004.

Other Boards: Mr. Glasscock has served as a director of Simon Property Group, Inc., a real estate investment trust, since March 2010; a2010, where he is currently the lead independent director, of Sprint Nextel Corp. since August 2007; and as a director of Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc., a global leader in the design, development, manufacture and marketing of orthopedic reconstructive implants, dental implants, spinal implants, trauma products and related surgical devices, since August 2001.2001, where he is currently the non-executive chairman of the board. In the last five years, Mr. Glasscock served as a director of WellPoint, Inc. and Sprint Nextel Corporation.

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Mr. Glasscock attended Cleveland State University, where he received a bachelor’s degree in business administration. He later studied at the School of International Banking, participated in the American Bankers Association Conference of Executive Officers, and completed the Commercial Bank Management Program at Columbia University. Mr. Glasscock has developed significant leadership and corporate strategy expertise through over 30 years of business experience, including former service as President and CEO of WellPoint, Inc., COO of CareFirst, Inc., President and CEO of Group Hospitalization and Medical Services, Inc., President and COO of First American Bank, N.A., and President and CEO of Essex Holdings, Inc. During his tenure at WellPoint, Inc., he played a major role in transforming the company from a regional health insurer into a national healthcare leader and championed company efforts to improve quality and customer service. Throughout his career, Mr. Glasscock has developed expertise in the successful completion and integration of mergers, utilization of technology to improve productivity and customer service, and team building and human capital development. Mr. Glasscock’s expertise in the utilization of technology to improve productivity will be valuable to Sysco as we continue to implement and build upontechnological solutions in connection with our Business Transformation Project.strategic priorities. His knowledge and experience in team building and human capital development are also extremely valuable to Sysco, as management development was oneand succession planning remain top priorities of our CEO’s key non-financial goalsexecutive management and the Board during fiscal 2012.2016. Mr. Glasscock also has considerable financial experience, as he has supervised the chief financial officers of major corporations. Earlier in his career he served as a bank officer lending to major corporations and supervised assessments of companies’ creditworthiness. Mr. Glasscock also has significant experience as a public company director and as a member of various committees related to important board functions, including audit, finance, governance and compensation.

Jonathan Golden

Age: 78

Director Since: February 1984

Committees: Corporate Sustainability Committee, Finance Committee

Primary Occupation: Mr. Golden is a partner of Arnall Golden Gregory LLP, counsel to Sysco.  

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Golden is a graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School. He also has served as an adjunct professor at Emory Law School in Atlanta for nine years. Mr. Golden, who is not considered an independent director, has developed an extensive knowledge of Sysco’s business through his service as a director of the company since 1984 and through Arnall Golden Gregory LLP, a firm that has served as legal advisor to the company on numerous transactions. Mr. Golden has served as Chairman of that firm for approximately eleven years. He personally has a long history of representing participants in the food industry, including manufacturers, distributors and food industry trade associations. Mr. Golden has gained further experience regarding the distribution and supply chain of foodservice companies as a member of the Board of Directors of a major privately-held food manufacturer that is a leader in the frozen food industry and sells to foodservice customers, particularly in-store bakeries and retail marketplaces. In addition to his legal and regulatory experience and focus on corporate responsibility, Mr. Golden has developed a knowledge of other public company Board practices through his past service on the Boards of The Profit Recovery Group International, Inc., Intermedics, Inc., Automatic Service Company and Butler Shoe Corp.

Joseph A. Hafner, Jr.

Age: 70

Director Since: November 2003

Committees: Finance Committee (Chair), Audit Committee, Corporate Sustainability Committee

Primary Occupation: Mr. Hafner retired as Chairman of Riviana Foods, Inc. in 2006, a position he had held since March 2005. He served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Riviana from 1984 until March 2004.

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Hafner attended Dartmouth College, where he graduatedcum laude, then earned a master of business administration degree with high distinction from Dartmouth’s Amos Tuck School of Business Administration. After graduation, Mr. Hafner served for two years in the Latin American Internship Program of Cornell University and the Ford Foundation in Lima, Peru, followed by two years with the Arthur Andersen & Co. accounting firm in Houston. In 1972, Mr. Hafner began his career with Riviana Foods, Inc. in Guatemala City as Controller of Riviana’s Central American Division. For over 30 years, Mr. Hafner worked in positions of increasing authority for Riviana, a company that processed, marketed and distributed rice products in the U.S. and Europe, as well as other food products in Central America and Europe. Mr. Hafner continued his international exposure through the oversight of Riviana’s rice operations in South Africa and Australia. His career culminated in his service as President and CEO of Riviana for over 20 years, providing him with experience in the areas of leadership, corporate strategy and development, the foodservice industry, distribution and supply chains, finance and accounting and international operations. In addition, Mr. Hafner has developed finance and accounting expertise during his career at Arthur Andersen and Riviana and is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement27

Back to Contents

Hans-Joachim Koerber

Age: 69

Director Since: January 2008

Committees: Audit Committee, Finance Committee

Primary Occupation: Dr. Koerber served as the chairman and chief executive officer of METRO Group from 1999 until his retirement in October 2007.

Other Boards: Dr. Koerber is chairman of the board of directors of Air Berlin PLC and a director of Eurocash SA, as well as a director of several private European companies, including Klüh Service management GmbH, WEPA Industrieholding SE and DAW SE.

Key Director Qualifications: Dr. Koerber earned a degree as a Master Brewer in Brewing Technology and a Ph.D. in Business Management from the Technical University of Berlin. Dr. Koerber began his career in the beverage industry, including management positions in which he was responsible for finance and accounting, information technology, purchasing and personnel. He first became involved with the company that would eventually become METRO when he joined the predecessor company’s cash-and-carry, self-service wholesale company in charge of finance and accounting, controlling, logistics and information technology. His responsibilities continued to expand to include international cash-and-carry activities in six countries. When METRO AG was formed in 1996, Dr. Koerber became part of the METRO management board. His responsibilities included corporate development, corporate communications and investor relations and he became chairman and chief executive officer in 1999. Dr. Koerber introduced a new management style, streamlined the company to focus on four of the original 16 business divisions in order to remain competitive and achieve profitability, adopted international accounting standards and rapidly developed METRO’s international presence, including hands-on experience in expanding METRO into Eastern Europe and Asia, including China and India. These efforts helped make METRO Germany’s largest retailer, operating wholesale cash & carry stores, supermarkets, hypermarkets, department stores and consumer electronics shops throughout the world. Throughout his career, Dr. Koerber developed experience and qualifications in the areas of leadership, corporate strategy and development, the foodservice industry, distribution and supply chains, marketing and risk management. Dr. Koerber’s insights on running and expanding a foodservice business with international operations have been, and will continue to be, particularly helpful to Sysco. Dr. Koerber’s career at METRO AG, combined with his 10 years of service on the Board of Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (the parent company of the SEB Group, a North European banking concern catering to corporations, institutions, and private individuals) and the Board of Directors of several other international companies, has provided him with financial expertise, particularly with regard to international financial accounting standards. His service on the Board of Air Berlin PLC (Germany’s second largest airline) has deepened his experience in marketing.

Nancy S. Newcomb

Age: 70

Director Since: February 2006

Committees: Audit Committee, Finance Committee

Primary Occupation: Ms. Newcomb served as Senior Corporate Officer, Risk Management, of Citigroup from May 1998 until her retirement in 2004. She served as a customer group executive of Citicorp (the predecessor corporation of Citigroup) from December 1995 to April 1998, and as a division executive, Latin America from September 1993 to December 1995. From January 1988 to August 1993 she was the principal financial officer, responsible for liquidity, funding and capital management.

Other Boards: In the last five years, Ms. Newcomb served as a director of The DIRECTV Group, Inc. and Moody’s Corporation.

Key Director Qualifications: Ms. Newcomb is a graduate of Connecticut College and received a Master’s Degree in Economics from Boston University. She also graduated from Harvard Business School’s Program for Management Development. Ms. Newcomb’s 35-year career with Citigroup, a major international financial services company, and its predecessors Citicorp and Citibank, provided her with experience in the areas of leadership, corporate strategy and development, finance, risk management and international operations. Ms. Newcomb developed extensive risk management experience throughout her career, including holding the position of Citigroup’s Senior Corporate Officer of Risk Management for the last six years of her career. In the area of Finance and International Operations, Ms. Newcomb served as Citigroup’s Principal Financial Officer, responsible for liquidity, funding and capital management. She has had extensive international experience as head of worldwide treasury operations in over 100 countries, and co-head of Citigroup’s global, multinational customer business.

Nelson Peltz

Age: 73

Director Since: August 2015

Committees: Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee

Primary Occupation: Mr. Peltz has served as the Chief Executive Officer and a Founding Partner of Trian Fund Management, L.P. since its formation in 2005. From April 1993 through June 2007, Mr. Peltz served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Triarc Companies, Inc. (now known as The Wendy’s Company).

Other Boards: Mr. Peltz has served as a director of Mondelēz International, Inc. since January 2014, as a director of The Madison Square Garden Company since December 2014, and as a director and non-executive Chairman of The Wendy’s Company since June 2007. Mr. Peltz previously served as a director of Legg Mason, Inc. from October 2009 to December 2014. He also served as a director of Ingersoll-Rand plc from August 2012 to June 2014 and H.J. Heinz Company from September 2006 to June 2013. In addition, he served as a director of Trian Acquisition I Corp. from October 2007 until May 2013.

Key Director Qualifications: Mr. Peltz has more than 40 years of business and investment experience and over 20 years of service as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of public companies. Mr. Peltz has developed extensive experience working with management teams and boards of directors, and in acquiring, investing in and building companies and implementing operational improvements at the companies with which he has been involved. As a result, he has strong operating experience and strategic planning skills and has strong relationships with institutional investors, investment banking and capital markets advisors and others that can be drawn upon for the Company’s benefit. Mr. Peltz has also gained extensive experience in the foodservice industry through his service on the boards of directors of H.J. Heinz Company, Mondelēz International, Inc. and The Wendy’s Company.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement28

Back to Contents

Richard G. Tilghman

Age: 7275

Director Since: November 2002

Committees: Audit Committee (Chair), Finance Committee

Primary Occupation: Mr. Tilghman served as Vice Chairman and Director of SunTrust Banks from 1999 until his retirement in 2000. He served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Crestar Financial Corporation, a bank holding company, from 1986 until 1999.

Key Director Qualifications: After graduating from the University of Virginia with a B.A. in Foreign Affairs and serving in the U.S. Army as a lieutenant, Mr. Tilghman enjoyed a 34-year banking career, including service as Vice Chairman and Director of Suntrust Banks, as well as the former Chairman and CEO of Crestar Financial Corporation, a bank holding company for fifteen years. His career provided him with experience and expertise in the areas of leadership, corporate strategy and development, finance, banking, accounting and risk management. Mr. Tilghman’s experience overseeing a business and technology transformation for a series of banks acquired through acquisitions is very important to Sysco as we undertake our ERP/Business Transformation Project to streamline our operations using a common technology platform. Mr. Tilghman also gained high tech and regional marketing experience that has been valuable to Sysco as we have redefined oversight of our operating companies by marketing region and focus on the use of e-Commerce technologies to service Sysco customers more efficiently. Mr. Tilghman’s experience also includes approximately 20 years of service on the Board of Directors of Chesapeake Corporation, which was then a leading supplier of cartons, labels, leaflets, and specialty plastic packaging, with manufacturing facilities in Asia, Europe and the U.S. at that time.

Unless otherwise noted,

Jackie M. Ward

Age: 77

Director Since: September 2001 (Chairman of the persons named above have been engagedBoard since November 2013)

Committees: Compensation Committee, Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee

Primary Occupation: Ms. Ward is the former Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Computer Generation Incorporated (CGI), a company she founded in 1968 that was acquired in December 2000 by Crescent Capital and later Intec Telecom Systems PLC, a technology company based in the principal occupations shown forUnited Kingdom.

Other Boards: Director of Sanmina-SCI Corporation. In the pastlast five years, Ms. Ward also served as a director of Bank of America Corporation, Equifax Inc., Flowers Foods, Inc. and WellPoint, Inc.

Key Director Qualifications: Ms. Ward attended Georgia State College for Women and the University of Georgia Extension Center, where she majored in psychology and mathematics. She later attended the London School of Business and was awarded a Doctor of Laws from Mercer University. Early in her career, Ms. Ward held programming, engineering, marketing and management positions with UNIVAC (a division of Sperry Corporation), General Electric Company and J.P. Stevens Company. Ms. Ward then founded, was elected chairman, president and chief executive officer, and had over 30 years of experience with Computer Generation Incorporated (CGI), a provider of software/ hardware solutions to the telecommunications and general industry with operations in the U.S., England and much of Europe, Australia, South Africa, Mexico and Latin America. Ms. Ward’s lengthy career has provided her with extensive leadership, information technology, retail/mass marketing, corporate strategy and development, finance, banking, and international experience. In addition, significant projects undertaken by CGI for governmental and private entities provided unique experience for Ms. Ward in developing and implementing supply chain inventory control systems, fraud detection systems and software/hardware to handle generalized and specific accounting functions. Ms. Ward has gained knowledge of the foodservice industry through her membership on the Board of Directors of Flowers Foods, Inc., one of the largest producers and marketers of bakery products in the U.S., as well as developing systems for related food clients, such as Edwards Baking Company and Eastern Food Services. She also has significant public company board experience as a current or longer.former member of numerous Boards of Directors where she served in various leadership positions, including lead director, presiding director, chairman of the board and the chairman of various committees. With respect to Flowers Foods, Ms. Ward served as the Chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and a member of the Compensation and Executive Committees. With respect to WellPoint, Ms. Ward served as Chairman of the Board, Chair of the Corporate Governance Committee and Executive Committee, and a member of the Compensation Committee. She also serves as the Chair of the Nominating and Governance Committee of Sanmina-SCI Corporation. Ms. Ward furthered her expertise in the areas of finance and risk management as Chairman of the Asset Quality Committee of Bank of America’s Board of Directors for 15 years and her expertise in the areas of accounting and internal audit as a member of the Board of PRG-Schultz International, Inc., now known as PRGX Global, Inc., which provides recovery audit services to organizations with high volumes of payment transactions, including retail and wholesale businesses, manufacturers, health care, and government agencies. In addition, Ms. Ward was named a member of the “NACD Directorship 100” in 2015, an annual honor sponsored by the National Association of Corporate Directors to recognize directors who exhibit exemplary leadership in the boardroom and promote the highest standards of corporate governance.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    2729


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

Overview of Non-Employee Director Compensation

The Company uses a combination of cash and stock-based compensation to attract and retain qualified candidates to serve on the Board, as described below. Members of the Board who are employees of the Company are not compensated for services on the Board or any of its Committees. We currently pay each non-employee director a base retainer of $100,000 per year. Non-employee directors who serve as committee chairpersons receive annual additional amounts as follows:

Audit Committee Chair — $25,000
Compensation Committee Chair — $20,000
Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee Chair — $20,000
Finance Committee Chair — $20,000
Corporate Sustainability Committee Chair — $15,000

Audit Committee Chair — $25,000

Compensation Committee Chair — $20,000

Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee Chair — $20,000

Finance Committee Chair — $20,000

Sustainability Committee Chair — $15,000

In addition to the compensation received by all non-employee directors, Mr. Fernandez, Sysco’s non-executive Chairman of the Board prior to his election as Executive Chairman in April 2012, received an additionalWe pay these annual retainer of $325,000 per year, paidretainers quarterly. In May 2012, the Board selected Ms. Ward as its Lead Director. In addition to the compensation received by all non-employee directors, Ms. Ward receives an additional annual retainer of $40,000, paid quarterly,$475,000 for her service as Lead Director.Chairman of the Board, which is paid quarterly in the form of “elected shares” that are deferred as described below under “— Deferral of Shares.” See footnote 1 to the “Fiscal 2015 Director Compensation” table below for a detailed discussion of the elected shares deferred by Ms. Ward.

Each November, the Board currently grants approximately $160,000 in long-termtime vesting equity incentives to each of the non-employee directors in the form of restricted stock awards. For fiscal 2012,2015, the Board granted approximately $160,000 in restricted stock awards whichthat vest in full on the first anniversary of the grant date. See “2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan — Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units” below for a description of the plan under which these awards may currently be granted, and the Fiscal 2012“Fiscal 2015 Non-Employee DIrector CompensationDirector Compensation” table below for detailed compensation information for fiscal 20122015 for each of our non-employee directors and “Stock Ownership — Stock Ownership Guidelines” below for a description of the stock ownership requirements applicable to our non-employee directors.

Reimbursement of Expenses

All non-employee directors are entitled to receive reimbursements of expenses for all services as director, including committee participation or special assignments. We pay the annual retainers quarterly. Directors are invited to have their spouses accompany them to dinners and other functions held in connection with one or two board meetings each year, and the company pays, either directly or through reimbursement, all expenses associated with their travel to and attendance at these business-related functions. Reimbursement for non-employee director travel may include reimbursement of a portion of the cost of travel on private aircraft. Specifically, this includes reimbursement for non-commercial air travel in connection with Sysco business, subject to specified maximums, provided that amounts related to the purchase price of an aircraft or fractional interest in an aircraft are not reimbursable and any portion of the reimbursement that relates to insurance, maintenance and other non-incremental costs is limited to a maximum annual amount. Non-employee directors also receive discounts on products carried by the company and its subsidiaries comparable to the discounts offered to all company employees.

Directors Deferred Compensation Plan

Non-employee directors may defer all or a portion of their annual retainer, including additional fees paid to committee chairpersons and the non-executive Chairman of the Board’s and/or Lead Directors’sDirector’s annual retainer, under the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan. Non-employee directors may choose from a variety of investment options, including Moody’s Average Corporate Bond Yield plus 1%, with respect to amounts deferred prior to fiscal 2009. This investment option was reduced to Moody’s Average Corporate Bond Yield, without the addition of 1%, for amounts deferred after fiscal 2008. We credit such deferred amounts with investment gains or losses until the non-employee director’s retirement from the Board or until the occurrence of certain other events.

Directors Stock Plans

As of September 17, 2012,21, 2015, the non-employee directors held options and shares of restricted stock that were issued under the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, the Amended and Restated 2005 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, the Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, as amended and restated, and the Amended and Restated Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan. They also held elected and match shares (as described below) issued under the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan. We may not make any additional grants under the Amended and Restated 2005 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, the Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, as amended and restated, or the Amended and Restated Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan. Since we may only make grants underBelow is a description of the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, the description below relates only to such plan.Plan.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    2830


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan

Election to Receive a Portion of the Annual Retainer in Common Stock

Under the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, instead of receiving his or her full annual retainer fee in cash, a non-employee director may elect to receive up to 100% of his or her annual retainer fee, including any additional retainer fee paid to the non-executive Chairman of the Board and/or Lead Director for his or her service in such capacity and any fees paid to a committee chairman for his or her service in such capacity, in 10% increments, in common stock. If a director makes this election, on the date we make each quarterly payment of the director’s annual retainer fee we will credit the director’s stock account with:

The number of shares of Sysco common stock that the director could have purchased on that date with the portion of his or her cash retainer that he or she has chosen to receive in stock, assuming a purchase price equal to the last closing price of the common stock on the last business day before that date; we call these shares “elected shares”; and
With respect to up to half of his or her annual retainer fee, excluding any additional retainer fee paid for chairing the Board or one of its committees and/or serving as Lead Director, 50% of the number of elected shares we credited to the director’s account; we call these extra shares “match shares.”

The number of shares of Sysco common stock that the director could have purchased on that date with the portion of his or her cash retainer that he or she has chosen to receive in stock, assuming a purchase price equal to the last closing price of the common stock on the first business day prior to that date; we call these shares elected shares; and

With respect to up to half of his or her annual retainer fee, excluding any additional retainer fee paid for chairing the Board or one of its committees and/or serving as Lead Director and any fees paid for meeting attendance or service on a committee, 50% of the number of elected shares we credited to the director’s account; we call these extra shares additional shares.

The elected shares and additionalmatch shares vest as soon as we credit the director’s account with them, but we do not issue them until the end of the calendar year. The director may not transfer the additionalmatch shares, however, until one year after we issue them, or, if deferred, the date that we otherwise would have issued them, provided that certain events will cause this transfer restriction to lapse.

The one year transfer restriction on additionalmatch shares will lapse if:

the director dies;
the director leaves the Board:
due to disability;
after having served out his or her full term; or
after reaching age 71; or
a change in control, as defined in the plan, occurs.

the director dies;

the director leaves the Board:

due to disability;

after having served out his or her full term; or

after reaching age 71; or

a change in control, as defined in the plan, occurs.

Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units

The plan provides that the Board may grant shares of restricted stock and restricted stock units in the amounts and on such terms as it determines, but specifies that no grant may vest earlier than one year following the grant date. A restricted stock unit is an award denominated in units whose value is derived from common stock, and which is subject to similar restrictions and possibility of forfeiture, as is the restricted stock. In November 2011,2014, we issued restricted stock awards to non-employee directors under this plan, including Mr. Fernandez who was a non-employee director at the time.plan. We have not yet issued any restricted stock units to non-employee directors under this plan.

Generally, if a director ceases to serve as a director of Sysco, he or she will forfeit all the unvested restricted stock and restricted stock units that he or she holds. However, if the director leaves the board after serving out his or her term, or for any reason after reaching age 71, his or her restricted stock and restricted stock units will remain in effect and continue to vest as if the director had remained a director of Sysco. All unvested restricted stock and restricted stock units will automatically vest upon the director’s death.

Deferral of Shares

A non-employee director may elect to defer receipt of all or any portion of any shares of common stock issued under the plan, whether such shares are to be issued as a grant of restricted stock, elected shares or additionalmatch shares, or upon the vesting of a restricted stock unit grant. Generally, the receipt of stock may be deferred until the earliest to occur of the death of the non-employee director, the date on which the non-employee director ceases to be a director of the company, or a change of control of Sysco. All such deferral elections shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in Sysco’s 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan.

Change in Control

Grant agreements underUnder the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan and the applicable grant agreements, any unvested awards of restricted stock or restricted stock units will determine vesting provisionsvest immediately upon the occurrence of a specified change in control.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement   2931


Back to Contents

Fiscal 2012 Non-Employee2015 Director Compensation

Other than with respect to Mr. Fernandez, whose compensation for fiscal 2012 is described under “Executive Compensation,” and who was a non-employee director prior to becoming Executive Chairman in April 2012, the

The following table provides compensation information for fiscal 2012year 2015 for each of our non-employee directors who served for any part of the fiscal year, including Ms. Sewell, who served as a non-employee director until her retirement fromother than Mr. DeLaney, whose compensation is disclosed in the Board at the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders:

Name

Fees Earned or

Paid in Cash($)(1)

Stock Awards($)

(2)(3)(4)

Non-Qualified Deferred

Compensation Earnings($)(5)

Other

Compensation(6)

Total($)

Cassaday

$

120,000

$

185,010

$

$

$

305,010

Craven

115,000

185,010

300,010

Glasscock

100,000

185,010

285,010

Golden

100,000

185,010

3,457

288,467

Hafner

120,000

185,010

305,010

Koerber

100,000

185,010

301

16,119

301,430

Newcomb

100,000

185,010

285,010

Sewell

50,000

172,510

222,510

Tilghman

125,000

185,010

310,010

Ward

130,000

185,010

1,431

316,441

(1)

Includes retainer fees, including any retainer fees for which the non-employee director has elected to receive shares of Sysco common stock in lieu of cash and fees for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2012 that were paid at the beginning of fiscal 2013. Although we credit shares to a director’s account each quarter, the elected shares are not actually issued until the end of the calendar year unless the director’s service as a member of the Board of Directors terminates. The number of shares of stock actually credited to each non-employee director’s account in lieu of cash during fiscal 2012, excluding match shares, which are reported in the column titled “stock awards,” was as follows: 1,746 shares for each of Mr. Cassaday, Dr. Craven, Mr. Glasscock, Mr. Golden, Mr. Hafner, Dr. Koerber, Ms. Newcomb and Mr. Tilghman; 901 shares for Ms. Sewell and 4,530 shares for Ms. Ward. Directors may choose to defer receipt of the elected shares described in this footnote under the Sysco Corporation 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan. The number of elected shares of stock deferred by each non-employee director during fiscal 2012 (which are included in the elected shares described above) was as follows: Dr. Craven and Mr. Glasscock — 1,746 shares, Dr. Koerber — 845 shares and Ms. Ward — 4,530 shares. To the extent cash dividends are paid on our common stock, non-employee directors also receive the equivalent amount of the cash dividend credited to their account with respect to all elected shares that are deferred. If the director has chosen to defer the receipt of any shares, they will be credited to the director’s account and issued on the earlier to occur of the death of the director, the date on which the director ceases to be a director of the company, or a change of control of Sysco.

(2)

For fiscal 2012, the Board, upon the recommendation of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, determined that it would grant approximately $160,000 in long-term incentives to each of the non-employee directors. Therefore, on November 15, 2011, the Board granted each of the non-employee directors 5,787 shares of restricted stock valued at $27.65 per share, the closing price of Sysco common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on November 14, 2011. These awards were granted under the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan and vest in full on the first anniversary of the grant date. The amounts in this column reflect the grant date fair value of the awards computed in accordance with ASC 718, “Compensation — Stock Compensation”. See Note 17 of the consolidated financial statements in Sysco’s Annual Report for the year ended June 30, 2012 regarding assumptions underlying valuation of equity awards.

The amounts in this column also reflect the grant date fair value of awards computed in accordance with ASC 718, “Compensation — Stock Compensation” with respect to a 50% stock match for directors who elect to receive a portion of their annual retainer fee in common stock. The value of any “elected” shares is included in the column entitled “Fees Earned or Paid in Cash” as described in footnote (1) above. See “Directors Stock Plans” above for a more detailed description. Although we credit shares to a director’s account each quarter, the shares are not actually issued until the end of the calendar year unless the director’s service as a member of the Board of Directors terminates. The number of additional shares actually credited to each non-employee director’s account during fiscal 2012 is as follows: 872 shares for each of Mr. Cassaday, Dr. Craven, Mr. Glasscock, Mr. Golden, Mr. Hafner, Dr. Koerber, Ms. Newcomb, Mr. Tilghman and Ms. Ward; and 450 shares for Ms. Sewell.

Directors may choose to defer receipt of the restricted stock and the matched shares described in this footnote under the Sysco Corporation 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan. The number of shares of restricted stock and matched shares deferred by each non-employee director during fiscal 2012 (which are included in the additional shares described above) was as follows: Dr. Craven, Mr. Glasscock and Ms. Ward — 872 shares and Dr. Koerber — 422 shares. To the extent cash dividends are paid on our common stock, non-employee directors also receive the equivalent amount of the cash dividend credited to their account with respect to all deferred restricted stock awards and all matched shares that are deferred, in the form of stock units. Directors may elect an “in-service” distribution date for deferrals that is at least one year following the end of the plan year in which shares would otherwise have been transferred to the Director. Otherwise, distributions occur upon the earlier of the death of the director, the date on which the director ceases to be a director of the company, or a change of control of Sysco, unless the director applies for and qualifies for a hardship withdrawal.

(3)

The aggregate number of options and unvested stock awards held by each non-employee director as of June 30, 2012 was as follows:

 

 

Aggregate Unvested Stock Awards

Outstanding as of June 30, 2012

Aggregate Options Outstanding

as of June 30, 2012

 

Cassaday

7,730

7,000

 

Craven

7,730

15,000

 

Glasscock

5,787

 

Golden

7,730

15,000

 

Hafner

7,730

15,000

 

Koerber

7,730

 

Newcomb

7,730

3,500

 

Sewell

7,730

15,000

 

Tilghman

7,730

23,000

 

Ward

7,730

15,000

All of the options shown in the table above are fully vested.

(4)

None of the non-employee directors received option grants during fiscal 2012.

(5)

We do not provide a pension plan for the non-employee directors. The amounts shown in this column represent above-market earnings on amounts deferred under the Non-Employee Director Deferred Compensation Plan. Directors who do not have any amounts in this column were not eligible to participate in such plan, did not participate in such plan or did not have any above-market earnings.

(6)

The amount shown for Dr. Koerber reflects the reimbursements for spousal travel, as well as amounts paid for spousal meals and entertainment at business events. Except for Dr. Koerber, the total value of all perquisites and personal benefits received by each of the non-employee directors with respect to fiscal 2012, including reimbursements for spousal airfare and meals associated with certain Board meetings, was less than $10,000.

Summary Compensation Table on page 57:

SYSCO CORPORATION

 Fees Earned or Stock Non-Qualified Deferred Other  
NamePaid in Cash($)(1) Awards($)(2)(3)(4) Compensation Earnings($)(5) Compensation(6) Total($)
Cassaday$120,000 $185,032 $ $ $305,032
Craven 115,000  185,032  2,485    302,517
Glasscock 120,000  185,032      305,032
Golden 100,000  185,032  31,111    316,143
Hafner 120,000  185,032      305,032
Koerber 100,000  185,032    12,786  297,818
Newcomb 100,000  185,032      285,032
Tilghman 125,000  185,032      310,032
Ward 575,000  185,032  6,968    767,000
(1)Includes retainer fees, including any retainer fees for which the non-employee director has elected to receive shares of Sysco common stock in lieu of cash and fees for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015 that were paid at the beginning of fiscal 2016. Although we credit shares to a director’s account each quarter, the elected shares are not actually issued until the end of the calendar year, unless the director’s service as a member of the Board of Directors terminates. The number of shares of stock actually credited to each non-employee director’s account in lieu of cash during fiscal 2015, excluding match shares, which are reported in the column entitled “Stock Awards,” above was as follows: 1,297 shares for each of Mr. Cassaday, Dr. Craven, Mr. Golden, Mr. Hafner, Dr. Koerber, Ms. Newcomb, Mr. Tilghman; 1,555 shares for Mr. Glasscock and 14,938 shares for Ms. Ward. Directors may choose to defer receipt of the elected shares described in this footnote under the Sysco Corporation 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan. The number of elected shares of stock deferred by each non-employee director during fiscal 2015 (which are included in the elected shares described above) was as follows: Dr. Craven (1,297 shares), Dr. Koerber (1,297 shares), Mr. Glasscock (1,555 shares) and Ms. Ward (14,938 shares). To the extent that cash dividends are paid on our common stock, non-employee directors also receive the equivalent amount of the cash dividend credited to their account with respect to all elected shares that are deferred. If the director has chosen to defer the receipt of any shares, they will be credited to the director’s account and issued on the earliest to occur of the “in-service” distribution date elected by the director (which shall be at least one year following the end of the plan year in which the shares would otherwise have been distributed to the director), the death of the director, the date on which the director ceases to be a director of the company, a change of control of Sysco, or the date on which the director applies and qualifies for a hardship withdrawal.
(2)For fiscal 2015, the Board, upon the recommendation of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, determined that it would grant approximately $160,000 in equity incentives to each of the non-employee directors. Therefore, on November 18, 2014, the Board granted to each of the non-employee directors 4,115 shares of restricted stock valued at $38.89 per share, the closing price of Sysco common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on November 17, 2014. These awards were granted under the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan and vest in full on the first anniversary of the grant date. The amounts in this column reflect the grant date fair value of the awards computed in accordance with ASC 718, “Compensation—Stock Compensation”. See Note 18 of the consolidated financial statements in Sysco’s Annual Report for the year ended June 27, 2015 regarding assumptions underlying valuation of equity awards. The amounts in this column also reflect the grant date fair value of awards computed in accordance with ASC 718, “Compensation—Stock Compensation” with respect to a 50% stock match for directors who elect to receive a portion of their annual retainer fee in common stock. The value of any “elected” shares is included in the column entitled “Fees Earned or Paid in Cash,” as described in footnote (1) above. See “Directors Stock Plans” above for a more detailed description. Although we credit shares to a director’s account each quarter, the shares are not actually issued until the end of the calendar year, unless the director’s service as a member of the Board of Directors terminates. The number of match shares actually credited to each non-employee director’s account during fiscal 2015 was 648 shares. Directors may choose to defer receipt of the restricted stock and the match shares described in this footnote under the Sysco Corporation 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan. Each of Dr. Craven, Mr. Glasscock, Dr. Koerber and Ms. Ward deferred receipt of the 4,115 shares of restricted stock and the 648 match shares described above. To the extent that cash dividends are paid on our common stock, non-employee directors also receive the equivalent amount of the cash dividend credited to their account with respect to all deferred restricted stock awards and all match shares that are deferred, in the form of stock units. Directors may elect an “in-service” distribution date for deferrals that is at least one year following the end of the plan year in which the shares would otherwise have been distributed to the Director. Otherwise, distributions occur upon the earlier of the death of the director, the date on which the director ceases to be a director of the company, or a change of control of Sysco, unless the director applies for and qualifies for a hardship withdrawal.
(3)The aggregate number of options and unvested stock awards held by each director listed in the table above, as of June 27, 2015, was as follows:

Aggregate Unvested Stock AwardsAggregate Options Outstanding
Outstanding as of June 27, 2015as of June 27, 2015
Cassaday4,115
Craven4,115
Glasscock4,115
Golden4,115
Hafner4,115
Koerber4,115
Newcomb4,115
Tilghman4,115
Ward4,115

2012 Proxy Statement   30


The unvested stock awards for each non-employee director listed in the table immediately above relate to restricted stock awards granted in November 2014 that vest in November 2015.
(4)None of the directors shown in the table received option grants during fiscal 2015.
(5)We do not provide a pension plan for the non-employee directors. For each non-employee director, the amounts shown in this column represent above-market earnings on amounts deferred under the Non-Employee Director Deferred Compensation Plan. Directors who do not have any amounts in this column were not eligible to participate in such plan, did not participate in such plan or did not have any above-market earnings.
(6)The amount shown with respect to Dr. Koerber reflects the amount paid for spousal travel in connection with business events. The total value of all perquisites and personal benefits received by each of the other non-employee directors, including reimbursements for spousal airfare and meals associated with certain Board meetings, was less than $10,000.

Back to Contents

Mr. DeLaney did not receive any compensation in or for his fiscal 2012 for Board service other than the compensation for services as an employee that is disclosed elsewhere in this proxy statement. After his election as Executive Chairman in April 2012, Mr. Fernandez did not receive any compensation in or for fiscal 20122015 for Board service, other than the compensation for services as an employee that is disclosed elsewhere in this proxy statement. See “Executive Compensation – Summary Compensation Table” for details regarding compensation received by Mr. DeLaney and Mr. Fernandez for fiscal 2012.2015.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

The Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that after five years of service as a non-employee director, such individuals are expected to continuously own a minimum of 16,500 shares of Sysco common stock. All of the current directors with at least five years of service beneficially held the requisite number of shares as of September 17, 2012. Until August 2016, the Executive Chairman remains subject to the stock ownership guidelines applicable to Sysco’s non-employee directors. Stock ownership guidelines applicable to executive officers are described under “Stock Ownership — Stock Ownership Guidelines.”SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement32

Back to Contents

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

The following persons, other than Mr. Kreidler, currently serve as executive officers of Sysco. Each person listed below, other than Mr. Fernandez,Bené, Mr. Kreidler,Charlton, Mr. LibbyMoskowitz and Mr. Moskowitz,Shurts, has served as an officer of Sysco and/or its subsidiaries for at least the past five years.

Name

Title

Age

Thomas L. Bené*

Executive Vice President and President, Foodservice Operations53
R. Scott CharltonExecutive Vice President, Supply Chain56
William B. Day

Executive Vice President, Merchandising and Supply Chain

55

58

William J. DeLaney*

President and Chief Executive Officer

56

59

G. Mitchell Elmer

Joel T. Grade

Senior Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer

53

Manuel A. Fernandez*

Executive Chairman

66

Michael W. Green*

Executive Vice President and Group President

53

James D. Hope

Executive Vice President, Business Transformation

52

Robert C. Kreidler*

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

48

45

Robert C. Kreidler*

Executive Vice President and Former Chief Financial Officer51
Russell T. Libby*Executive Vice President, Administration and Corporate Secretary49
Paul T. Moskowitz

SeniorExecutive Vice President, Human Resources

48

51

Russell T. Libby

Wayne R. Shurts*

Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

46

Larry G. Pulliam*

Executive Vice President and Group President

Chief Technology Officer

56

*

Named Executive Officer.

William B. Day Thomas L. Benéhas served as Sysco’s Executive Vice President and President, Foodservice Operations since January 1, 2015. Previously, he served as Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer from September 2013 to December 2014 and as Executive Vice President, Chief Merchandising Officer from May 2013 to September 2013. Prior to joining Sysco, Mr. Bené served as President of PepsiCo Foodservices from 2011 until 2013. Between 2008 and 2011, he held various senior roles with PepsiCo, including President, Pepsi-Cola North American Beverages; SVP, Sales and Franchise Development; President, PepsiCo Foods & Beverages, Canada; and Chief Operating Officer, South Beach Beverage Co. Mr. Bené joined PepsiCo in 1989 after working for American Hospital Supply.

R. Scott Charltonhas served as Sysco’s Executive Vice President, Supply Chain since August 30, 2015, having been promoted from Senior Vice President, Distribution Services, a position he had held since July 2013. Prior to joining Sysco, Mr. Charlton served as Executive Vice President, Operations, at C&S Wholesale from 2007 until June 2013. Between 1980 and 2007, Mr. Charlton served in a variety of manufacturing, operations and quality assurance roles at Publix Super Markets, Inc., culminating with his role as Senior Vice President, Manufacturing and Distribution, from 2005 to 2007.

William B. Dayhas served as Sysco’s Executive Vice President, Merchandising since July 2010. He served as Senior Vice President — Merchandising and Supply Chain from July 2009 to July 2010. He began his Sysco career in 1983 as a staff accountant at Sysco’s Memphis, Tennessee subsidiary. Between 1984 and 1987 he divided his time between Sysco’s corporate headquarters and Sysco’s Atlanta subsidiary, where he served as the Chief Financial Officer. In 1987 Mr. Day officially moved to Sysco’s corporate headquarters in Houston where he served in a variety of roles until 1999, when he was promoted to Assistant Controller. Mr. Day started Sysco’s RDC project in 2000, was named Vice President, Supply Chain Management in 2003 and was promoted to Senior Vice President, Supply Chain in July 2007.

William J. DeLaneyis described under “Board of Directors Matters.”

G. Mitchell Elmer was promoted to Senior Vice President and Controller in November 2008 after servinghas served as Vice President and Controller from 2000 to November 2008 andSysco’s Chief Executive Officer since March 2009. He assumed the added responsibilityadditional title of Chief Accounting OfficerPresident in July 2005.March 2010. Mr. ElmerDeLaney began his Sysco career in 19891987 as a staff auditorAssistant Treasurer at the company’s corporate headquarters. He was promoted to Treasurer in operations review at Sysco’s corporate office1991, and in Houston. In 1991 he transferred to Sysco’s Virginia subsidiary as Director of Finance, and the following year1993 he was named a Vice President of Financethe company, continuing in those responsibilities until 1994. Mr. DeLaney joined Sysco Food Services of Syracuse in 1996 as chief financial officer, progressed to senior vice president in 1998 and Administration.executive vice president in 2002. In 2004, Mr. ElmerDeLaney was appointed Vice President of Finance for Sysco’s Louisville, Kentucky operation in 1995president and progressed to Senior Vice President of Marketing, Merchandising and Finance at that company in 1997. The following year he transferred to Sysco’s Denver operation as Vice President of Finance. In 2000 he returned to Sysco’s corporate office to serve as Vice President and Controller.

Manuel A. Fernandez is described under “Board of Directors Matters.”

Michael W. Greenhas served as Executive Vice President and Group President since October 2011. Prior to this promotion, Mr. Green served as Executive Vice President, Foodservice Operations, with expanded responsibilities over all of Sysco’s U.S. Broadline Foodservice Operations beginning in July 2010. Mr. Green began his Sysco career in 1991 as a member of the Management Development Program and was named Sysco Chicago’s Vice President of Marketing later that year. In 1992, he was promoted to Senior Vice President of Marketing and Merchandising, and then to Executive Vice President, of Sysco’s Chicago operating company. In 1994, Mr. Green became the President and Chief Executive Officerchief executive officer of Sysco Food Services of Detroit.Charlotte. He held that position until December 2006, when he was promoted in 2004 tonamed Sysco’s Senior Vice President of Operations for Sysco’s Midwest Region. In January 2008,Financial Reporting. Effective July 1, 2007, Mr. GreenDeLaney was promoted to the role of Executive Vice President of Northeast and North Central U.S. Foodservice Operations, aChief Financial Officer and continued to serve in such position he held untilfollowing his promotion to his current title.CEO until October 2009.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   31


Back to Contents

James D. Hope Joel T. Gradehas served as Executive Vice President, Business Transformation, since January 2010. He served as Senior Vice President, Business Transformation, from 2008 to 2010. Mr. Hope started his career at Sysco’s corporate headquarters as a financial analyst in 1987 where he served in various financial management roles. He transferred to Sysco Food Services of Kansas City, Inc. in 1993 as Chief Financial Officer, where he was named President and Chief Executive Officer in 2000. Mr. Hope served as Group President, Demand, in the company’s Strategic Group from 2005 until 2007. He was promoted in 2007 to Senior Vice President, Sales and Marketing, a position he held until 2008. Mr. Hope currently serves on the Board of Trustees for the National Restaurant Association Education Foundation.

Robert C. Kreidlerhas served as Sysco’s Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since September 1, 2015, having been promoted from Senior Vice President – Finance and Chief Accounting Officer, a position he had held since February 2014. Mr. Grade began his career at Sysco as a Staff Auditor in 1996. He was promoted to Assistant Manager-Operations Review in 1999. He transferred to Sysco Austin in 2000 as Controller, was appointed Vice President-Finance and CFO of Sysco Chicago in 2002, and became Vice President-Finance and CFO of Sysco Canada in 2007. He was promoted to Vice President, Foodservice Operations of Sysco Corporate and President of Sysco Canada in 2010 and held that position until May 2012, when he was appointed Senior Vice President, Foodservice Operations (North).

Robert C. Kreidlerserved as Sysco’s Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from October 2009.2009 until September 1, 2015, at which time he was appointed Executive Vice President to serve in an advisory role until his previously announced departure on December 31, 2015. Prior to joining Sysco, Mr. Kreidler served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of C&S Wholesale Grocers, a large privately-held food wholesaler, from February 2007 through March 2009. Between June 1996 and February 2007, he held various senior roles with Yum! Brands, Inc., which includes the worldwide operations of KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell. His last position with Yum! Brands was Senior Vice President of Corporate Strategy and Treasurer from December 2003 to February 2007.

Russell T. Libbyhas served as Sysco’s Executive Vice President, Administration and Corporate Secretary since August 30, 2015. Previously, he served as Executive Vice President – Corporate Affairs, Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary from March 2014 to August 2015 following his promotion from Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, a position he had held since November 1, 2011. He joined Sysco in October 2007 as Assistant Vice President, Mergers and Acquisitions and Real Estate and was promoted to Vice President and Assistant General Counsel in July 2009 and to Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary in December 2010. From 1997 through September 2007, Mr. Libby worked for the North America unit of COFRA Holding A.G., a Swiss international conglomerate, in various positions of increasing responsibility, culminating in service as President of COFRA North America and Vice President, Legal for Good Energies, Inc., an affiliated investment advisor. He joined Sysco in October 2007 as Assistant Vice President, Mergers and Acquisitions and Real Estate and was promoted to Vice President and Assistant General Counsel in July 2009, and was promoted to Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary in December 2010.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement33

Back to Contents

Paul T. Moskowitzhas served as Sysco’s Executive Vice President, Human Resouces since August 30, 2015, having been promoted from Senior Vice President, Human Resources, a position he had held since January 2011. Prior to joining Sysco, Mr. Moskowitz served as Chief Human Resources Officer of Dean Foods Company, a large dairy processing company from 2007 until 2011. Between 1996 and 2004, he held various senior roles with Yum! Brands. His last position with Yum! Brands was Chief People Officer at Pizza Hut from 2004 to 2007.

Larry G. Pulliam Wayne R. Shurtshas served as Sysco’s Executive Vice President & Group Presidentand Chief Technology Officer since October 2011.2012. Prior to this promotion,joining Sysco, Mr. Pulliam was Executive Vice President, Foodservice Operations from July 2009 to October 2011. Mr. Pulliam began his foodservice career in 1975 with a regional foodservice company in Fort Worth, Texas. He served in a variety of areas for that company, from warehouse operations to information services, before joining Sysco’s corporate office in 1987. Mr. Pulliam was named Vice President of Operations for Sysco’s Los Angeles operation in 1991, and in 1995 he transferred to the Baltimore subsidiary to serve as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. He returned to Sysco’s corporate office in 1997 as Vice President and Chief Information Officer, a position he held until he was promoted to President and Chief Executive Officer of Sysco Food Services of Houston, LP in 2000. Mr. Pulliam then returned to Sysco’s corporate office as Senior Vice President, Merchandising Services in 2002 and served in that role until 2005, when he was promoted to Executive Vice President, Merchandising Services. From 2005 to July 2009, heShurts served as Executive Vice President Global Sourcingof SuperValu Inc. from 2010 until 2013. Between 2006 and Supply Chain.2010, he held various senior roles with Cadbury. His last position with Cadbury was Chief Information Officer from 2008 to 2010.

Management Development and Succession Planning

On an ongoing basis, the Board plans for succession to the position of CEO and other key management positions, and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee oversees this management development and succession planning process. To assist the Board, the CEO periodically provides the Board with an assessment of senior executives and their potential to succeed to the position of CEO, as well as perspective on potential candidates from outside the company. On an annual basis, the Board and its Corporate Sustainability Committee have engaged in discussions with management regarding increasing the diversity of Sysco’s executive management team. In addition, the CEO periodically provides the Board with an assessment of potential successors to other key positions.

In fiscal 2012,2015, Sysco’s effectiveness in management development and succession planning were a part of our CEO’s non-financial performance goals, which are reviewed at the end of each fiscal year by the Compensation and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committees. In addition, the Compensation Committee assessed Sysco’s performance in select non-financial areas, including the overall effectiveness of its management development and succession planning processes, in determining the magnitude of the 20122015 bonus payment to our CEO. Management development and succession planning remain top priorities of executive management and the Board during fiscal 2013,2016, as evidenced by the following:

Sysco’s Board discussed human capital and succession planning at its regularly scheduled meeting in August 2015; and
One of our CEO’s six fiscal year 2016 strategic goals is to continue to build, refine, coach, empower and measure a best-in-class senior leadership team to drive company performance. Success in this goal will affect our CEO’s annual incentive payment for fiscal 2016, as described under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—What We Paid and Why—Compensation for NEOs—Annual Incentive Award Detailed Information.”

Sysco’s Board discussed human capital and succession planning at its annual strategy meeting and several other regularly scheduled meetings, and

one of our CEO’s five fiscal year 2013 non-financial strategic goals is to make continued strides toward the human capital plan and high level succession planning. Success in this goal will affect our CEO’s MIP bonus payment for fiscal 2013, as described under “Executive Compensation — Management Incentive Plan.”

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement   3234


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

STOCK OWNERSHIP

Security Ownership of Officers and Directors

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to the beneficial ownership of Sysco’s common stock, as of September 17, 2012, except as otherwise specified,21, 2015, by (i) each current director, (ii) each named executive officer (as defined under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis”), and (iii) all current directors and executive officers as a group, (iv) each person who, to the best of our knowledge and belief, beneficially owns more than 5% of our common stock.group. Unless otherwise indicated, each stockholder identified in the table has sole voting and investment power with respect to his or her shares. Fractional shares have been rounded down to the nearest whole share.

 

Shares of

Common

Stock Owned

Directly

Shares of

Common

Stock Owned

Indirectly

Shares of

Common

Stock

Underlying

Options(1)

Shares of

Common Stock

Underlying

Restricted

Stock Units(2)

Total Shares

of Common

Stock

Beneficially

Owned(1)(2)

Percent of

Outstanding

Shares(3)

State Street Corporation and certain affiliates (**)

(**)

(**)

30,373,646

(**)

5.2%

**

John M. Cassaday

38,464

(4)

7,000

45,464

*

Judith B. Craven

62,911

(4)

15,000

77,912

*

William J. DeLaney

98,522

976,900

81,696

1,157,118

*

Manuel A. Fernandez

49,009

(4)

3,500

52,510

*

Larry C. Glasscock

15,871

15,871

*

Jonathan Golden

79,648

(4)

18,500

(5)

15,000

113,148

*

Michael W. Green

12,903

376,912

28,080

417,895

*

Joseph A. Hafner, Jr.

54,391

(4)

15,000

69,391

*

Hans-Joachim Koerber

38,585

(4)

38,586

*

Robert C. Kreidler

11,054

810

(5)

232,500

31,443

275,807

*

Nancy S. Newcomb

31,373

(4)

3,500

34,873

*

Larry G. Pulliam

177,247

471,850

28,491

677,588

*

Richard G. Tilghman

61,258

(4)

1,957

(6)

23,000

86,215

*

Jackie M. Ward

50,762

(4)

61

(6)

15,000

54,644

*

All Directors, Director Nominees and Executive Officers as a Group (19 Persons)

866,234

(7)

37,454

(8)

2,707,772

(9)

248,053

(10)

3,859,513

(7)(8)(9)(10)

*

(*)

Less than 1% of outstanding shares.

(**)

The Company has included State Street Corporation and certain of its affiliates in the table above based solely upon a quarterly report on Form 13F filed with the SEC by State Street Corporation for the quarter ended June 30, 2012. The Company has not undertaken any independent verification of the information presented. The Form 13F indicates that the reporting person and certain of its affiliates held investment discretion and sole voting authority with respect to 30,373,646 shares of Sysco common stock as of June 29, 2012. State Street Corporation’s address, as reported on the Form 13F, is One Lincoln Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02111. Applicable percentage ownership at June 29, 2012 based on 585,928,175 shares outstanding.

(1)

Includes shares underlying options that are presently exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days after September 17, 2012. Shares subject to options that are presently exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days after September 17, 2012 are deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the person holding such options, but are not deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of any other persons.

(2)

Includes shares underlying restricted stock units (RSUs) that will vest and settle within 60 days after September 17, 2012. Shares underlying RSUs that will vest and settle within 60 days after September 17, 2012 are deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the person holding such RSUs, but are not deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of any other persons. It is expected that approximately one-third of the shares underlying these RSUs will be withheld to pay taxes related to the RSUs as they vest and settle.

(3)

Applicable percentage of beneficial ownership at September 17, 2012 is based on 587,019,262 shares outstanding.

(4)

Includes shares that were elected to be received in lieu of non-employee director retainer fees during the first half of calendar 2012, and related matching shares under the Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan. For Dr. Koerber (who has shares withheld for the payment of taxes), this includes 591 elected shares and 295 matching shares; for Ms. Ward, this includes 2,368 elected shares and 422 matching shares; for each of the other current non-employee directors, this includes 845 elected shares and 422 matching shares. With respect to Mr. Fernandez, who received elected and matching shares under the Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan prior to his election as Executive Chairman in April 2012, this includes 845 elected shares and 422 matching shares. Unless the director has chosen to defer the shares under the Sysco Corporation 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan (“Stock Deferral Plan”), these shares will be issued on December 31, 2012 or within 60 days after a non-employee director ceases to be a director, whichever occurs first. Directors may choose to defer receipt of these shares related to director retainer fees, as well as shares awarded pursuant to restricted stock grants, and these deferred amounts are also included in this line item. To the extent cash dividends are paid on our common stock, non-employee directors also receive the equivalent amount of the cash dividend credited to their account with respect to all deferred restricted stock awards, and all elected and matched shares that are deferred. The number of shares in each non-employee director’s deferred stock account, as well as the number of shares in the deferred stock account for Mr. Fernandez, including related dividend equivalents, is as follows: Mr. Cassaday — none, Dr. Craven — 17,289, Mr. Fernandez — 14,315, Mr. Glasscock — 14,562, Mr. Golden — none, Mr. Hafner — none, Dr. Koerber — 11,748, Ms. Newcomb — none, Mr. Tilghman — none, and Ms. Ward — 11,179. In addition, Dr. Craven, Mr. Fernandez, Mr. Glasscock, Mr. Koerber and Ms. Ward have elected to defer receipt of the elected and match shares described above. If the director has chosen to defer the receipt of any shares, they will be credited to the director’s account in the Stock Deferral Plan and issued on the earliest to occur of the death of the director, the date on which the director ceases to be a director of the company, or a change of control of Sysco. Deferred shares are deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the persons holding such shares, but are not deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of any other persons.

(5)

These shares are held by a family trust affiliated with the executive officer or director.

(6)

These shares are held by the spouse of the director or executive officer.

(7)

Includes an aggregate of 84,236 shares directly owned by the current executive officers other than the named executive officers.

(8)

Includes an aggregate of 16,126 shares owned by the spouses and/or dependent children of current executive officers other than the named executive officers.

(9)

Includes an aggregate of 552,610 shares underlying options that are presently exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days after September 17, 2012 held by current executive officers (and, in the case of Mr. Day, his spouse) other than the named executive officers.

(10)

Includes an aggregate of 78,343 shares underlying restricted stock units (RSUs) that will vest and settle within 60 days after September 17, 2012 held by current executive officers (and, in the case of Mr. Day, his spouse) other than the named executive officers.

  Shares of
Common
Stock Owned
Directly
 Shares of
Common
Stock Owned
Indirectly
 Shares of
Common
Stock
Underlying
Options(1)
 Shares of
Common Stock
Underlying
Restricted
Stock Units(2)
 Total Shares of
Common Stock
Beneficially
Owned(1)(2)
 Percent of
Outstanding
Shares(3)
Thomas L. Bené 18,857  99,214 9,648 127,719 *
John M. Cassaday 60,294(4)    60,294 *
Judith B. Craven 86,547(4)    86,547 *
William J. DeLaney 227,277  1,789,463 67,311 2,084,051 *
Joshua D. Frank      *
Larry C. Glasscock 39,628    39,628 *
Jonathan Golden 100,239(4) 18,500(5)   118,739 *
Joseph A. Hafner, Jr. 65,490(4)    65,490 *
Hans-Joachim Koerber 63,285(4)    63,285 *
Robert C. Kreidler 55,055 810(6) 787,784 26,757 870,406 *
Russell T. Libby 27,183  135,287 15,462 177,932 *
Nancy S. Newcomb 51,964(4)    51,964 *
Nelson Peltz  41,411,938(7) 649,500(7)  42,061,438 7.06%
Wayne R. Shurts 18,772  233,336 19,586 271,694 *
Richard G. Tilghman 81,849(4) 1,957(8)   83,806 *
Jackie M. Ward 104,183(4) 61(8)   104,244 *
All Directors, Director Nominees and Executive Officers as a Group
(19 Persons)
 1,076,287(9) 41,432,699(10) 3,641,686(11) 149,962(12) 46,300,635(9)(10)(11)(12) 7.77%
(*)Less than 1% of outstanding shares.
(1)Includes shares underlying options that are presently exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days after September 21, 2015. Shares subject to options that are presently exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days after September 21, 2015 are deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the person holding such options, but are not deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of any other persons.
(2)Includes shares underlying restricted stock units (RSUs) that will vest and settle within 60 days after September 21, 2015. Shares underlying RSUs that will vest and settle within 60 days after September 21, 2015 are deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the person holding such RSUs, but are not deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of any other persons. It is expected that approximately one-third of the shares underlying these RSUs will be withheld to pay taxes related to the RSUs as they vest and settle.
(3)Applicable percentage of beneficial ownership at September 21, 2015 is based on 596,105,787 shares outstanding.
(4)Includes shares that were elected to be received in lieu of non-employee director retainer fees during the first half of calendar 2015, and related matching shares under the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan. For Ms. Ward, this includes 7,582 elected shares and 329 matching shares; for Mr. Glasscock, this includes 789 elected shares and 329 matching shares; for each of the other non-employee directors (other than Messrs. Frank and Peltz), this includes 658 elected shares and 329 matching shares. Unless the director has chosen to defer the shares under the Sysco Corporation 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan, these shares will be issued on December 31, 2015 or within 60 days after a non-employee director ceases to be a director, whichever occurs first. Directors may choose to defer receipt of these shares related to director retainer fees, as well as shares awarded pursuant to restricted stock grants, and these deferred amounts are also included in this line item. To the extent cash dividends are paid on our common stock, non-employee directors also receive the equivalent amount of the cash dividend credited to their account with respect to all deferred restricted stock awards, and all elected and matched shares that are deferred. The number of shares in each non-employee director’s deferred stock account, including related dividend equivalents, is as follows: Mr. Cassaday (none), Dr. Craven (41,205), Mr. Glasscock (38,468), Mr. Golden (none), Mr. Hafner (none), Dr. Koerber (22,141), Ms. Newcomb (none), Mr. Tilghman (none) and Ms. Ward (20,520). If the director has chosen to defer the receipt of any shares, he or she will be credited to the director’s account in the 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan and issued on the earliest to occur of the “in-service” distribution date elected by the director (which shall be at least one year following the end of the plan year in which the shares would otherwise have been distributed to the director), the death of the director, the date on which the director ceases to be a director of the company, a change of control of Sysco, or the date on which the director applies and qualifies for a hardship withdrawal. Deferred shares are deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the persons holding such shares, but are not deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership of any other persons.
(5)These shares are held by a family trust affiliated with Mr. Golden.
(6)Includes 465 shares held by a family trust affiliated with Mr. Kreidler, 120 shares held by Mr. Kreidler’s spouse and 225 shares held by a family trust affiliated with Mr. Kreidler’s spouse.
(7)These shares are beneficially owned by both Trian Fund Management, L.P. (“Trian”), in its capacity as the management company for certain investment funds and vehicles managed by it (the “Trian Funds”), and Mr. Peltz, as described below under “- Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Holders.” Trian Fund Management GP, LLC, which is controlled by Mr. Peltz, Peter W. May and Edward P. Garden, is the general partner of Trian and, therefore, is in a position to determine the investment and voting decisions made by the Trian Funds. Accordingly, Mr. Peltz and Trian may be deemed to beneficially own the shares that the Trian Funds directly and beneficially own. Each of Trian and Mr. Peltz disclaims beneficial ownership of such shares, except to the extent of their respective pecuniary interests therein.
(8)These shares are held by the spouse of the director or executive officer.
(9)Includes an aggregate of 130,719 shares directly owned by the current executive officers other than the named executive officers.
(10)Includes 243 shares held in trust for the benefit of Mr. Grade’s son.
(11)Includes an aggregate of 734,886 shares underlying options that are presently exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days after September 21, 2015 held by the current executive officers other than the named executive officers.
(12)Includes an aggregate of 37,955 shares underlying restricted stock units (RSUs) that will vest and settle within 60 days after September 21, 2015 held by the current executive officers other than the named executive officers.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement   3335


Back to Contents

BackSecurity Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners

The following table sets forth information concerning beneficial ownership of our common stock by persons or groups known to Contentsus to be beneficial owners of more than 5% of Sysco’s common stock outstanding as of September 21, 2015. The applicable percentage of beneficial ownership is based on 596,105,787 shares outstanding as of September 21, 2015.

  Total Shares of Common Stock
Beneficially Owned
  Percent of Outstanding Shares 
Trian Fund Management, L.P. and certain affiliates(1)  42,061,438   7.06%
BlackRock, Inc. and certain affiliates(2)  33,049,090   5.54%
State Street Corporation and certain affiliates(3)  32,257,974   5.41%
Yacktman Asset Management LP(4)  31,631,921   5.31%
The Vanguard Group and certain affiliates(5)  31,239,368   5.24%
(1)This information is based on a Schedule 13D/A filed on September 2, 2015 by Trian. According to the Schedule 13D/A, these shares include (i) 41,411,938 shares of common stock beneficially owned by Trian through direct ownership and (ii) 649,500 shares of common stock underlying privately negotiated back-to-back call and put transactions as a result of which Trian is subject to the same economic gain or loss as if it had purchased the underlying shares. Trian has shared power to vote, or to direct the vote of, and shared power to dispose, or to direct the disposition of, these shares of common stock. The address for Trian is Trian Fund Management, L.P., 280 Park Avenue, 41st Floor, New York, NY 10017.
(2)This information is based on a Schedule 13G/A filed on February 9, 2015 by BlackRock, Inc. (“BlackRock”). According to the Schedule 13G/A, BlackRock has the sole power to vote, or to direct the vote of, 28,201,777 shares of common stock and sole power to dispose, or to direct the disposition of, 33,049,090 shares of common stock. The address for BlackRock is BlackRock, Inc., 55 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10022.
(3)This information is based on a Schedule 13G filed on February 12, 2015 by State Street Corporation (“State Street”). According to the Schedule 13G, State Street has shared power to vote, or to direct the vote of, and shared power to dispose, or to direct the disposition of, these shares of common stock. The address for State Street is State Street Financial Center, One Lincoln Street, Boston, MA 02111.
(4)This information is based on a Schedule 13G/A filed on February 10, 2015 by Yacktman Asset Management LP (“Yacktman”). According to the Schedule 13G/A, Yacktman has the sole power to vote, or to direct the vote of, 31,536,671 shares of common stock and sole power to dispose, or to direct the disposition of, 31,631,921 shares of common stock. The address for Yacktman is Yacktman Asset Management LP, 6300 Bridgepoint Parkway, Building One, STE 500, Austin, TX 78730.
(5)This information is based on a Schedule 13G filed on February 11, 2015 by The Vanguard Group (“Vanguard”). According to the Schedule 13G, Vanguard has sole power to vote, or to direct the vote of, 1,014,667 shares of common stock, sole power to dispose, or to direct the disposition of, 30,276,530 shares of common stock, and shared power to dispose, or to direct the disposition of, 962,838 shares of common stock. The address for Vanguard is 100 Vanguard Blvd., Malvern, PA 19355.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

To align the interests of our executivesmanagement with those of our stockholders, Sysco’s Board of Directors concluded that our executivesenior officers should have a significant financial stake in Sysco stock. To further that goal, for several years we have maintained stock ownership guidelines for our executives. In August 2011,February 2015, we amended our Corporate Governance Guidelines in order to provide that,better align with evolving best practices by tying the ownership requirement to a multiple of the officer’s annual base salary, rather than a specified number of shares. Pursuant to these guidelines as amended, beginning in August 2016 or upon the executivesend of the five-year period from the date the officer is hired, promoted or otherwise becomes subject to the guidelines, whichever is later, the following senior officers should own, thebased on their respective positions, a minimum number of shares by position,equal in value to the multiple of each such officer’s annual base salary as described in the following table. In May 2012, we further amended our Corporate Governance Guidelines in order to provide for the position of Executive Chairman.

Position

Required to Own

by Fifth Anniversary

in Position

Minimum Ownership Requirement (Multiple of Base Salary)

CEO

175,000 shares

7x

Executive Vice Presidents

60,000 shares

4x

Executive Chairman

30,000 shares

Senior Vice Presidents

20,000 shares

Other Section 16 Officers

10,000 shares

2x

Executive

Our senior officers have five years to achieve these ownership requirements. The five-year period begins the date the officer is hired, promoted or otherwise becomes subject to the guidelines. With respectIf an individual was hired after August 26, 2011, or promoted after August 26, 2011 to officersa position that were already subject torequires the ownership guidelinesof a greater amount of stock than his or her prior to the August 2011 amendment,position, the five-year period began as ofpertaining to the new position will begin upon the effective date of the amendment. These officers, other than the Executive Chairman, are also requiredhiring or promotion; provided, further, however, that a promoted individual shall continue to maintain compliancecomply with the previous stockabove ownership guidelines, which required each individualrequirements applicable to maintain certain ownership levels at the fourth and eighth years following his or her promotion, until the new five-year requirement and respective ownership levels are also satisfied. The stock ownership guidelines in effect until August 2016 are as follows:

Position

Required to Own

by Fourth Anniversary

in Position

Required to Own

by Eighth Anniversary

in Position

CEO

100,000 shares

175,000 shares

CFO and Executive Vice Presidents

15,000 shares

30,000 shares

Senior Vice Presidents (other than CFO)

10,000 shares

20,000 shares

Other Section 16 Officers

5,000 shares

10,000 shares

Until August 2016, the Executive Chairman remains subjectprior position at all times subsequent to the stock ownership guidelines applicable to Sysco’s non-employee directors. See “Director Compensation – Stock Ownership Guidelines” for a description of the stock ownership guidelines applicable to the non-employee directors.promotion.

For purposes of the guidelines, the

The shares counted towards these ownership requirements shall include Sysco shares of common stock owned directly or indirectly by the executive through the Sysco Corporation Employees’ Stock Purchase Plan, as well as any othersenior officer, including shares of vested restricted stock held by the executive officer that may be subject to transfer restrictions or potential clawbacks, butshares owned indirectly by the officer through any Sysco employee stock purchase plan, and two-thirds of the shares underlying an officer’s unvested restricted stock units, and shall not include unvested shares of restricted stock, shares held through any other form of indirect beneficial ownership or shares underlying unexercised options. However, for purposesRestricted stock unit incentives, coupled with shares obtained from the exercise of complyingstock options, are anticipated to provide all senior officers with the five-yearopportunity to satisfy these requirements within the specified time frames.

These ownership requirements are set at levels that Sysco believes are reasonable given the senior officers’ respective salaries and responsibility levels. In addition, Exequity has reviewed our ownership guidelines approved inand confirmed that they are consistent with the August 2011 amendment, two-thirdscorresponding practices of an officer’s shares underlying unvested restricted stock units will count towardsour peer group.

In connection with the ownership requirement.

In addition,requirements described above, each executivesenior officer to whomof the guidelines apply is expected toCompany shall retain 25% of the net shares acquired upon exercise of stock options and 25%100% of the net shares acquired pursuant to vested restricted stock and restricted stock unit grantsthe vesting of RSUs until the executive officer’s holdings of companyCompany stock equal or exceed the applicable minimum ownership guidelines applicable to the executive officer.requirement. For these purposes, “net shares” shall mean the shares remaining after disposition of shares necessary to pay the related tax liability and, if applicable, exercise price.

In the event that these ownership guidelines present an undue hardship for an executive, the Chairman of the

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement36

Back to Contents

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee may make an exception orGuidelines also provide an alternativethat, after five years of service as a non-employee director, such individuals are expected to address the intentcontinuously own a minimum of the guidelines, taking into consideration the executive’s personal circumstances.

We adopted guidelines with a specific number of16,500 shares rather than a multiple of salary to protect executives from unnecessary concern regarding fluctuations in the stock price, and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee will periodically review the guidelines to determine if they need to be updated due to, among other things, significant changes in the price of Sysco common stock. Based on an assumed $30.52 Sysco stock price, the CEOThe shares beneficially owned by Trian, as reported above under “ - Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners,” are credited to Messrs. Frank and Peltz for purposes of our ownership requirement of 175,000 shares equals a value of approximately 4.55 times Mr. DeLaney’s salary. The other officer ownership requirements are set at lower levels that Sysco believes are reasonable given their salaries and responsibility levels. Restricted stock and restricted stock unit incentives, coupled with shares obtained from the exercise of stock options, are anticipated to provide all executives with the opportunity to satisfy these requirements within the specified time frames.requirements.

We provide the Board of Directors with the status of the executives’officers’ and directors’ stock ownership at itsall of the regularly-scheduled meetings to ensure compliance with these holding requirements. As of September 17, 2012, all21, 2015, each of the named executive officers and directors met thehis or her then-applicable stock ownership requirement.

SYSCO CORPORATIONStock Trading Restrictions2012 Proxy Statement   34


Directors and executive officers may only purchase and sell Sysco common stock and exercise stock options pursuant to a 10b5-1 trading plan adopted during an approved trading window, subject to limited exceptions, including “net exercises” of stock options that do not involve an open market sale of shares and hardship exemptions. The adoption of a 10b5-1 trading plan or other transaction in Sysco stock by executive officers and directors must be pre-approved by a committee that includes the Chairman of the Board, the Chair of Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, the Chief Executive Officer and the Company’s chief legal officer, following their review of the amount and timing of the proposed transaction and their confirmation that the individual in question does not possess any material inside information about the Company. Quarterly trading windows generally open two business days after Sysco issues its quarterly earnings release and typically close around seven weeks after the opening of the window.

Back to Contents

SECTION 16(A) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules issued thereunder, our executive officers and directors and any persons holding more than ten percent (10%) of our common stock are required to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York Stock Exchange reports of initial ownership of our common stock and changes in ownership of such common stock. To our knowledge, no person beneficially owns more than 10% of our common stock. Copies of the Section 16 reports filed by our directors and executive officers are required to be furnished to us. Based solely on our review of the copies of the reports furnished to us, or written representations that no reports were required, we believe that, during fiscal 2012,2015, all of our executive officers and directors complied with the Section 16(a) requirements except as follows: On October 25, 2011, Ms. Newcomb filedthat, due in each case to an administrative error on the part of the Company, a late Form 4 was filed on behalf of Mr. William Day on October 2, 2014, to report an exercise of options and the sale of the underlying shares of common stock, and a late Form 4 was filed on behalf of Mr. DeLaney on November 18, 2014, to report two transactions that were not reported on a timely basis. The two late transactions were sales that occurred on November 18, 2010 and September 15, 2011.involving the vesting of restricted stock units to pay tax withholding obligations.

EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION

The following table sets forth certain information regarding equity compensation plans as of June 30, 2012.

Plan Category

Number of Securities

to be Issued

Upon Exercise of

Outstanding Options,

Warrants and Rights

Weighted-Average

Exercise Price

of Outstanding

Options, Warrants

and Rights

Number of Securities Remaining

Available for Future Issuance

Under Equity Compensation

Plans (Excluding Securities

Reflected in First Column)

 

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

59,224,226

$

29.85

23,020,505

(1)

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

TOTAL

59,224,226

$

29.85

23,020,505

(1)

(1)

Includes 17,224,939 shares issuable pursuant to our 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended, including 7,189,123 shares subject to outstanding restricted stock units; 554,828 shares issuable pursuant to our 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan; and 5,240,738 shares issuable pursuant to our Employees’ Stock Purchase Plan as of June 30, 2012. Does not reflect the issuance of 398,165 shares in July 2012 pursuant to our Employees’ Stock Purchase Plan.

27, 2015.

Plan Category  Number of Securities to
be Issued Upon Exercise
of Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
  Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of
Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
 Number of Securities
Remaining Available for
Future Issuance Under
Equity Compensation
Plans (Excluding Securities
Reflected in First Column)
 
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders 25,787,128 $        31.28 55,598,190(1) 
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders    
TOTAL 25,787,128 $        31.28 55,598,190(1) 
(1)Includes 43,562,619 shares issuable pursuant to our 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan, of which 15,115,359 shares are eligible to be granted as full value awards; 346,286 shares issuable pursuant to our 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan; and 10,683,544 shares issuable pursuant to our Employee Stock Purchase Plan as of June 27, 2015. The amount does not reflect the issuance of 346,219 shares in July 2015 pursuant to the completion of the quarterly purchase under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan.

SYSCO CORPORATION -20122015 Proxy Statement   3537


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

In this section, we provide an overview of our philosophy and objectives of our executive compensation program and describe the material components of our executive compensation program for our fivefiscal 2015 named executive officers, or “NEOs,” whose compensation is set forth in the 20122015 Summary Compensation Table and other compensation tables contained in this proxy statement:

William J. DeLaney, our President and Chief Executive Officer;
Robert C. Kreidler, our Executive Vice President and former Chief Financial Officer;
Thomas L. Bené, our Executive Vice President and President, Foodservice Operations;
Russell T. Libby, our Executive Vice President, Administration and Corporate Secretary; and
Wayne R. Shurts, our Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer.

William J. DeLaney, our Chief Executive Officer;

Manuel A. Fernandez, our Executive Chairman;

Robert C. Kreidler, our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer;

Michael W. Green, our Executive Vice President and Group President; and

Larry G. Pulliam, our Executive Vice President and Group President.

In addition, we explain how and why the Compensation Committee of our Board (the “Committee”) arrives at compensation policies and decisions involving the NEOs. Furthermore, in April 2012, Mr. Fernandez was appointed to the newly-created position of Executive Chairman. The philosophy and policies underlying the Committee’s determination of the Executive Chairman’s compensation, as well as the procedures followed in setting that compensation, differ from those with respect to the other NEOs and, except where the context states otherwise, are discussed solely below under “—Compensation of the Executive Chairman.”

Executive Summary

Sysco is the global leader in selling, marketing and distributing food products, equipment and supplies to the foodservice industry. As such, our long-term success depends on our ability to attract, retainengage, motivate and motivateretain highly talented individuals who are committed to Sysco’s vision and strategy. One of the key objectives of our executive compensation program is to link executives’ pay to their performance and their advancement of Sysco’s overall annual and long-term performance and business strategies.

Other objectives include aligning the executives’ interests with those of stockholders and encouraging high-performing executives to remain with Sysco over the course of their careers. We believe that the amount of compensation for each NEO reflects extensive management experience, continued high performance and exceptional service to Sysco and our stockholders. We also believe that Sysco’s compensation strategies have been effective in attracting executive talent and promoting performance and retention. We also believe that the amount of compensation for each NEO reflects his extensive management experience, high performance and exceptional service to Sysco and our stockholders.

Business Highlights

High levels of product costs and an uneven economic recovery contributed to a challenging business environment in fiscal 2012. Our case volume growth has shown modest improvement in a low growth market environment. However, our earnings declined due to high levels of inflation and rising operating expenses, driven in part by our expenses related to our Business Transformation Project. Sysco’s management team has kept its full attention on servicing our customers and effectively managing expenses, resulting in solid financial performance for fiscal 2012, including the following:

Sales of $42.4 billion, the highest on record for a fiscal year.

Operating income of $1.9 billion.

Net earnings of $1.1 billion.

Basic and diluted earnings per share in fiscal 2012 were $1.91 and $1.90, respectively. Adjusted** diluted earnings per share were $2.13 in fiscal 2012.

We generated $1.4 billion in operating cash flow for fiscal 2012, a 29% increase compared to the prior year.

We increased the annual dividend by four percent; paid $623 million to our stockholders in dividend payments in 2012.

We successfully purchased companies in the US and Canada with total annual sales of approximately $270 million.

(** For more detail please see our Annual Report on Form 10-K.10-K (“Form 10-K”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Our discussion abovebelow of our results includes certain non-GAAP financial measures that we believe provide important perspective with respect to underlying business trends. AnyOther than free cash flow, any non-GAAP financial measuremeasures will be denoted as an adjusted measuremeasures and, excludes expenses from our Business Transformation Project, withdrawalsexcept for free cash flow and measures provided pursuant to benefit plan formulas, will exclude the impact from multiemployer pension plans, restructuringwithdrawal charges, corporate-owned life insurance (COLI) policies,severance charges, integration planning, litigation costs and recognized tax benefits.termination costs in connection with the merger that had been proposed with US Foods, Inc. (“US Foods”), facility closure charges and merger related financing costs. More information on the rationale for the use of these measures can be found in our Form 10-K on pages 27-30 and reconciliations to GAAP numbers can be found in Annex I - Non-GAAP Reconciliations.)

The foodservice industry performance in fiscal 2015 was generally improved. Consumer confidence and the outlook of foodservice operators are at high levels, but have decreased slightly in the summer months of 2015. Fuel prices declined during fiscal 2015 and are currently at lower levels, as compared to recent years, that may support higher consumer spending in the future. Spending at restaurants is generally improved, but customer traffic levels are generally unchanged. Overall, the market environment appears to be modestly improved as compared to the prior two years; however, uncertainty in industry growth remains for fiscal 2016. Amid these conditions, we provided our customers with excellent service, growing our business with both our locally and corporate managed customers and stabilizing our gross margins by successfully implementing several value-added commercial initiatives. We improved our expense management performance as the year progressed, achieving greater success managing expenses in the second half of the year as compared to the first half.

Financial highlights from fiscal 2015 include the following:

Sales of $48.7 billion.
Operating income of $1.2 billion. Adjusted* operating income of $1.8 billion.
Net earnings of approximately $0.7 billion. Adjusted* net earnings of $1.1 billion.
Diluted earnings per share of $1.15. Adjusted* diluted earnings per share of $1.84.
Cash flow from operations of $1.6 billion and free cash flow* of $1.0 billion.
Increased our annual dividend, paying $695.3 million to our stockholders in dividend payments.

*See “Non-GAAP Reconciliations” for an explanation of these non-GAAP financial measures.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement   3638


Back to Contents

Say on Pay – Stockholder Feedback

At last year’s Annual Meeting, 94.8%92.7% of the stockholders who cast a vote for or against the Company’s “Say on Pay” proposal voted in favor of the Company’s “Say on Pay” proposal on executive compensation.proposal. Further, throughout theearlier this year, management engaged in dialogue with some of our largest investorsstockholders to solicit their feedback and gather information on thetheir views and opinions of our stockholders on various operations and governance issues, including executive compensation practices. ThePartially due to this feedback and to the strong 2014 “Say on Pay” vote, the Company did not take any specific actionactions in response to the 2011 “Saysuch vote. Based on Pay” vote; however, based on thethese results of the stockholder advisory vote on “Say on Pay”, as well asand our ongoing dialogue with our stockholders, the Committee and our Board concluded that even though our overall executive compensation policies and practices enjoy favorable stockholder support, it was appropriate to continue to adjust the compensation mix offramework for our named executive officers, other than the Executive Chairman,NEOs to ensure that fixed and variable compensation components and target total direct compensation are set at levels that ensure that earned compensation awards are reflective of Sysco’s performance relative to its peers and our internal pay philosophy.

The Committee carefully considers feedback from our stockholders regarding our executive compensation program. StockholdersIn addition to the annual “Say on Pay” advisory vote on NEO compensation and the Company’s stockholder engagement efforts, stockholders are invited to express their views to the Committee as described under the heading “Corporate Governance – Communicating with the Board.” In addition, the advisory vote on the compensation of the NEOs provides stockholders with an opportunity to communicate their views on our

Our Practices

Below we highlight certain executive compensation on an annual basis.

Changespractices applicable to Executive Compensation Programour NEOs that we have implemented to drive performance, as well as practices we have not implemented because we do not believe they would serve our stockholders’ long-term interests.

In August 2011, the Committee redesigned the key components of our executive compensation program, with the aim of improving the extent to which pay is linked to performance.What We linked incentive plan performance goals and total compensation levels to better ensure that earned compensation awards will be reflective of Sysco’s performance against our annual profit plan and relative to peers. To that end, in August 2012, the Committee refined the performance goal setting process and financial objectives of the Management Incentive Plan or “MIP” annual incentive award to align with Sysco’s profit plan. Recent changes to Sysco’s executive compensation programs approved by the Committee include the following:Do

Fiscal 2012 Changes:

Component:

Change:

Objective:

Pay for Performance– We link pay to Sysco and individual performance. The great majority of non-retirement executive pay is performance based. We retrospectively review the pay and performance relationship of our executive pay on an annual basis. By aligning annual and long-term incentive opportunities with Sysco’s profit plan, compensation is tightly aligned with stockholder interests.

Total Compensation Opportunity

Modified

Reward Achievement Relative to Peers– We link portions of incentive pay mix through selective base salary increases, selective reductions in annual incentive opportunities, and selective increases in long term incentives

Strike a more appropriate balance between participants’ long- and short- term orientation to the business while targeting total direct compensation at levels consistent with the overall philosophy with a continued strong focus on variable pay for performance

Annual Incentive Award

Set performance goals that better support achievement of Sysco’s vision and strategy by transitioning to a bonus program more closely tied to Sysco’s annual profit plan

Improve the extent to which plan targets provide an appropriate degree of challenge and stretch and link plan targets with Committee’s assessment of market conditions, operating expectations and other relevant factors, rather than base them on prior year’s operating results.

CEO Annual Incentive Award

Modified the form of CEO annual incentive framework to permit the Committee to adjust CEO earned annual incentive award for specified non-financial performance goal achievements

Committee has opportunity to review CEO performance with respect to specified non-financial performance criteria and make relevant adjustments to promote pay for performance goal

Long-term Incentives (CPU)

Adjusted the cash performance units (“CPU”) performance criterion to a three fiscal yearCompany’s total shareholder return (TSR) as compared to the TSRS&P 500 for 3-year performance periods. Our programs are designed to reward performance that is better than the broader market.

Value Stockholders’ Input– We regularly communicate with some of our larger stockholders and consider their input when designing and implementing compensation programs.
Mitigate Undue Risk– We mitigate undue risk associated with compensation, including utilizing a mix of elements, caps on potential payments, clawback provisions, multiple performance targets and robust Board and management processes to identify risk. We also utilize post-employment covenants designed to protect competitive information of Sysco. We do not believe any of Sysco’s compensation programs creates risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse impact on Sysco, which we validate through our compensation risk analysis each year.
Align Target Compensation with Our Peers– We position the target total direct compensation levels for our NEOs within a tight range of the S&P 500 companies overmedian for our peers, using a combination of lower fixed pay and an emphasis on pay for performance.
Independent Compensation Consulting Firm– The Committee seeks counsel from an independent compensation consulting firm that does not provide any other services to Sysco.
Executive Compensation Clawback Policy– The Committee has the authority to recoup compensation if there is (i) a restatement of our financial results, other than a restatement due to a change in accounting policy, within 36 months of the payment of the award and (ii) the restatement would result in the payment of a reduced award if the award were recalculated.
Reasonable Change in Control Provisions– We believe we have reasonable change in control provisions that generally apply to executive officers in the same period

Relative TSR better aligns executive rewards with corresponding stockholder value versusmanner as the marketplace

The Company believes TSR is the ultimate measureapplicable broader employee population, including use of stockholder value creationdouble-trigger provisions in stock option and long-term company success

RSU awards since November 2013.

Significant Stock Ownership

Increase Guidelines– We have adopted stringent stock ownership requirementsguidelines for top executivesour directors and senior officers, including a stock holding requirement. We review and adjust these guidelines when appropriate, including enhancements in February 2015 and August 2015.

Modest Perquisites– We provide only modest perquisites that have a sound benefit to Sysco’s business. We do not allow personal use of private aircraft or other than the CEO, withegregious perquisites.
Regular Review of Share Utilization– We evaluate share utilization by reviewing overhang levels (dilutive impact of equity compensation on our stockholders) and annual run rates (the aggregate shares awarded as a percentage of total outstanding shares).
Limited Trading Windows– We require our directors and executive officers to conduct all requirements to be phasedtransactions in over a five year period

Increased ownership further strengthens alignment with stockholders

Ensures long term view of stockholder value creation

Sysco common stock through pre-approved 10b5-1 trading plans established during open trading windows. Further information about our trading restrictions is available under “Stock Ownership – Stock Trading Restrictions” above.

Fiscal 2013 Changes:

What We Don’t Do

Component:

Change:

Objective:

None of our NEOs has an employment contract.

Annual Incentive Award

Refined performance goal setting and financial objectives to fully align with Sysco’s annual profit plan

Linkage to profit plan ensures the goals will better reflect market conditions, operating expectations and other relevant factors as reflected in Sysco’s profit plan

Reinforces accountability to annual profit plan goals

Annual Incentive

Award

No stock option reloading.
No tax gross-ups for personal aircraft use, financial planning or loss on sale of home in connection with a relocation.
No separate change in control agreements.
No hedgingNEO Individual Objectives

Our insider trading policy prohibits executive officers and directors from using strategies or products (such as derivative securities or short-selling techniques) to hedge against the potential decrease in the market value of Sysco common stock.

Modified the form

No excise tax gross-ups upon a change in control.
No repricing of the annual incentive award agreement for the NEOs (other than CEO) and other senior level officers to allow the Committee to adjust annual incentive awards for specified non-financial performance goal achievements and implemented an umbrella bonus plan funding structure pool for the CEO and other NEOs.

Committee has opportunity to assess each NEO’s performance with respect to specified non-financial, strategic performance criteria and make relevant adjustments to promote pay for performance by individual

Maintain Section 162(m) compliance for annual incentive award payments while providing the Committee more flexibility in determining such payments

While adjustments could be positive, no award is made under the MIP unless the executive earns some portion of the bonus pursuant to the annual incentive plan

underwater stock options.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement   3739


Back to Contents

How Pay is Tied to Performance

Sysco’s executive compensation program directly links a substantial portionthe great majority of executive compensation to Sysco’s financial performance through annual and long-term incentives. The mix of the key non-retirement compensation elements for the CEO and the other NEOs for fiscal 20122015 is shown below. The Target Compensation Mix charts describe each element of compensation as a percent of total target direct compensation, while the Actual Compensation Paid charts describe each element of compensation that was actually paid out for(for cash incentives) or granted (for equity awards) in fiscal 2012.2015, other than those specifically described in the paragraph below.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement   3840


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

The Target Compensation Mix charts above include the target award opportunities related to annual and long-term incentive compensation, granted in fiscal 2012 and valued at target levels, and do not include any amounts paid with respect to prior years’ incentive award grants. The Actual Compensation Paid charts include the annual incentive and CPU award amounts paid out to the NEOs in cash with respect to fiscal 2012, and do not include the values of grants made but not paid out in cash during fiscal 2012. All charts include salary with respect to fiscal 2012 and the estimated grant date value of stock options and RSUs granted during fiscal 2012. The value of all of Sysco’s long-term incentive compensation vehicles, stock options, restricted stock units (RSUs), and cash performance units (CPUs) is time vested and depends upon Sysco’s stock performance. How we derive the values of the components of Sysco’s long-term incentives is discussed under “— How Executive Pay is Established.” Including the annual incentive award, payment of which is wholly dependent on Sysco’s financial performance, these four performance-linked components constituted approximately 82% to 88% of the total target direct compensation, and approximately 76% to 84% of the total actual direct compensation paid for fiscal 2012 to each of the named executive officers other than the Executive Chairman.

In developing our pay for performance policies, the Committee generally benchmarks elements of pay against a comparison peer group, discussed under “— How Executive Pay Is Established” below. However, the Committee has not historically used an exact formula for allocating between fixed and variable, cash and non-cash, or short-term and longer-termlong-term compensation, allowing it to incorporate flexibility into our annual and longer-termlong-term compensation programs and adjust for the evolving business environment. The Target Compensation Mix charts above include award opportunities related to annual and long-term incentive compensation, granted in fiscal 2015 and valued at target levels, and do not include (i) any amounts paid with respect to prior years’ incentive award grants, or (ii) any value of retirement benefits. The Actual Compensation Paid charts include the annual incentive and CPU award amounts, if any, paid out to the NEOs in cash with respect to fiscal 2015 or measurement period ending in fiscal 2015. All charts include salary with respect to fiscal 2015 and the estimated grant date value of stock options and RSUs granted during fiscal 2015 as part of the NEOs long-term incentive compensation.

The value of Sysco’s stock options and RSUs is directly linked to Sysco’s stock performance. The value of Sysco’s CPUs depends on Sysco’s relative shareholder return over the three-year performance period. How we derive the values of the components of Sysco’s long-term incentives is discussed under “—How Executive Pay is Established.” Including the annual incentive award, payment of which is largely dependent on Sysco’s financial performance, these four performance-linked components constituted approximately 80% to 89% of the total target direct compensation, and approximately 77% to 86% of the total actual direct compensation paid for fiscal 2015 to each of the NEOs.

Changes to Executive Compensation Program

Sysco is committed to providing and maintaining a competitive executive compensation program. In addition, we continue to address ways in which our pay can be appropriately linked to Company performance, and we have made some changes for fiscal 2016 incentives to further tighten this alignment. Recent changes to Sysco’s executive compensation programs approved by the Committee include the following:

Fiscal 2015 Changes:

Component:Change:Objective:
Annual IncentiveAwardRefined performance goal setting and financial objectives to improve alignment with Sysco’s annual profit plan.

•  Ensure that the goals will better reflect market conditions, operating expectations and other relevant factors as reflected in Sysco’s profit plan.

•  Reinforce accountability to annual profit plan goals.

Annual IncentiveAward – NEO IndividualObjectivesModified the annual incentive award opportunity for the NEOs and other officers to emphasize the importance of the individualized strategic bonus objectives (“SBOs”). SBOs were used as a discrete component of the program representing 20% of the target award opportunity.

•  Align with market practice through a mix of financial and individual goals.

Total CompensationOpportunityMaintained competitiveness through increases in performance incentives and merit-based salary increases.

•  Maintain an appropriate balance between long-term and short-term orientation to the business, with a continued strong focus on pay for performance.

Fiscal 2016 Changes:

Component:Change:Objective:
Annual Incentive AwardAligned performance goal setting and core financial objectives with Sysco’s annual profit plan, shifted return on invested capital to a long-term metric.

•  Ensure the goals, operating expectations and other key performance criteria are reflective of Sysco’s profit plan.

Annual IncentiveAward – NEO IndividualObjectivesIncreased percentage of SBOs as a discrete component of the program representing 25% of the target award annual incentive award.

•  Increase the significance of the specified SBOs and promote individual accountability for performance in key areas.

Long-Term IncentivesCash-performance units (CPU) metric modified to use average 3-year return on invested capital metric, as modified by relative total shareholder return during the 3-year performance period.

•  Strengthen alignment with business objective and strike a more appropriate balance of variable pay with regard to relative market returns.

Retention IncentiveAwardGranted a special incentive and retention payment, subject to a 12-month recoupment provision.

•  Motivate certain individuals who were instrumental in developing future state business strategies, in addition to their ordinary duties, and to retain those individuals for successful pursuit of other operational and strategic initiatives.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement41

Back to Contents

Philosophy of Executive Compensation Program

Historically, our

Our executive compensation plans have directly linkedlink a substantial portion of annual executive compensation to Sysco’s performance. These plans are designed to deliver superiorhighly competitive compensation for superior company performance. Likewise, when company performance falls short of expectations, certainthese variable incentive programs deliver lower levels of compensation. For example, as discussed in more detail below, annual incentive awards for 2012 paid at less than the target amount because some of the performance results failed to reach required threshold levels. However, the Committee tries to balance pay-for-performance objectives with retention considerations, so that, even during temporary downturns in the economy and the foodservice industry, the programs continue to ensure that qualified, successful, high-achievingperformance-driven employees stay committed to increasing Sysco’s long-term value. Furthermore, to attract and retain highly skilled management, our compensation program must remain competitive with that of comparable employers who compete with us for talent.

Core Principles

We use the following key principles as the cornerstone of Sysco’s executive compensation philosophy to attract, develop and retain business leaders to drive financial and strategic growth and build long-term stockholder value:

Pay for Performance:Provide base salaries that reflect each NEO’s background, experience and performance, combined with variable incentive compensation that rewards executives at higher levels than at peer companies when superior performance is achieved, while subpar performance results in compensation that is below that of peer companies;
Competitiveness and Retention:Provide a competitive pay opportunity that attracts and retains the highest quality professionals;
Accountability for Short- and Long-Term Performance:Strike an appropriate balance between achieving both short-term and long-term interests of the business through short-term and long-term compensation; and
Alignment with Stockholders’ Interests:Link the interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders through significant at risk, equity-based compensation.

Pay for Performance: Provide conservative base salaries combined with higher levels of variable, incentive compensation relative to the peer group, such that superior performance rewards executives at higher levels than at peer companies while subpar performance results in less compensation than would be the case at peer companies;

Competitiveness and Retention: Provide a competitive pay opportunity that attracts and retains the highest quality professionals;

Accountability for Short- and Long- Term Performance: Strike an appropriate balance between short-term and longer-term compensation and short- and longer-term interests of the business; and

Alignment with Stockholders’ Interests: Link the interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders through the risks and rewards of significant equity based compensation.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement   3942


Back to Contents

Our Practices

Below we highlight certain executive compensation practices, both the practices we have implemented to drive performance and the practices we have not implemented because we do not believe they would serve our stockholders’ long-term interests.

What We Do

Pay for Performance - We link pay to Sysco and individual performance. The great majority of non-retirement executive pay is at risk.

Mitigate Undue Risk - We mitigate undue risk associated with compensation, including utilizing a mix of elements, caps on potential payments, clawback provisions, multiple performance targets and robust Board and management processes to identify risk. We do not believe any of Sysco’s compensation programs create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse impact on Sysco, which we validate through our compensation risk analysis each year.

Independent Compensation Consulting Firm - The Compensation Committee benefits from its utilization of an independent compensation consulting firm that provides no other services to Sysco.

Executive Compensation Recoupment Policy – The Compensation Committee has the authority to recoup compensation that resulted from a material misstatement of financial results.

Reasonable Change in Control Provisions - We believe we have reasonable change in control provisions that generally apply to executive officers in the same manner as the applicable broader employee population.

Modest Perquisites - We provide only modest perquisites that have a sound benefit to Sysco’s business, and revised our relocation policy in fiscal 2011 to reduce benefits and added a clawback feature to any relocation reimbursements.

Significant Stock Ownership Guidelines - We have adopted stringent stock ownership guidelines and retention requirements, with all NEOs meeting their applicable stock ownership requirement.

Regular Review of Share Utilization - We evaluate share utilization by reviewing overhang levels (dilutive impact of equity compensation on our shareowners) and annual run rates (the aggregate shares awarded as a percentage of total outstanding shares).

What We Don’t Do

No Severance/Employment Contracts - We do not have employment contracts that provide severance benefits for any NEO.

No Tax Gross-Ups for Personal Aircraft Use, Financial Planning or Relocation

No Separate Change in Control Agreements

No Excise Tax Gross-Ups Upon Change in Control

No Repricing Underwater Stock Options

No Hedging Transactions or Short Sales by Executive Officers or Directors Permitted

Components and Objectives of Executive Compensation Program

The Committee has built the executive compensation program upon a framework that includes the following components and objectives, each of which is described in greater detail later in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis. The Committee routinely reviews each component of the executive compensation program to see how it affects target total pay levels and generally targets total direct compensation at or slightly above the median of the target total pay ranges for similar executive positions among companies in our peer group. Compensation decisions with respect to the Executive Chairman are based upon a modified framework, due to the uniqueness of that position. That framework is discussed below under “—Compensation of the Executive Chairman.”

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   40


Back to Contents

Component

Description

Component

DescriptionObjective of Element

AnnualCompensation

Base Salary

The Committee generally sets competitive base salaries at market competitive levels to attract and retain talented executives and to provide a fixed, competitive base of cash compensation. The Committee then may adjust the base salaries based on a number of factors, which may include merit increases, the executive’s unique job responsibilities, management experience, individual contributions, number of years in his or her position and market position of current salary, which isas described under “How Executive Pay is Established” below.

Designed to createCreate a competitive pay mix with an appropriate balance between fixed and variable and short- and long-term pay componentscomponents.

Generally targeted between the 25th percentile andat or below the median of the salary ranges for similar executive positions among companies in our peer groupgroup.

MIP -

AnnualIncentive Award

The MIP annual incentive award is designed to offer opportunities for cash compensation tied directly to company performance. Under the MIP, weWe pay the annual incentive award in cash with payments made in the first quarter of the fiscal year for bonuses earned with respect to performance in the prior fiscal year. Payment of the annual incentive award is based on satisfaction of performance criteria that the Committee believes ultimately create stockholder value. The threshold requirements for payment of each component of the annual incentive award in fiscal 20122015 were Sysco’s achieving at least a 4% increase$1.78 in adjusted fully diluted earnings per share, at least a 4%2% increase in sales and a 2% increase in gross profit dollar growth, and at least a 17.3%an 11.25% adjusted return on invested capital, respectively.capital. In addition, for fiscal 2012, a portion2015, 20% of the CEO’s earned annual incentive award for each of the NEOs was adjusted based on his performance with respect to specified non-financial performance goals. The Executive Chairman is not currently eligible to participate in the MIP annual incentive award program.

certain key SBOs.

Designed to payPay annual cash incentive bonuses based on Sysco performance on key metrics that support the company’s operating/annual profit planplan.

PromotesPromote pay for performance in a competitive way so that exemplary performance rewards executives at higher levels than at peer companiescompanies.

Generally targeted betweenat or above the median and the 75th percentile of the annual incentive ranges among companies in our peer group upon achieving target goalsperformance goals.

Long-TermIncentives

CashPerformanceUnits (CPUs) 25% weight

MIP participants have

Each NEO has an opportunity to receive cash incentive payments based on Sysco’s performance over a three-year performance period under Sysco’s CPU Program. CPUprogram. For grants are forward-looking andprior to fiscal 2016, the grant of CPUs typically does not take into account prior Sysco or individual performance. The payoutpay out on CPUs is based on Sysco’s actual performance over the three-year performance cycle. The currently outstanding grants we made in 2011 that may be paid in August 2014 usecycle using Sysco’s three-year total shareholder return (TSR) as compared to the S&P 500 as the sole performance criterion. See “Executive Compensation – Cash Performance Unit Plan”Units” for a description of the CPU planprogram and outstanding grants thereunder.

Granted to motivateMotivate executive officers to achieve specified longer term financiallonger-term goals over a three-year periodthree- year performance periods.

Use of TSR alignsAlign pay with stockholders to the degreecreation of stockholder value, is createdas compared withto the S&P 500 companies over theeach performance periodperiod.

Stock Options 50% weight

Stock Optionsoptions granted to NEOs vest one-fifth per year beginning one year from the date of grant, except for the options granted to the Executive Chairman, which vest one-third per year.

grant.

Closely align the executives’ interests with those of our stockholders through share price appreciation.

RestrictedStock Units(RSUs)RSUs granted to NEOs generally vest one-third per year beginning one year from the date of grant. Dividend equivalents are paid to US-based participants, if and when the underlying RSUs vest.

Focus executives on multi-year activities that increase stockholder valuevalue.

Enhance retention through time vesting requirementsrequirements.

Total long-term incentivesincentive opportunities are generally targeted between the median and the 75th percentile of the long-term incentives paid by companies in our peer group for performance that meets or exceeds targeted levels.

Restricted Stock Units (RSUs)

25% weight

Restricted stock units (“RSUs”) granted to NEOs vest one-third per year beginning one year from the date of grant. Dividend equivalents are granted with respect to RSUs, which provide dividend equivalent amounts equal to the regular cash dividend payable to holders of the Company’s common stock (to the extent regular quarterly cash dividends are paid) as if the grantee were an actual stockholder with respect to the number of shares of common stock equal to grantee’s outstanding RSUs. The dividend equivalents are paid at the time the underlying RSUs vest.

Retirement,other BenefitPrograms andPerquisites

Non-QualifiedRetirementBenefits andDeferredCompensation Plan

All of the named executive officers other than the Executive Chairman are participants in the SERP and the EDCP. During fiscal 2011, however, the SERP was closed to new participants.

The Supplemental Executive RetirementManagement Savings Plan or SERP, and Executive Deferred Compensation Plan, or EDCP, have historically played(the “MSP”) is a major role in our totalnon-qualified, deferred compensation program for the named executive officers other than the Executive Chairman.plan. The SERP was designed to provide annuity payments based on prior years’ compensation following a participant’s termination of service with Sysco. The EDCPMSP allows participants to defer a portion of current cash compensation and employer contributions, plus applicable earnings, for payment on specified dates or upon certain specified events.

All of the NEOs are participants in the MSP. The MSP replaced the former SERP and the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (the “EDCP”), which have been frozen to future accruals, contributions or new participants since 2013. Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler and Libby are participants in the SERP. Messrs. DeLaney and Kreidler are also participants in the EDCP.

The SERP supportsSupport executive performance and retention by using continued servicethrough vesting requirement and forfeiture provisions applicable to company contributions.

•  Complement the Sysco 401(k) Plan to serve as the primary retirement savings vehicles for executives.

•  Provides a determinant of future accruals and vesting

The EDCP supports executive performance and retention as a result of its vesting requirementsmarket competitive retirement savings opportunity for company matching contributions.executives.

Other Benefits and Perquisites

Executive officers, including the NEOs, are eligible to participate in the same benefit programs that are offered to other salaried employees. Limited perquisites are provided to executives, including payment of life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance coverage, long-term care insurance coverage, reimbursement of costs for annual medical exams, payment of long-term disability coverage, payment of fees related to the preparation of foreign tax returns where warranted due to company business, and certain expenses related to spousal travel in connection with business events. See “—Executive Perquisites & Other Benefits – Detailed Information” below.

Designed to provideProvide limited market competitive benefits to protect employees’ and their covered dependents’ health and welfare and provide retirement benefitsbenefits.

Facilitate strong performance on the job and enhance productivityproductivity.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement   4143


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

How Executive Pay Is Established

The Compensation Committee, in consultation with management and the Committee’s independent compensation consultant, Compensation Advisory Partners LLC, referred to herein as CAP, continues to focus on ensuring that our executive compensation programs reinforce our pay for performance philosophy and enhance stockholder value. In September 2012, afterDuring the first portion of fiscal 2015 the Committee utilized Compensation Advisory Partners LLC, referred to herein as CAP, as its independent compensation consultant. Beginning in November 2014, Exequity LLP, referred to herein as Exequity, replaced CAP as the independent compensation consultant to the Committee. For a portion of fiscal 2015, both CAP and Exequity assisted the Committee in annual benchmarking of executive compensation at Sysco. After reviewing CAP competitive studies and the Company’s fiscal 2012 performance,of its consultants, the Committee determined that each named executive officer’sNEO’s target compensation provided the executive with an appropriate compensation opportunity andopportunity. The Committee later determined, based on the Company’s fiscal 2015 performance, that each named executive officer’sNEO’s total 2012fiscal 2015 compensation was generally appropriate in light of overall Company performance and the executive’s personal performance.

In developing our pay for performance policies, the Committee generally benchmarks elements of pay against a comparison peer group, as discussed below. However, the Committee has not historically used an exact formula for allocating between fixed and variable, cash and non-cash, or short-term and long-term compensation, allowing it to incorporate flexibility into our annual and long-term compensation programs and adjust for the evolving business environment.

Committee Oversight

The Committee, which is comprised entirely of all independent directors, is responsible for overseeing Sysco’s executive compensation program. The Committee determines and approves all compensation of the Chief Executive Officer, or CEO and Sysco’s other senior officers, including the named executive officers.NEOs. Although the Compensation Committee meets jointly with the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee to discuss both the CEO’s personal goals and his performance in achieving such goals in each fiscal year, the Compensation Committee is solely approvesresponsible for approving all compensation awards and payoutpayment levels. The Committee develops and oversees programs designed to compensate our corporate officers, including the named executive officers,NEOs, as well as the presidents and executive vice presidents of our operating companies. The Committee is also authorized to approve all grants of restricted stock, restricted stock units, stock options, CPUs and other awards to NEOs under our equity-basedlong-term incentive plans for Sysco employees. Further information regarding the Committee’s responsibilities is found under “Corporate Governance – Board Meetings and Committees” and in the Committee’s Charter, available on the Sysco website at www.sysco.comunder “Investors — www.sysco.comunder “Investors—Corporate Governance — Committees.Governance.

The Committee has several resources and analytical tools they consider in making decisions related to executive compensation. The table belowthat follows discusses the key tools the Committee uses.

Committee Resources

Independent
Committee
Consultant – CAP

On a combined basis, Exequity and CAP attended four Compensationsix Committee meetings during Fiscal 2012.fiscal 2015.

CAP and Exequity advised on compensation matters, including peer group composition, annual and long termlong-term incentive plan designs, special compensation issues related to acquisitions, and market data on CEO and other NEO compensation.

CAP and Exequity prepared Compensation Studiescompensation studies for NEOs (other than the Executive Chairman):NEOs:

For decisions made from May 2011July 2014 through April 2012,December 2014, the Committee consulted a CAP study prepared in May 20112014 that used the most current available peer group information and benchmarked 20112014 actual base salary, estimated 20112014 total cash compensation and total direct compensation, and target 20122015 base salary, total cash compensation, long-term incentives, and total direct compensation of each of the named executive officers other thanNEOs. In addition, the Executive Chairman.Committee relied on a CAP study prepared in March 2014 that summarized competitive pay practices of companies involved in significant acquisitions.

For all executive compensation decisions made from May 2012 through the date of this proxy statement,since January 2015, including base salary adjustments for fiscal 20132016, fiscal 2016 incentive awards, and fiscal 2013the July 2015 incentive awards,and retention payments, the Committee consulted a CAPExequity and, for decisions made from and after May 2015, the Exequity study dated May 20122015 that used updated peer group information and benchmarked 2012to benchmark 2015 base salary, estimated 20122015 total cash compensation and total direct compensation, and target 2013fiscal 2016 base salary, total cash compensation, long-term incentives, and total direct compensation of each of the named executive officers other than the Executive Chairman.NEOs.

For purposes of the reports listed above, with respect to the NEOs, “target total cash compensation” was defined as proposed base salary plus target MIP bonusannual incentive opportunity of 150% for Mr. DeLaney, 125% for Mr. Bené following his promotion to Executive Vice President and President, Foodservice Operations, and 100% for Messrs. Libby and Shurts. Mr. Kreidler, and 125%Kreidler’s target annual incentive opportunity was 100% with respect to fiscal 2015, with no annual incentive opportunity for Messrs. Green and Pulliam; “targetfiscal 2016. “Target total direct compensation” was defined as target total cash compensation plus the value of stock options, restricted stock unitsRSUs and cash performance unitsCPUs expected to be granted with respect to the year in question; stock options are valued using an estimated Black-Scholes calculation, restricted stock unitsRSUs are valued at the average closing fair market value of Sysco stock onof the ten trading days immediately preceding the date of grant, and cash performance unitsCPUs are valued at $1.00 per unit, with assumed payoutpayment at the 100% target amount; and “actual amounts” are calculated similarly to the target amounts, but use an estimated bonus payoutyear-end annual incentive payment and the actual amounts paid for all components other than the annual bonus.

Compensation Studies Preparedincentive payment. The Committee has determined both CAP and Exequity to be independent from the Company and that no conflicts of interest exist related to CAP’s or Exequity’s services provided to the Committee. Other than with respect to CAP’s and Exequity’s roles in advising the Committee and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee with respect to non-employee director compensation, neither CAP nor Exequity performs any services for Sysco. Each organization is an independent consultant and reports directly and exclusively to the Committee. Additionally, CAP and Exequity each have policies and procedures in place to prevent conflicts of interest. The fees received by CAP for Executive Chairman:

For decisions madeduring fiscal 2014 related to compensationSysco represented less than 3.5% of Mr. Fernandez in his role as Executive Chairman,CAP’s 2013 total revenues. The fees received by Exequity during fiscal 2015 related to Sysco represented less than 5% of Exequity’s 2014 revenues. Neither CAP nor Exequity, nor any adviser of either organization, had a business or personal relationship with any member of the Committee consultedor any executive officer of Sysco during fiscal 2015. No CAP for market data relevantor Exequity adviser directly owns, or directly owned during fiscal 2015, any Sysco common stock.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement44

Back to the Executive Chairman position.

Contents
Committee Resources

Sysco’s
Human
Resources
Department

Sysco’s SeniorExecutive Vice President, Human Resources and the Human Resources Department (“HR”) providesprovide additional analysis and counselguidance as requested by the Committee related to NEO compensation, (other thanincluding the Executive Chairman):following:

Assisting the CEO and Senior Vice President of Human Resources in making preliminary recommendations of base salary structure, annual and long-term incentive planprogram design, including the July 2015 incentive and retention payments, and target award levels for the NEOs (other than the Executive Chairman) and other participants in the MIP.employees eligible to receive annual incentive awards.

Providing scenario planning and compiling tally sheet information.- HR provides the Committee with anticipated pay outpayment levels throughout the year based on the Company’s projections relative to the performance measures.

Providing comparison data on the internal equity of the compensation awarded within the Sysco organization.

HR has retained the services of Towers Watson to provide assistance to HR and Sysco management in making recommendations to the Compensation Committee and the Board of Directors with respect to certain aspects of executive compensation. Towers Watson has provided advice directly to Sysco’s management team and has consulted directly with management and provided, among other things, reports based on their proprietary data and information regarding market benchmarks.

CEO

For other NEOs, other than the Executive Chairman, the CEO makes individual recommendations to the Compensation Committee on base salary and annual and long-term incentive goals and award opportunities. The CEO also provides initial recommendations for MIP annual incentive award performance targets and individual non-financial performance goalsSBOs for the Committee to consider

consider. The Compensation Committee reviews, discusses, modifies and approves, as appropriate, these compensation recommendations. The CEO’s recommendations with respect to fiscal 2015 compensation and fiscal 2016 compensation to date were accepted by the Committee. No member of management, including the CEO, has a role in determining his or her own compensation.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   42


Back to Contents

Role of CEO and/or Other Executive Officers in Determining ExecutiveNEO Compensation

As described in the table above, our CEO, Mr. DeLaney, provides recommendations to the Committee for each element of compensation for each of the NEOs other than himself and Mr. Fernandez.himself. In forming his recommendations, he is advised by HR as described above. HR assesses the design of, and makes recommendations related to, ourSysco’s compensation and benefit programs. Mr. DeLaney also consults with other senior officers of the companyCompany for recommendations related to the appropriate financial and non-financial performance measures used in our incentive programs. HR did not provide assistance to the Committee with respect to the determination of Mr. Fernandez’ compensation in his role as Executive Chairman. In developing recommendations for the Committee, Mr. DeLaney and HR consult benchmarking and other market data from CAP, Exequity and Towers Watsonother advisors as described elsewhere in this proxy statement, and follow the philosophy and pursue the objectives described above under “—Philosophy of Executive Compensation Program.” The Committee, with input from CAP,its independent compensation consultant, determines each element of compensation for Mr. DeLaney and, withDeLaney. With input from CAP,its independent compensation consultant, HR and Mr. DeLaney, the Committee determines each element of compensation for the other NEOs other than Mr. Fernandez.NEOs. The Compensation Committee is under no obligation to utilize these recommendations. Executive officers and others may also attendparticipate in discussions with the Committee meetings when invited to do so.

Tally Sheets

To enhance the analytical data used by the Committee to evaluate our NEO compensation and to provide the Committee a consolidated source for viewing the aggregate value of all material elements of executive compensation, we have incorporated tally sheets into the Committee’s annual executive compensation review. The tally sheets provide a snapshot of:

current total annual compensation, including base salary, annual cash incentives, equity compensation, benefits and perquisites;

accumulated unvested equity award values and total stock ownership levels; and

estimated termination benefits for a variety of voluntary and involuntary termination events, including change of control.

The Committee does not assign a specific weighting to the tally sheets in their overall decision-making process, but rather uses the information provided in the tally sheets to gain additional perspective and as a reference in the decision-making process. HR and Mr. DeLaney are also utilizing these same tally sheets in the course of developing their respective recommendations as a consolidated source for viewing the aggregate value of all material elements of executive compensation.

Internal Analysis

With respect to annual salary and the various incentive awards available to the named executive officers, the Committee does not perform a formal internal equity analysis, but does consider the internal equity of the compensation awarded by utilizing comparisons within the Sysco organization.

On an annual basis, the Committee compares the CEO’s compensation with that of the Executive Vice Presidents to ensure that the CEO compensation, as well as its relationship to the compensation of the CEO’s direct reports, is reasonable. The Committee makes similar evaluations among the Executive Vice Presidents and Senior Vice Presidents. These comparisons only provide a point of reference, as the Committee has not typically used specific formulas to determine compensation levels. Although officers at different levels of the organization receive a different MIP target award as a percent of their base salary, the quantitative financial performance criteria used for all corporate officers, including the NEOs, to determine earned MIP annual incentive awards are consistent.

Use of Peer Group and Survey Data

Sysco is the largest foodservice distributor in North America, and other companies in the foodservice industry are significantly smaller, with nearly all of such companies also being privately-held. We believe that these smaller businesses would not create a satisfactory comparison group due to the greater skill levels and abilities required to manage a public company of Sysco’s size.size and complexity. Absent a robust industry peer group, the Committee concluded that the most comparable companies with respect to executive pay are companies whose business size and complexity are similar to ours and with which we compete for top executive positions. Therefore,talent. However, due to the lack of directly comparable publicly traded companies, the peer group developed for the executive compensation analysis for all of the named executive officers (other than the Executive Chairman, where a different competitive data set was used)our NEOs is not the same peer group that is used in the stock performance graph included in our annual report to stockholders.stockholders or for the benchmarking of performance. The Committee evaluates the compensation analysis peer group periodically for appropriateness. The peer group utilized by the Committee for fiscal 2012appropriateness and fiscal 2013 (through the date of this proxy statement) executive compensation decisions was the same peer group used for all decisionslast made during fiscal 2011. changes in February 2013.

The companies in the peer group for executive pay and performance benchmarking includefor decisions made during fiscal 2015 and so far in fiscal 2016 are the following:following, which we refer to as our “peer group” or “peer companies” throughout this proxy statement:

AmerisourceBergen Corporation

FedEx Corp.Lowe’s Cos Inc.United Parcel Service Inc.
Best Buy Company, Inc.

Cardinal Health Inc.

Emerson Electric Company

Express Scripts

Home Depot Inc.

(The)

FedEx

Staples, Inc.Walgreen Company
ConAgra Foods Inc.Kraft Heinz Company (The)Target Corp.

YUM! Brands Inc.
Costco Wholesale CorpMcDonald’s Corp.

McKesson Corp.

Pepsico Inc.

Staples, Inc.

Target Corp.

United Parcel Service Inc.

Walgreen Company

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   43


Back to Contents

Based on the most recent fiscal year data available for each of the CAP studies described above in “—Committee Oversight,” thisThe peer group had the median market capitalization and revenue levels at the time fiscal 2015 compensation was established shown below:

Revenue LevelMarket Capitalization

Revenue Level

Peer Group:

2011: $29.5 billion as of March 31, 2011

2012: $28.9 billion as of March 31, 2012

2011: $50.32015: $48.9 billion as of most recent fiscal year end prior to May 2011

2012: $53.12014

$42.4 billion as of most recent fiscal year end prior to May 2012

December 31, 2013

Sysco:

2012: $17.5

2015: $46.6 billion as of June 30, 2012

2012: $42.4

$21.0 billion as of June 30, 2012

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement45

Back to Contents

Peer group compensation data is limited to information that is publicly reported and, to the extent it deems appropriate, the Committee uses it to benchmark the major components of compensation for our named executive officers other than the Executive Chairman.NEOs.

The CAP 2012independent compensation study from May 2014 compared Sysco’s actual pay (based on projected 2014 annual incentive payments) and projected fiscal 2012 financial performance for the applicable period to that of the peer companies as well as benchmarking theand was used to benchmark target pay program.levels and identify prevailing performance criteria. The following projected one-year and three-year performance measures were reviewed with respect to validating Sysco’s 2012fiscal 2015 target pay and performance alignment:

Fully-diluted EPS, as adjusted;
Growth in sales and gross profit dollar growth;
Return on Invested Capital; and
Total shareholder return (computed as of December 31, 2014).

Revenue growth;

EPS growth;

Return on Invested Capital;

Net Income Margin; and

Total shareholder return (computed as of December 30, 2011).

ForAn analysis performed by Exequity in May 2015 indicated that, for fiscal year 2012,2015, Sysco’s performance rank based on these one-year and three-year financial metrics varied by measure, yet on average approximated the peer group median overall for both periods. Targeted NEO pay on average, was positioned below median,also confirmed to be in part due to FY 2012 MIP annual incentive awards that were below target.alignment with our compensation philosophy. Actual compensation earned for both periods was generally in alignment with overall relative performance.

What We Paid and Why – Compensation for NEOs

Base Salary – Detailed Information

We pay base salaries to attract and retain talented executives and to provide a fixed base of cash compensation. The table below shows the annualized salaries of each named executive officer other than the Executive ChairmanNEO at the beginning of fiscal 2011, 20122014, 2015 and 2013:2016, with the effective dates as noted below:

Named Executive Officer

2011

Base Salary

2012

Base Salary(1)

2013

Base Salary

 

William J. DeLaney

$

1,000,000

$

1,150,000

$

1,175,000

(2)

Robert C. Kreidler

525,000

600,000

700,000

(3)

Michael W. Green

550,000

650,000

700,000

(3)

Larry G. Pulliam

550,000

600,000

300,000

(2)(4)

(1)

The Committee approved these base salaries on July 19, 2011, effective as of July 3, 2011.

(2)

The Committee approved these base salaries on August 23, 2012, effective as of September 1, 2012.

(3)

The Committee approved these base salaries on July 19, 2012, effective as of September 1, 2012.

(4)

For further detail on Mr. Pulliam’s change in salary, see “—Fiscal 2013 Base Salary” below.

  FY2014  FY2015  FY2016
Named Executive Officer Base Salary(1)  Base Salary(2)  Base Salary(3)
William J. DeLaney $1,198,500  $1,225,000  $1,250,000
Robert C. Kreidler  715,000   736,450   736,450
Thomas L. Bené  625,000   643,750   750,000
Russell T. Libby  425,000   540,750   600,000
Wayne R. Shurts  587,000   604,610   625,000
(1)The Committee approved these base salaries effective as of September 1, 2013. Mr. Libby’s base salary was adjusted from $425,000 to $525,000 effective as of March 1, 2014, in connection with his promotion to Executive Vice President – Corporate Affairs, Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary.
(2)The Committee approved these base salaries effective as of September 1, 2014. Mr. Bené’s base salary was adjusted from $643,750 to $725,000, effective as of January 1, 2015, in connection with his promotion to Executive Vice President and President, Foodservice Operations.
(3)The Committee approved these base salaries effective as of September 1, 2015. The base salary increase for Mr. Libby reflected the increased areas of responsibility in connection with his promotion to Executive Vice President, Administration and Corporate Secretary.

Base Salary – Analysis

Fiscal 20122015 Base Salary

Given

For fiscal 2015 base salary determinations, the improvement in economic conditions during fiscal 2011,Committee again reviewed, for each executive’s performance duringNEO, the year and the company’s financial performance, as well as each executive’s job responsibilities, management experience, individual contributions, and yearstenure in his or her position, the Committee determined that it was appropriate to grant the salary increases for fiscal 2012 described in the chart above. With respect to Mr. DeLaney, the Committee provided an increase as part of its plan to make his pay package more competitive at the Chief Executive Officer level with Sysco’s peer group as his tenure and experience in the CEO role increased. With respect to the other named executive officers, these increases were approved by the Committee upon recommendation by CAP from a market perspective and were driven by the Committee’s intent to modify pay mix in order to strike a more appropriate balance between fixed and variable and short- and long-term pay components and to more closely align them with the philosophy and principles outlined above at “— Philosophy of Executive Compensation Program.” These increases placed the fiscal 2012 base salary of Messrs. DeLaney and Kreidler near the 25th percentile of the peer group, that of Mr. Green at the median, and that of Mr. Pulliam between the 25th percentile and median.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   44


Back to Contents

Fiscal 2013 Base Salary

For base salary determinations for fiscal 2013, the Committee once again reviewed each executive’s job responsibilities, management experience, individual contributions, number of years in his or her position and then-current salary. The Committee determined that it was appropriate to grant the salary increases for fiscal 20132015 described in the chart above. Following a comprehensive review of Mr. DeLaney’s performance in Fiscal Year 2012fiscal 2014 by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Compensation Committee, and Mr. DeLaney’s evaluation by the entire Board, the Compensation Committee approved a raisean increase in Mr. DeLaney’s base salary for fiscal 2015 of $25,000,$26,500, or 2.2%, reflecting the Company’s average merit increase.. The Committee, approved salary adjustments for Mr. Kreidler for fiscal 2013, after considering input from the CEO on Mr. Kreidler’seach of their individual contributions as well as to adjust his relative position closer toand additional job responsibilities, approved salary adjustments for each of Messrs. Bené, Kreidler, Libby and Shurts for fiscal 2015 of 3%. The Committee approved these salary increases for annual market adjustments after considering recommendations and information provided by CAP and management. These changes placed the fiscal 2015 base salaries of Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Bené and Shurts between the 50thand 75thpercentile of the peer group, and Mr. Libby between the 25thpercentile and the median of the peer group,group. In addition, the base salary for Mr. Bené was adjusted, effective January 1, 2015, in connection with his promotion to be more competitive,Executive Vice President and President, Foodservice Operations. Following his promotion, Mr. Bené’s new base salary placed him between the 25thand the 50thpercentile of the peer group. Mr. Libby’s base salary was adjusted from $425,000 to be better aligned$525,000 effective as of March 1, 2014, in connection with his promotion to Executive Vice President – Corporate Affairs, Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary. Following his promotion and new base salary, Mr. Libby remained between the Company’s25thpercentile and the median of the peer group.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement46

Back to Contents

Fiscal 2016 Base Salary

For fiscal 2016 base salary determinations, the Committee again reviewed, for each NEO, the executive’s job responsibilities, management experience, individual contributions, tenure in his position and then-current salary. An independent compensation study from May 2015 compared Sysco’s actual pay philosophy.(based on projected annual incentive payments) and projected fiscal financial performance for the applicable period to that of the peer companies. The Committee also approveddetermined that it was appropriate to grant the salary adjustments for Mr. Greenincreases for fiscal 2013,2016 described in the chart above. Following a comprehensive review of Mr. DeLaney’s performance in fiscal 2015 by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Committee, and Mr. DeLaney’s evaluation by the entire Board, the Committee approved an increase in Mr. DeLaney’s salary for fiscal 2016 of $25,000, or 2.0%. The Committee, after considering input from the CEO on Mr. Green’seach of their individual contributions and additional job responsibilities, approved salary adjustments for Mr. Bené of 3.4%, Mr. Libby of 11% and Mr. Shurts of 3.4%. Mr. Libby’s salary adjustment reflected increased areas of responsibility, effective September 1, 2015, in connection with his promotion to Executive Vice President, Administration & Corporate Secretary. The Committee approved these salary increases for annual market adjustments as well as to keep his relative position at the median of the peer group.recommended by Exequity and management. These changes placedplace the fiscal 20132016 base salarysalaries of Messrs. DeLaney, Bené and Kreidler nearLibby between the 2550thand 75thpercentile of the peer group, and that of Mr. Green atShurts between the median. The Committee reduced25thpercentile and the 50thpercentile of the peer group. Mr. Pulliam’s salary to $300,000 to reflect his temporary period of reduced responsibilities for personal reasons related to an immediate family member’s health issues. The Committee determined theKreidler’s 2016 base salary reduction appropriately reflected the balance between Mr. Pulliam’s reduced schedule and his continued advice and service with respect to customer and supplier issues, industry relations issues and other components of Sysco’s business transformation initiatives during this time of his reduced schedule. The Committee determined that all other incentive compensation percentages for fiscal 2013 for Mr. Pulliam would remain the same, but all MIP and long-term incentive awards will be based on the reduced salary. The change to Mr. Pulliam’s salary was not based on peer group data, but rather on management’s recommendation andadjusted due to his previously announced, scheduled departure from the Committee’s subjective evaluation of the factors discussed above.Company.

Annual Incentive Award – Detailed Information

The MIP annual incentive award is designed to offer opportunities for cash compensation tied directly to company performance. In August 2014, the Committee approved the incentive award framework for fiscal 2015 pursuant to our 2009 Management Incentive Plan (the “2015 MIP”), which expired in November 2014. In August 2015, the Committee approved the fiscal 2016 annual incentive award opportunities for the eligible NEOs under the Sysco Corporation Fiscal 2016 Management Incentive Program For Corporate MIP Bonus-Eligible Participants (the “2016 MIP”), which was adopted by the Committee pursuant to the 2013 Sysco Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan.

Under the terms of the 2015 MIP and the 2016 MIP, we pay the annual incentive award in cash with payments made in the first quarter of the fiscal year for bonusesannual incentives earned with respect tofor performance in the prior fiscal year. Each year the Committee approves the incentive award framework for each of the named executive officers other than the Executive Chairman. In August 2011 and 2012, the Committee approved the incentive award framework for fiscal 2012 and 2013, respectively.

MIP

Annual Incentive Award for Fiscal 20122015

With the exception of Mr. DeLaney, the named executive officers’

The NEOs’ fiscal 20122015 annual incentive award payment calculation under the 2015 MIP was based solely on the following corporate financial objectives adjustedand weightings as describedshown in the chart below. Mr. DeLaney’s Business Performance Factor is further subject toCorporate financial results accounted for 80% of the strategic business objective review bytarget annual incentive opportunity. In addition, the remaining 20% of the target annual incentive opportunity was determined based on the Compensation Committee as described below.Committee’s review and evaluation of each NEO’s performance with respect to his pre-established strategic bonus objectives, or SBOs.

Calculating the Corporate Financial Performance Factor (80% of target annual incentive opportunity)
Performance Metric Potential Payment Weightingx 2015 Performance= Payment (% of target)
Adjusted Fully Diluted Earnings Per Share(1) 0% - 150%  50%   125%   62.5% 
Adjusted Sales Growth/Gross Profit Dollar Growth(2) 0% - 150%  30%   150%   45.0% 
Adjusted ROIC(3) 0% - 150%  20%   124%   24.8% 
TOTAL 0% - 150%  100%        132.3 

Base Salary

(1)

x

The calculation of adjusted results for this performance metric excluded the following items: severance charges, financing and merger integration costs associated with the proposed US Foods merger, the impact of consolidated joint ventures in the first year of operations, and the impact of changes in foreign exchange rates. The Committee had the discretion to include certain of these excluded items, except where such inclusion would have caused an NEO’s annual incentive payment to become non-deductible for federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code; however, the Committee did not use such discretion.
(2)

Target Bonus %

The calculation of the adjusted results for each of these performance metrics excluded the following items: the impact of consolidated joint ventures in the first year of operations and the impact of changes in foreign exchange rates. The Committee had the discretion to include certain of these excluded items, except where such inclusion would have caused an NEO’s annual incentive payment to become non-deductible for federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code; however, the Committee did not use such discretion.
(3)

X

Business Performance Factor (0%-150%)

=

Annual Incentive Award

ROIC is computed by dividing the Company’s adjusted net after-tax earnings for fiscal 2015 by the Company’s adjusted total invested capital for that year. Adjusted total invested capital is computed as the sum of (i) adjusted stockholder’s equity, computed as the average of adjusted stockholders’ equity at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year; and (ii) adjusted long-term debt, computed as the average of the adjusted long-term debt at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year.

Calculating the Business Performance Factor

 

Performance Metric(1)

Potential Payout

Weighting

 

x

2012 Performance

 

=

Payout (% of target)

 

Adjusted Fully Diluted Earnings Per Share

0% - 150%

50

%

0

%

0.0

%

Adjusted Sales

0% - 150%

30

%

112

%

33.5

%

Adjusted ROIC(2)

0% - 150%

20

%

0

%

0.0

%

TOTAL

0% - 150%

100

%

 

 

 

 

33.5

%

(1)

The calculation of the adjusted results with respect to each of the performance metrics excluded from each measure the following items, the financial returns from which we expected to be beyond fiscal 2012: expenditures relating to Sysco’s Business Transformation Project, the impact of major acquisitions and divestitures, and withdrawals by Sysco operating companies from multi-employer pension plans. The Compensation Committee had the discretion to include certain of these excluded items, except where such inclusion would have caused a named executive officer’s MIP bonus to become non-deductible for federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code; however, the Committee did not use such discretion.

(2)

ROIC is computed by dividing the company’s adjusted net after-tax earnings for fiscal 2012 by the company’s adjusted total invested capital for that year. Adjusted total invested capital is computed as the sum of (i) adjusted stockholder’s equity, computed as the average of adjusted stockholders’ equity at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year; and (ii) adjusted long-term debt, computed as the average of the adjusted long-term debt at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year.

The fiscal year 20122015 program provided for minimum bonus payoutsannual incentive payments upon increases inachieving adjusted fully diluted earnings per share of at least 4%, increases in$1.78, adjusted sales growth of at least 4%2% and gross profit dollar growth of at least 2%, and/or an adjusted return on invested capital of at least 17.3%11.25%. This was a change fromFor the fiscal 20112015 program, which provided for a threshold incentive payment upon an increase inactual results included adjusted fully diluted earnings per share of at least 2%$1.86(exceeded target performance level), adjusted sales growth of 5.2%(exceeded maximum performance level), gross profit dollars growth of 5.2%(exceeded maximum performance level), and three-year average return on capital of at least 11%. Because Sysco did not meet the minimum levels of adjusted fully diluted earnings per share or adjusted return on invested capital but did achieve approximately 7.7% increase in adjusted sales,of 13.1%(exceeded target performance level). Based on these results, which approached or exceeded maximum performance for each metric, we paid a fiscal 20122015 MIP annual incentive award of approximately 33.5%132.3% of target.target with respect to the portion of the annual incentive opportunity based on corporate financial performance. SeeAnnex I for a reconciliation of these adjusted measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures. Operating results, acquisitionAcquisition expenses, acquisition debt, if any, and any gains or losses relating to or resulting from acquisitions with a purchase price in excess of $40$100 million are excluded from the determination of the relevant performance metrics to reflect the continuing operations of the company and because the returns from such acquisition expenses are generally expected to be outside fiscal 2012.determination. During fiscal year 2012,2015, Sysco only had one acquisitionno acquisitions with a purchase price over $40 million, which resulted in sales of $38.7 million excluded from determining the sales growth over the prior year. The various levels of performance and the percentage of base salary they would have yielded as a bonus are set forth in a table under “Executive Compensation — Management Incentive Plan.”$100 million.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    4547


Back to Contents
Fiscal 2015 Summary of Annual Incentive Award Payments
           Amount of        Total Annual    
           Award Funding  Individual  Amount  Incentive  Total Earned 
     Target Annual  Financial  on Financial  SBO  of Award  Payment  Award 
Name Ending Base
Salary
  Incentive (% of
Base Salary)
  Performance
Factor
  Performance
Factor
  Performance
Factor(1)
  Funding on
SBO Factor
  (% of Base
Salary)
  for FY15
Performance
 
DeLaney $1,225,000   150.0%  132.3% $1,944,810   112.0% $411,600   192.4% $2,356,410 
Kreidler $736,450   100.0%  132.3% $779,459   112.0% $164,965   128.2% $944,423 
Bené(2) $725,000   112.5%  132.3% $863,258   115.0% $187,594   144.9% $1,050,851 
Libby $540,750   100.0%  132.3% $572,330   112.0% $121,128   128.2% $693,458 
Shurts $604,610   100.0%  132.3% $639,919   110.0% $133,014   127.8% $772,933 
(1)For each NEO, the fiscal 2015 annual incentive award provided 80% of their target incentive opportunity, based on corporate financial performance, which amounted to a payment of 132.3% of target based on actual financial results. The remaining 20% of the target annual incentive opportunity depended on individual performance with regard to pre-established individual SBOs, which the Committee has the discretion to pay out between 0% - 150% based on the assessment of the NEO’s performance. These goals included, but were not limited to, performance against financial strategic goals and the NEO’s personal performance. The Committee believes the use of individual SBOs further promotes the overall executive compensation pay philosophy to link individual pay to performance. For further discussion of the Committee’s evaluation with respect to the individual SBOs of each NEO, please see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—What We Paid and Why—Compensation for NEOs—Annual Incentive Award—Analysis” above.
(2)Mr. Bené’s 2015 annual incentive payment was calculated using different targets for portions of fiscal 2015. For 50% of his 2015 annual incentive payment, covering the period from the beginning of the fiscal year to January 1, 2015, the effective date of his promotion, a target annual incentive percentage of 100% was applied. For the remaining 50% of his annual incentive payment, covering the period from January 1, 2015 to the end of the fiscal year, a target annual incentive percentage of 125% was applied. The target annual incentive percentage reflected in the table represents a blended rate.

Back to Contents

Summary of Payments

NEO(1)

Base Salary

x

Target %

 

x

Business

Performance Factor

 

=

Award for FY12

Performance

DeLaney

$

1,150,000

150

%

32.2

%(2)

$

554,760

Kreidler

$

600,000

100

%

33.5

%

$

201,000

Pulliam

$

600,000

125

%

33.5

%

$

251,250

Green

$

650,000

125

%

33.5

%

$

272,188

(1)

The Executive Chairman is not included. See “—Compensation of the Executive Chairman.”

(2)

The Committee had the discretion to adjust Mr. DeLaney’s Annual Incentive Award pursuant to his strategic business objectives, as described below.

In approving the MIP annual incentive award arrangements for fiscal 2012, the Committee provided for:

MIP annual incentive award payouts which, based upon varying levels of performance, could have varied between 0% and a maximum of 150% of target (reflecting a change from a minimum of 0% and a maximum of 250% of base salary in fiscal 2011); and

Three bonus measures under the 2012 MIP annual incentive award program that are independent of each other, whereby one portion of the award could be earned even if the threshold level of the other measures was not achieved.

Mr. DeLaney’s fiscal 2012 annual incentive award was subject to a maximum amount that was equal to 110% of the award he would have received based solely on the initial Business Performance Factor. Mr. DeLaney’s fiscal 2012 annual incentive award was initially calculated as equal to the maximum amount. The actual Business Performance Factor used to determine Mr. DeLaney’s award, however, was subject to further review by the Committee, which could have resulted in an adjustment to the Business Performance Factor as described below.

The Committee reviewed Mr. DeLaney’s performance with respect to the following non-financial, strategic performance goals:

Continue to Effectively Carry Out Implementation of Business Transformation Initiative;

Further Improve Customer Retention;

Successfully Execute Board Approved Strategic Acquisitions;

Communicate Broadly the Strategic Direction of the Corporation to All Key Stakeholders; and

Make Continued Strides Toward Implementing an Effective Human Capital Plan.

The Committee had the discretion to adjust Mr. DeLaney’s Award payout based on his performance with respect to these goals. If Mr. DeLaney’s performance with respect to the above non-financial performance goals had met the target levels established by the Committee, Mr. DeLaney’s 2012 Award for FY12 Performance would have equaled 100% of the bonus determined by using the initial, unadjusted Business Performance Factor. If Mr. DeLaney’s performance with respect to the above goals had exceeded the target levels established by the Committee, Mr. DeLaney’s 2012 Award for FY12 Performance would have equaled between 100% and 110% of the bonus determined by using the initial, unadjusted Business Performance Factor. If Mr. DeLaney’s performance was below the target levels of performance established by the Committee, Mr. DeLaney’s 2012 Award for FY12 Performance would have equaled between 80% and 100% of the bonus determined by using the initial, unadjusted Business Performance Factor. In no event could Mr. DeLaney’s fiscal 2012 MIP annual incentive award have exceeded the maximum bonus amount. For the reasons discussed in “—Annual Incentive Award – Analysis” below, the Committee adjusteddetermined payments for the Business PerformanceSBO Factor and awarded (i) Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler and Libby a 2015 SBO performance payment equal to 112% of the target SBO award component; (ii) Mr. DeLaneyShurts a 20122015 SBO performance payment equal to 110% of the target SBO award component; and (iii) Mr. Bené a 2015 SBO performance payment equal to 115% of the target SBO award component.

In no event could any NEO’s fiscal 2015 MIP annual incentive award equal to 96%have exceeded the maximum bonus amount set as part of the bonus that would have been paid using the initial, unadjusted Business Performance Factor, or 32.2% of target.

pool amount discussed in “—Limit on Fiscal 2015 and Fiscal 2016 Maximum Annual Incentive Award Payments” below. The fiscal 20122015 awards are also subject to clawback provisions that provide that, subject to applicable law, all or a portion of the award paid pursuant to the 20122015 awards may be recovered by Sysco if there is a restatement of our financial results, other than a restatement due to a change in accounting policy, within 36 months of the payment of the award and the restatement would result in the payment of a reduced award if the award was recalculated using the restated financial results. The Committee has the sole discretion to determine the form and timing of the repayment. See “—“ — Executive Compensation Recoupment Policy.”Clawback Policy” below.

MIP

Annual Incentive Award Potential for Fiscal 20132016

In approving the annual incentive award opportunity for fiscal 2013,2016 pursuant to the 2016 MIP, the Committee provided for:approved:

Each participating NEO’s annual incentive opportunity to be targeted at the following percentages of base salary: 150% for Mr. DeLaney, 125% for Mr. Bené, and 100% for Messrs. Libby and Shurts. Mr. Kreidler is not eligible for an annual incentive award for fiscal 2016 due to his previously announced, scheduled departure from the Company;
Three bonus measures under the 2016 MIP that are independent of each other, whereby one portion of the award can be earned even if the threshold level of other measures is not achieved, consistent with prior bonus calculations; and
The financial metrics to be used as performance measures for fiscal 2016 performance, as follows: (1) adjusted operating income; and (2) profitable sales growth, as measured based on a combination of sales and gross profit dollar growth. In addition, each NEO will continue to have a separate performance metric tied to pre-established, individualized SBOs. For fiscal 2016, the performance metric based on adjusted operating income is 50% of the target annual incentive opportunity, and the performance metric based on profitable sales growth is 25% of the target annual incentive opportunity. The third metric, SBOs, is 25% of the target annual incentive opportunity. The financial performance metrics have a potential payment range of 0% - 200% of target and the SBO metric has a potential payment range of 0% - 150% of target.

Each named executive officer’s MIP bonus to be targeted at the following percentages of base salary: 150% for Mr. DeLaney, 125% for Messrs. Green and Pulliam and 100% for Mr. Kreidler;

Three bonus measures under the 2013 MIP annual incentive award program that are independent of each other, whereby one portion of the award can be earned even if the threshold level of one or both of the other measures is not achieved; and

The same performance measures as were used in fiscal 2012: adjusted sales, adjusted fully diluted earnings per share and adjusted return on invested capital calculated the same way as in 2012, with the same weighting for each performance measure as in fiscal 2012.

To align with the construct of the CEO’s award and performance assessment, the Committee also refined the MIP annual incentive award for the eligible NEOs by providing that the Committee may consider pre-established individual strategic business objectives to adjust any MIP incentive award based on factors determined by the Committee, including but not limited to, performance against financial strategic goals and the NEO’s personal performance. Based on the each NEO’s performance with respect to the pre-established objectives, the Committee may either increase the NEO’s bonus by up to 10% or decrease the NEO’s bonus by up to 20%, subject to the bonus pool maximum discussed below. The Committee will review each NEO’s performance against such goals and adjust the Business Performance Factorbonus accordingly. The Committee believes this will further promote the overall executive compensation pay philosophy to link executive pay to performance.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   46


Back to Contents

Limit on Fiscal 2013 maximum2015 and Fiscal 2016 Maximum Annual Incentive Award Payments

The Committee established an annual incentive award payouts. In August 2012, the Committee further refined the MIP annual incentive awardspool limit for each of fiscal 2015 and fiscal 2016 for the NEOs, by establishing a bonus pool for fiscal year 2013 forCFO and certain “covered employees” of Sysco, as defined in Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) to help ensure compliance with the deductibility requirements of Section 162(m) of the Code, as well asCode. Under the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan, the maximum dollar amount that may be paid under all cash-based awards granted to any individual for Mr. Kreidler. The bonus pool was set to be equal to two percent (2%) of Sysco’s net earnings forany a fiscal year 2013 and in no event canunder the sumPlan is 1% of the individual percentagesCompany’s earnings before income taxes as publicly disclosed in the “Consolidated Results of Operations” section of the bonus pool grantedCompany’s annual report to the participants inSecurities and Exchange Commission on Form 10-K for the pool exceed one hundred percent (100%). fiscal year ended immediately before the date the applicable award is paid.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement48

Back to Contents
Participant’s Title Percent of 2015 Incentive Pool
Allocated to Participant
 Percent of 2016 Incentive Pool
Allocated to Participant
CEO  40%  41%
CFO  15%  13%
NEO 3  15%  20%
NEO 4  15%  13%
NEO 5  15%  13%

The maximum award for each Participant, expressed as a percentageumbrella structure of the bonusincentive pool for the Program Year, is set forth below and in no event can it exceed the individual award maximum set forth in the plan document:

Participant’s Title

Percent of Bonus Pool

Allocated to Participant

CEO

40

%

CFO

15

%

NEO 3

15

%

NEO 4

15

%

NEO 5

15

%

The bonus poollimit serves only to provide a ceiling on the maximum bonusannual incentive amount that any NEO may receive, and the actual bonusincentive amount paid to each NEO will be determined pursuant to the fiscal 2013applicable incentive award opportunityprogram described above.

Annual Incentive Award – Analysis

Fiscal 20122015

The Committee determined in August 2011 that it would begin to move toward an annual incentive programaward targets for fiscal 2015 continued to align with performance benchmarks derived fromSysco’s financial plan, to link incentive pay to the Company’s annualplan and to provide that the goals reflect market conditions, operating expectations and other relevant factors as contemplated in the profit plan. CAP hasThe independent compensation consultants informed the Committee that this approach is more in line withreflects sound design practices. In light of the majority offoregoing, Sysco’s peer group. The fiscal 2012 program was meant to be transitional, in that it still required an increase in the performance criteria relative to fiscal 2011 for adjusted earnings growth and sales growth. The Committee added the sales component in order to bring the bonus program more in line with Sysco’s peer group,executive management team prepared, and the change from three year averageCommittee approved, the earnings per share, sales and return on invested capital to an annual adjusted calculation was recommended by management and was driven by the inclusion inmeasurements of the fiscal 2012 program of2015 annual incentive award. It was both management’s and the abilityCommittee’s intent to adjust for major acquisitions and other unusual events, minimizing the need to normalize results over a three-year period. The decision to pay thecreate an annual incentive award for each performance component separately, regardless of whetherformula that would pay the threshold for the others is achieved, was driven by market practice. The changes in the threshold and maximumtarget annual incentive award levels were based on benchmarking ofin the peer group.event Sysco performed at the median level relative to its peers. The Committee excludes the extraordinary items described above because they represent items that generally involve current period costs that management and the Committee believe would not result in benefits until later periods, or vice versa. In light of the foregoing, Sysco’s executive management team prepared the earnings per share, sales and return on capital components of the fiscal 2012 MIP annual incentive award. It was both management’s and the Committee’s intent to create an annual incentive award formula that was more likely to pay an annual incentive award in the event Sysco performed at the median level relative to its peers than may have been the case with respect to prior year bonus formulas; however, as discussed above, fiscal 2012 was a transitional year, so in addition to basing performance levels on Sysco’s internal projections, increases from the prior year were also imposed at the threshold level. The Committee believes that the threshold and target levels of performance represented challenging, but reasonably obtainable, Sysco performance, while levels in excess of the target level represented exemplarysuperior and extremely challenging performance.

The reductions inCommittee also set the target annual incentive award levels for each of the named executive officers other than Mr. DeLaney were driven by the Committee’s express goal of maintaining base salaries generally between the 25th percentile and median and decreasing annual incentives in orderNEOs to bring the pay mix closer to the norm of the peer group, and ensure that total cash compensation does not significantly exceed the median unless outstanding performance levels are achieved. The Committee maintained Mr. DeLaney’s target bonus level at 150% because it provided a target total cash compensation opportunity at approximately the median of the peer group. The Committee also asked CAP to validate that threshold, target and maximum performance expectations and associated payment levels under the revised fiscal 20122015 program to ensure that annual incentive award payout levels would be commensurate with performance.were aligned.

Based upon the CAP May 20112014 report and management reports containing CAP data, target total cash compensation for fiscal 20122015 for each of the named executive officersNEOs participating in the 2015 MIP compared as follows with respect to the comparable peer group position: Mr. DeLaney— near the median, Mr. Kreidler — nearMessrs. DeLaney and Libby—between the 25thpercentile and the median; and Messrs. GreenBené, Kreidler, and Pulliam — Shurts—between the median and 75thpercentile. The Committee determined that these target opportunities were appropriate.

The Committee continues to believebelieves that non-financialindividual goals are extremely important in evaluating the CEO’s and other NEOs’ respective performance and that they should, therefore, also have an impact on his earnedeach of their annual incentive.incentive opportunities. The performance goalsCommittee refined the MIP annual incentive award for the NEOs by providing that the Committee may consider individual SBOs in order to further align the NEOs’ objectives with the key components of Sysco’s overall strategy. The Committee believes that consideration of individual SBOs further promotes the overall executive compensation pay philosophy by strengthening the link between executive pay and individual performance. Each individual’s SBOs for fiscal 20122015 were chosenpre-established by the Committee based on the critical components of Sysco’s overall strategy as set out by management and the Board. TheFor each SBO, the Committee determined that Mr. DeLaney’s fiscal 2012 annual incentive award should be subjectreviewed and rated each NEO at the following rating/associated payment ranges: significantly below target (0%); below target (50% - 85%); on target (90% - 110%); above target (115% - 125%) and significantly above target (130% to adjustment based on the non-financial criteria discussed above in “—Annual Incentive Award – Detailed Information” as a result of the desire to link his pay to his performance and advancement of Sysco’s overall performance and business strategies. 150%).

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement49

Back to Contents

Following the Committee’s evaluation in August 2012July 2015 of Mr. DeLaney’seach NEO’s performance in fiscal 20122015 with respect to these non-financial criteria,individual SBOs, the Committee adjusted the BusinessSBO Performance Factor downward and awarded Mr. DeLaney a 2012 MIP annual incentive award equal to 96% of the earned Business Performance Factor, or 32.2% of target. The Committee applied some adjustment to the Business Performance Factor because of the delayas described in the Business Transformation technology deployment.following table.

NameSBOsCommittee’s Review and Determination
DeLaney

1) Achieve customer retention goals.

2) Achieve targeted product cost reductions.

3) Complete associate engagement actions.

4) Manage integration planning process of the proposed US Foods merger.

5) Achieve targeted expense growth rate.

6) Continue development of senior leadership team.

7) Continue implementation of human capital plan.

Awarded Mr. DeLaney a 2015 MIP annual incentive award equal to 112% of target with respect to the SBO Factor based on the evaluation of Mr. DeLaney’s combined SBO performance. The above target payment was driven by performance above targeted levels with respect to product cost reduction, development of the senior leadership team and implementation of an entity-wide human capital development plan.
Kreidler

1) Achieve customer retention goals.

2) Achieve targeted product cost reductions.

3) Achieve targeted inventory and accounts receivable goals.

4) Complete associate engagement actions.

5) Achieve targeted business development through new acquisitions and joint ventures.

6) Develop merger integration plan.

Awarded Mr. Kreidler a 2015 MIP annual incentive award equal to 112% of target with respect to the SBO Factor based on the evaluation of Mr. Kreidler’s performance. The above target payment was driven by performance above target levels with respect to customer retention, talent development, and business development.
Bené

1) Achieve customer retention goals.

2) Achieve targeted product cost reductions.

3) Complete associate engagement actions.

Awarded Mr. Bené a 2015 MIP annual incentive award equal to 115% of target with respect to the SBO Factor based on the evaluation of Mr. Bené’s performance. The above target payment was driven by performance above target levels with respect to product cost reduction and customer retention.
Libby

1) Achieve customer retention goals.

2) Achieve targeted product cost reductions.

3) Achieve the targeted Workplace Safety Index.

4) Complete associate engagement actions.

5) Manage the regulatory review process of the proposed US Foods merger.

6) Achieve targeted business development through new acquisitions and joint ventures.

7) Develop the communications and government relations function.

8) Achieve targeted reduction in legal fees.

Awarded Mr. Libby a 2015 MIP annual incentive award equal to 112% of target with respect to the SBO Factor based on the evaluation of Mr. Libby’s performance. The above target payment was driven by performance above target levels with respect to customer retention, talent development, and business development.
Shurts

1) Achieve customer retention goals.

2) Complete associate engagement actions.

3) Successful installation of certain technology upgrades.

4) Successful preparation of technology platform for merger integration.

Awarded Mr. Shurts a 2015 MIP annual incentive award equal to 110% of target with respect to the SBO Factor based on the evaluation of Mr. Shurts’ performance. The above target payment was driven by performance above target levels with respect to customer retention, talent development, and merger deliverables.

Based upon the CAPExequity May 20122015 report actualcomparing the fiscal 2015 total cashtargeted compensation (i.e., base salary, target annual incentive and LTI grant value) for the NEOs to that of the peer group, the Committee confirmed that, with respect to peer group pay levels, the total targeted compensation for fiscal 2012, using an annual incentive award payout estimate of 36% of target, for(1) each of Messrs. DeLaney and Shurts was approximately at the median, (2) each of Messrs. Bené and Kreidler Green and Pulliam with respect to comparable peer group pay levels was at or belowbetween the 2550thand 75thpercentile and actual total direct compensation was below the 25th percentile(3) for Messrs. DeLaney and Kreidler and between the 25th percentile and median for Messrs. Green and Pulliam. The Committee was satisfied that these payout levels appropriately correlated to Sysco’s overall financial performance, whichMr. Libby was between the 25thpercentile and median relative to the peer group on select metrics, because results on two ofmedian. The Committee further reviewed in May 2015 the three annual incentive award measures inrelationship between actual realizable pay for the MIP annual incentive award did not reachNEOs and the minimum threshold levels.Company’s total shareholder return and found that realizable pay was well-aligned with the Company’s total shareholder return versus its peers.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   47


Back to Contents

Fiscal 20132016

In August 2012,the first quarter of fiscal 2016, the Committee refined the MIP annual incentive awardperformance targets for fiscal 20132016 under the 2016 MIP to fully aligncontinue alignment with Sysco’s profit plan in orderand to link incentive pay to the Company’s profit plan and provide that the goals continue to reflect market conditions, operating expectations and other relevant factorsfactors. The Committee has determined that fiscal 2016 annual incentive performance measures are: (1) earnings, as contemplated inmeasured by operating income, and (2) profitable sales growth. For fiscal 2016, adjusted operating income provides 50% of the profit plan. CAP has informedtarget annual incentive opportunity, profitable sales growth provides 25% of the Committee that this approach is in line withtarget annual incentive opportunity, and the majoritySBO performance goals provide 25% of Sysco’s peer group and reflective of sound design practices.the target annual incentive opportunity. The Committee continues to believe that the threshold and target levels of performance represent challenging, but reasonably obtainable, Sysco performance levels, while levels in excess of the target level represent exemplarysuperior and extremely challenging performance. The Committee also refined the MIP annual incentive award for the eligible NEOs by providing thatExequity has informed the Committee may consider individual strategic business objectives andthat this approach continues to provide for a maximum bonus level as determined by a bonus pool, as discussed above. The Committee added the individual strategic business objectives for the NEOsbe in order to further align the NEOs’ objectivesline with the key componentsmajority of Sysco’s overall strategy. The Committee believes this will also further promote the overall executive compensation pay philosophy to link executive pay to performance. The Committee added the bonus pool in order to help ensure deductibility pursuant to Section 162(m).peer group and reflects sound design practices.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement50

Back to Contents

Long-term Incentives – Detailed Information

The Committee granted long-term incentives in November 20112014 for the FY 2012.fiscal 2015 (the “Annual LTI Grant”). These incentives consisted of three-year cash performance units, stock options and restricted stock units. The long-term incentives are designed to provide our NEOs competitive long-termlonger-term incentive opportunities that alignare consistent with our peer group and reflect our overall compensation philosophy.philosophy of aligning pay with performance. The Annual LTI Grant consisted of stock options, RSUs and CPUs. The targeted aggregate dollar value of the Annual LTI Grant was set by the Committee at 6.5x base salary for Mr. DeLaney, 3.5x base salary for Mr. Kreidler, 3.25x base salary for Messrs. Bené and Shurts and 3x base salary for Mr. Libby, and the total value of these long-term incentives for each NEO was allocated among the awards by the Committee as follows: approximately 40% of the value in stock options, approximately 35% in CPUs, and approximately 25% in RSUs, with the options valued at $5.54 per option using the Black-Scholes pricing model (as of October 15, 2014), each RSU valued at $38.36 per share (i.e., the ten trading day average closing price of Sysco common stock prior to the grant date) and each CPU valued at the target level of $1 per unit. The values referenced by the Committee for the stock options and RSUs awarded in connection with the Annual LTI Grant differ slightly from the values for such awards reported below in the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table due to the requirement that those tables reflect the fair value of such awards on the date of grant (as opposed to the methods described above for estimating the value of RSUs and options in connection with allocating the Annual LTI Grant). For morefurther details regarding these grants and their respective grant date fair values, see “Executive Compensation—Summary Compensation Table,” “Executive Compensation—Cash Performance Unit Plan,Units,” “Executive Compensation — Compensation—Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End,” and “Executive Compensation — Compensation—Grants of Plan-Based Awards.”

As in fiscal 2011, during fiscal 2012, Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Green and Pulliam received approximately 50% of the value of their long-term incentives in stock options, approximately 25% in grants of restricted stock units (“RSUs”), and approximately 25% in cash performance units (“CPUs”), with the options valued using an adjusted Black-Scholes value of $4.00 per option, each RSU valued at the average ten-day closing price of Sysco common stock before the grant date, and CPUs valued at the target level of $1.00 per unit. The Black-Scholes value of the options calculated based on standard assumptions was less than $4.00 per option, and the upward adjustment resulted in a grant of fewer options. See the footnotes to the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table below for detailed explanation of the Black-Scholes calculation for the options as of the date of grant. The targeted dollar value of the long-term incentive grants to Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Green and Pulliam increased from a multiple in fiscal 2011 of 5x base salary for Mr. DeLaney and 3x base salary for Messrs. Kreidler, Pulliam and Green, to a multiple in fiscal 2012 of 6x base salary for Mr. DeLaney, 3.5x for Mr. Kreidler and 3.25x for Messrs. Pulliam and Green to provide more competitive LTI opportunities in line with the peer group and to better position total pay with the market/peers given the current positioning between the 25th and 50th percentile.

Stock Options and Restricted Stock Units

The Committee approved the fiscal 20122015 stock option and restricted stock unitRSU grants to Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, GreenBené, Libby and PulliamShurts in November 20112014 under our 2007 Stockstockholder approved 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended. The specificPlan. All fiscal 2015 grants made in November 2011 are shown under “Executive Compensation — Grants of Plan-Based Awards.” The 2007 Stock2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan calls forrequired options to be priced at the closing price of our common stock on the business day prior to the grant date, and the fiscal 20122015 option grant agreement provides for ratable vesting over a five-year period. For stock options granted since November 2014, the maximum term of the option is ten years. The fiscal 2012 restricted stock unit2015 RSU grant agreement providesagreements provide for ratable vesting in three equal tranches over a three-year period.period following the date of grant. The Committee grants all of our stock options and restricted stock unitsRSUs pursuant to ourapproved equity grant guidelines. These guidelines are more fully described under “Executive Compensation — Compensation—Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End.”

Cash Performance Units

Under the Sysco Corporation 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan, as amended, participants

Participants in the MIP, including each of the NEOs, have the opportunity to receive cash incentive payments based on Sysco’s performance over a specified three-year period. We pay any awards earned under these plansperiod in cash.the form of Cash Performance Units. CPU grants are forward-looking and the grant of CPUs typically does not take into account prior Sysco or individual performance. CPU payoutspayments are based on Sysco’s actual performance over the three-year performance cycle beginning with the fiscal year in which the CPU is granted. In November 2011,2014, the Committee granted three-year cash performance units under the 2008 plan for the FY 2012-2014 performance period. In addition, the cash performance units that we issued in November 2009CPUs under the 2008 Cash Performance Unit plan were paid out in August 2012 (see below discussion) andPlan for the three-yearfiscal 2014-2016 performance results associated withperiod. In addition, the cash performance unitsCPUs that we issued in September 2008fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2013 under the 2004 plan to corporate participants did not satisfy2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan reached the minimum criteria necessary to receive a paymentend of their respective performance periods and would have been payable in August 2011.2014 and August 2015 (see discussion below). Future grants of CPU awards will be made pursuant to the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan.

The CPU grants that the Committee made in September 2008fiscal 2012 and November of 2009fiscal 2013 related to the respective three-year performance periodsperiod ending in fiscal 20112014 and 2012,2015, respectively, and each had a value of $35 per unit with the same payoutprovided payment possibilities ranging from 0% to 150% of the total value of the units granted. ForThe fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2013 grants each had a value of $1 per CPU. Of the NEOs, Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler Green and Pulliam, one-half of the payout was based on the average growth in diluted earnings per share and one-half of the payout was based on the average increase in sales. Achievement of the target performance goals would have yielded a 100% payout, while the minimum satisfaction of only one criterion would have yielded a 25% payout and maximum performance above target on both criteria would have provided a 150% payout. The Committee took the total value that was targeted at 100% payout for CPUs for a given level of participant and divided by the $35 value assigned toLibby each unit to determine the number of units to be granted to each participant. In order for generally accepted accounting principles to be applied consistently year-over-year, the performance measures for the CPUs may be calculated slightly differently from comparable measures in our financial statements.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   48


Back to Contents

Our adjusted sales growth over the three-year performance period ended on July 2, 2011 was 1.6% and our average growth in fully diluted earnings per share over the performance period was 2.8%, neither of which satisfied the minimum criteria necessary for a payout with respect to the CPUs granted in September 2008. Our adjusted sales growth over the three-year performance period ended on June 30, 2012 was 4.85% and our average growth in fully diluted earnings per share over the performance period was 2.54%, which resulted inreceived a CPU payout of $12.04 per unitgrant in August 2012. See Annex I - Non-GAAP Reconciliations for a reconciliation of these adjusted measures tofiscal 2012 and fiscal 2013. For the comparable GAAP measures.

The terms of thefiscal 2012 and fiscal 2013 CPU grants, that the Committee made in November 2010 are identical to those of the November 2009 grants, except that each unit was assigned a value of $1.00. Beginning in November 2011, the Committee changed the performance metrics/goals associated with the CPUs so that they arewere based solely on Sysco’s three-year total shareholder return, over the three-year period, as compared to that of the S&P 500 companies. The Committee continues to assign a value of $1.00 to each unit. Based upon where Sysco’s relative total shareholder return, for that period falls relative to the other S&P 500 companies, CPUs willunder each award would pay out from 0% to 150% of the target award value. The threshold payment (which iswas 50%) requires of target) required Sysco’s three-year total shareholder return to equal or exceed that of the 30thpercentile of the S&P 500 companies, while the maximum payment is earnedrequired performance at the 75thpercentile, with graduated payoutspayments in between. The target payout is earnedpayment required performance between the 45thand 55thpercentile. These grants arewere subject to Sysco’s clawback policies. See “Executive Compensation — Compensation—Cash Performance Unit Plan”Units” for an explanation of the calculation of total shareholder return.

For the fiscal 2012 CPU grant, our relative total shareholder return for the period ending June 28, 2014 was in the 27thpercentile, representing performance that was below the threshold payment level set for the fiscal 2012 CPU grant. Consequently, the fiscal 2012 CPU grant resulted in no payments. For the fiscal 2013 CPU grant, our relative total shareholder return for the period ending June 27, 2015 was in the 28thpercentile, representing performance that was below the threshold level set for the fiscal 2013 CPU grant. Consequently, the fiscal 2013 CPU grant also resulted in no payments.

The specific performance measures and related potential payoutspayments for the November 2009, November 2010fiscal 2013 CPU award, the fiscal 2014 CPU award and November 2011 corporate grantsthe fiscal 2015 CPU award are shown under “Executive Compensation — Compensation—Cash Performance Unit Plan.Units.

Long-term Incentives – Analysis

The Committee determined the mix of CPUs, stock options and restricted stock unitsRSUs for the FY 2012 grants2015 Annual LTI Grant in order to continue to provide long-term incentives that are in line with those disclosed by the peer group and to provide further alignment of the executives’ interests with those of the stockholders based onusing incentive vehicles with varying vesting and payoutpayment periods. AsThe Committee determined that in fiscal 2016, the annual LTI grant will continue to consist of approximately 40% stock options, 35% CPUs, and 25% RSUs. Under such a relative weighting of the NEO’s long-term incentive pay, the NEO’s compensation will continue to be strongly linked to the Company’s long-term value creation.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement51

Back to Contents

Based on the long-term incentives granted, as discussed above under “Long-term Incentives - Incentives—Detailed Information,” this resulted in a mix of 50% options, 25% RSUs, and 25% CPUs, based on values calculated as described above. Based on these same values, this placed each of Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Green and Pulliam near or below the 25th percentile of the peer group with respect to long-term incentives; and with respect toresulting target total direct compensation positionedfor fiscal 2015 was as follows: the positioning for Messrs. DeLaney and Shurts approximated the median, Mr. DeLaney below the 25th percentile and Messrs. Kreidler, Green and PulliamLibby was between the 25thpercentile and the median, ofand the peer group.positioning for Messrs. Kreidler and Bené was between the median and 75thpercentile. These results were consistent with the Committee’s focus of providing competitive base salaries and competitive incentive opportunities such that overall target total direct compensation was closer toat or above the median. Despite increases in the size and value of Mr. DeLaney’s longer-term incentive grantsmedian for fiscal year 2012, his long-term incentive compensation and target total direct compensation are near the 25th percentile of the peer group. The Committee has determined that his pay package will be made more competitive with Sysco’s peer group over time, as his tenure and experience in the CEO role increase.performance.

The change in the performance measure for CPUs to three-year relative total shareholder return versus the S&P 500 companies was driven by the Committee’s desire to further align executives’ interests with shareholders and because three-year goal setting on financial metrics has proven difficult given Sysco’s business transformation.

The minimum, target and maximum performance goals and corresponding payoutspayments for the CPU awards, as well as the decision to use the S&P 500 companies, were based on an analysis of our peer group’s practices, the Committee’s desire to use a broad market index, and because the Committee believes TSRCommittee’s belief that total shareholder return is the ultimate measure of stockholder value creation and long-term companyCompany success.

The Committee believes that stock option and restricted stock unitRSU awards help to ensure that long-term strategic initiatives are not compromised by having executives focus solely on short-term profitability through the annual incentive award. Such awards also help focus executives on strategies that increase long-term stockholder value. Existing executive equity ownership levels are not generally a factor in the Committee’s granting of stock options and restricted stock units.RSUs.

Fiscal 2014 Transaction Incentive Bonus Pool – Detailed Information

On March 21, 2014, the Committee approved incentive and retention cash awards for certain officers of the Company, including the NEOs other than Mr. DeLaney, related to the successful negotiation of and entry into the proposed merger agreement with respect to US Foods. Amounts awarded to the NEOs at that time were as follows: Mr. Kreidler ($429,000); Mr. Bené ($125,000), Mr. Libby ($255,000) and Mr. Shurts ($117,400). These amounts were subject to a twelve-month recoupment provision. The Committee separately approved the creation of the 2014 transaction incentive pool for certain officers of the Company, including each NEO other than Mr. DeLaney, to incentivize employees of the Company who were expected to be directly involved in planning, leading and executing the complex integration associated with the proposed merger, while simultaneously leading the Company’s ongoing operations. Under the terms of the approved pool, the potential bonus available to each of the NEOs was as follows: Mr. Kreidler ($715,000), Mr. Bené ($468,750), Mr. Libby ($525,000) and Mr. Shurts ($440,250). The payment of awards under the 2014 transaction incentive pool was contingent upon the closing of the merger and approval of a definitive integration plan. As the proposed merger with US Foods was terminated, no merger completion payments were made under the 2014 transaction incentive pool.

Fiscal 2016 Incentive and Retention Payments – Detailed Information

On July 10, 2015, based on (a) the strong desire of the Committee to motivate and retain certain senior officers as they transition their focus from integration planning for the terminated merger with US Foods to pursuing other operational and strategic initiatives, (b) an effort to recognize that these individuals have played critical roles in the development of the future business strategy of the Company in conjunction with their integration planning work, and (c) recognition of the work product generated by the integration planning teams under the direction of senior officers, which will be of considerable value to the Company in the future, the Committee approved a one-time incentive and retention cash payment to such officers. Payments made to the NEOs were: Mr. Kreidler ($429,000); Mr. Bené ($281,250), Mr. Libby ($315,000) and Mr. Shurts ($264,150). These incentive and retention payments are subject to a twelve-month recoupment provision should the recipient voluntarily terminate employment with the Company. The Committee waived application of the recoupment provision to Mr. Kreidler, in light of his previously scheduled departure from the Company.

Retirement/Career Benefits – Detailed Information

Retirement Plans – Current Programs – Management Savings Plan

As our business strategy and organization evolve, it is critical that our compensation programs support strategic and operational priorities. Additionally, our pay programs are continually evaluated to ensure they reflect best practices, engage and motivate executives, and support the Company’s ultimate goal of delivering stockholder value. Sysco monitors evolving best practices in executive rewards program design, and we modify our programs, as necessary.

On January 1, 2013, Sysco introduced a new non-qualified, defined contribution savings plan, the Management Savings Plan (the “MSP”). The MSP allows individual deferrals and employer contributions in excess of IRS 401(k) contribution and compensation limits. The MSP allows eligible participants to defer up to 50% of their base salary (for calendar years 2013 and thereafter) and up to 100% of their eligible bonus (for fiscal years 2014 and thereafter). In addition, in conjunction with the freeze of accruals in the SERP, certain participants (who would otherwise have incurred a sizable loss of future benefits under the SERP) are eligible for transition contributions. The participants in the MSP direct the investment for both their individual contributions and the company contributions. The MSP is described in further detailed below under “Executive Compensation—Fiscal 2015 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation – About the MSP.”

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement52

Back to Contents

MSP Analysis

Currently, individual contributions to the 401(k) plan are limited by law to $18,000 per year, plus an additional $6,000 in “catch-up” contributions if the participant is at least 50 years of age. The Committee believes that the MSP motivates and assists in the retention of key employees by providing them with a supplemental retirement savings vehicle. The MSP is an important, and cost effective, recruitment and retention tool for Sysco, as the companies with which we compete for executive talent typically provide a similar plan to their senior employees.

Retirement Plans – Transition from Legacy Programs

Beginning in 2013, Sysco moved future retirement benefits from a defined benefit towards a defined contribution strategy. A defined contribution-based program further aligns Sysco with our peer group, increases flexibility, simplifies the benefit structure, retains key talent and both reduces and stabilizes costs. Going forward, wealth accumulation opportunities for NEOs at Sysco will be further focused on variable annual and long-term incentive plans.

The retirement program changes, however, were expected to result in significant reductions in anticipated benefits for existing participants in the pension plan, the SERP and the EDCP. In order to help ensure retention of key leaders during the transition from the defined benefit towards a defined contribution strategy, Sysco amended the 401(k) and MSP to partially mitigate the reductions in pension plan benefits by providing that, for a period of ten plan years commencing January 1, 2013, or until an eligible participant ceases employment with Sysco, whichever is earlier, Sysco will credit an automatic employer contribution of three percent (3%) of the participant’s gross base salary and bonus into the participant’s 401(k) account to the extent permitted under applicable IRS limitations, with the remainder credited to the MSP account of eligible participants (the “Pension Transition Contribution”). No NEO other than Mr. DeLaney is eligible to receive the Pension Transition Contribution.

With respect to reductions in the expected value of benefits under the SERP and the EDCP, the cessation of future benefit accruals affected each individual in a different manner. While some existing SERP participants experienced no projected adverse impact, others were forecast to experience reductions of up to 49%. To address concerns over retention, the Committee developed a transition program intended to help ensure that no impacted participant experiences an aggregate reduction of more than 15% - 20% (depending on an individual’s prior years of service) in his or her expected retirement benefits under the Company’s non-qualified plans as a result of the retirement strategy changes. While Messrs. Bené and Shurts were not eligible for the SERP or the EDCP, Mr. DeLaney (31%), Mr. Kreidler (44%) and Mr. Libby (49%) each had a projected reduction in their respective non-qualified benefits in excess of the targeted range.

To mitigate the loss in projected non-qualified retirement benefits, impacted individuals were eligible for transitional compensation opportunities, including supplemental contributions to the MSP. Of the NEOs, each of Messrs. Kreidler and Libby was eligible for a supplemental MSP contribution of 10%, which was made on their behalf in the third quarter of fiscal 2015.

Legacy Program - Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

We historically havehad provided annual retirement benefits to all corporate employees and most of our non-union operating company employees under the broad-based tax-qualified Sysco Corporation Retirement Plan, whicha defined benefit program that we simply refer to as the “pension plan.” Beginning January 1, 2013, however, most employees will no longer earnaccrue additional retirement benefits under the pension plan, as we are restructuring our retirement plan program commencing January 1, 2013, by providing for new, enhanced Sysco contributions to our broad-based tax-qualified Sysco Corporation Employees’ 401(k) plan and freezing future benefit accruals of employees underplan. However, when the pension plan. Sysco offers supplementalplan was the primary retirement plans to approximately 159 corporate and operating company officers. Each ofvehicle, the named executive officers other than Mr. Fernandez participates in theCompany maintained a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, or SERP; however, in May 2011, the SERP, was amended in order to close the SERP to future participants.retain and drive continued performance from certain employees. The Committee utilizesutilized the SERP to increase the retirement benefits available to officers whose benefits under the pension plan are limited by law. Of the NEOs, Messrs. Delaney, Kreidler and Libby participate in the SERP.

The SERP was frozen and future accruals under the SERP ceased, effective June 29, 2013. Those SERP participants who retire and are not eligible for immediate commencement of their SERP benefit are deemed 100% vested, with benefits payable upon reaching age 65. The earliest an executive can retire and receive any benefits under the SERP is age 55 with a minimum of 15 years of MIP service or age 60 with 10 years of Sysco service. Payments before the age of 65 are adjusted by an early retirement reduction factor. The SERP was designed to provide fully vested participants with post-retirement monthly payments, with annual benefits equalingequalling up to 50% of a qualifying participant’s final average annual compensation, when combined with other retirement benefits, including other pension benefits, the company match under the 401(k) plan and social security payments. The participating named executive officersNEOs will receive a SERP benefit based on the greater of the accrued benefit determined as of the relevant separation date from service under the current provisions of the SERP, or the accrued benefit determined as of June 28, 2008 under the prior provisions of the SERP, but with vesting, benefit limits and eligibility for immediate benefit payments determined as of the relevant separation from service date. Annual retirement benefits from the SERP for a participant who is 100% vested in his accrued benefit were generallyare limited to approximately $2.35 million in fiscal 2012 and will generally be limited to approximately $2.39 million in fiscal 2013, with such maximum limit adjusted$2,393,832 per year, reduced for cost-of-living increases in future years.early commencement of benefit payments, as applicable. The terms of the SERP are more specifically described under “Executive Compensation — Compensation—Pension Benefits — Benefits—Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan.” The amounts accrued by each participating named executive officerNEO under the pension plan and the SERP as of June 30, 201227, 2015 are set forth under “Executive Compensation — Compensation—Pension Benefits.”

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   49


Back to Contents

SERP Analysis

Sysco’s retirement plans are an important performance and retention tool, the effectiveness of which the Committee tries to balance with the cost of providing them.

The Committee continuespreviously amended the SERP to monitorfreeze benefits, stop future accruals and review the SERPto provide for immediate vesting of accrued benefits in order to achieve the following goals:

Bring the value of retirement benefits more in line with the practices of the peer group; and
Increase the proportion of long-term and performance-based compensation in the compensation mix, relative to fixed and retirement compensation such as the SERP and MSP.

Bring the value of retirement benefits more in line with the practices of the peer group; andSYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement53

Back to Contents

Increase the proportion of long-term and performance-based compensation in the compensation mix, relative to fixed and retirement compensation such as the SERP.

NonqualifiedLegacy Program - Executive Deferred Compensation Plan

Prior to December 31, 2012, Sysco offersoffered an Executive Deferred Compensation Plan, or EDCP, to provide MIP participants, including the named executive officersNEOs other than Mr. Fernandez,Messrs. Bené and Shurts, the opportunity to save for retirement and accumulate wealth in a tax-efficient manner beyond savings opportunities under Sysco’s 401(k) retirement savings plan. Participants maywere able to defer up to 100% of their base salary and up to 40% of their MIP bonus, or any bonus paid in lieu of or as a replacement for the MIP bonus, to the EDCP. Sysco doesdid not match any base salary deferrals into the EDCP.EDCP in fiscal 2015, as deferrals are no longer permitted. For participants who chose to defer a portion of their qualifying bonus, Sysco matchesmatched 15% of the first 20% deferred, making the maximum possible match to the EDCP 3% of the MIP bonus. This match generally vestsAn executive is always 100% vested in accordance with a graduated schedule afterhis or her past deferrals and Sysco matches, but any portion of an executive has reached age fifty-fiveexecutive’s account attributable to Sysco matches, including associated deemed investment return, and has fifteen years of service, but will vestthe net investment gain, if any, credited on his or her deferrals, is subject to forfeiture for specified cause or competing against Sysco in all events upon the earlier of (i) the tenth anniversary of the crediting date, (ii) the executive’s death, (iii) the executive’s disability, (iv) a change in control, or (v) the executive’s attaining age sixty.certain instances. Participants who deferhave deferred compensation under the EDCP may choose from a variety of investment options, including Moody’s Average Corporate Bond Yield, with respect to amounts deferred. Company matching contributions are credited with the Moody’s Average Corporate Bond Yield.options. The EDCP is described in further detail under “Executive Compensation — ExecutiveCompensation—Fiscal 2015 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan.– About the EDCP.

EDCP Analysis

Currently, individual contributions to the 401(k) plan are limited by law to $17,000 per year. The Committee believes that

For many years, the EDCP motivates and assists in the retention of key employees by providing them with greater flexibility in structuring the timing of their compensation payments. The EDCP is an importantserved as a recruitment and retention tool for Sysco, asSysco. In connection with the companies with which we compete for executive talent typically providebroader transition in retirement philosophy, beginning in fiscal 2013, a similarnew deferred compensation plan, the MSP, has been utilized to their senior employees.fulfil this objective.

Executive Perquisites & Other Benefits – Detailed Information

We provide benefits for executives that we believe are reasonable, particularly since the cost of these benefits constitutes a very small percentage of each named executive officer’sNEO’s total compensation. Certain of these benefits are described below.

Sysco’s named executive officersNEOs are generally eligible to participate in Sysco’s regular employee benefit programs, which include the defined benefit pension plan, a 401(k) plan, ouran employee stock purchase plan, group life insurance and other group welfare benefit plans.plans, and until the changes made to retirement benefits in fiscal 2013, the defined benefit pension plan. We also provide MIP participants, including the named executive officers,NEOs, with additional life insurance and accidental death and dismemberment insurance benefits, long-term disability coverage, including disability income coverage, and long-term care insurance, as well as reimbursement for an annual comprehensive wellness examination by a physician of their choice. We believe many of these benefits are required to remain competitive with our competitors for executive talent. Although the executive officers are eligible to participate in Sysco’s group medical and dental coverage, we adjust employees’ contributions towards the monthly cost of the medical plan according to salary level; therefore, executives’ pay a higher percentage of the cost ofemployee contribution to participate in these benefitswelfare plans than do non-executives.

MIP participants, including the named executive officers,NEOs, are encouraged to occasionally have their spouses accompany them at business dinners and other business functions in connection with some meetings of the Board of Directors, certain business meetings and other corporate-sponsored events, and Sysco pays, either directly or by reimbursement, all expenses associated with their spouses’ travel to and attendance at these business-related functions. Furthermore, Sysco owns fractional interests in private aircraft that are made available to members of the Board of Directors, executives and other members of management for business use, but these aircraft are not allowed to be used for personal matters. Spouses may occasionally accompany executive officers on such flights in connection with travel to and from business-related functions if there is space available on the aircraft.

All employees, including our named executive officers,NEOs, as well as members of our Board, of Directors, are also entitled to receive discounts on all products carried by Sysco and its subsidiaries. Although Sysco does provide the named executive officersNEOs with certain additional perquisites, we do not provide any of the named executive officersNEOs with automobiles, security monitoring or split-dollar life insurance.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   50


Back to Contents

Compensation of the Executive Chairman

Mr. Fernandez was elected to the Executive Chairman position in April 2012 and his compensation for this role was determined by the Compensation Committee. Prior to that time, he served as a non-employee director and non-executive chairman of the board of Sysco, and his compensation was determined by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, as described above in “Director Compensation.” The Committee considered various factors in determing the compensation for the Executive Chairman, and based upon the Committee’s determination and assessment of the role, responsibilities and time requirements, further described below, the Committee approved the following compensation for Mr. Fernandez:

An annual base salary of $900,000;

$2.5 million of restricted stock units;

$2.5 million of stock options; and

Reimbursement of travel expenses, including the necessary housing, transportation and other expenses to support his travel and stays in Houston in accordance with the performance of his job duties.

The restricted stock units and the options vest one-third per year on the anniversary of the grant date. The Committee valued the restricted stock units at the closing price of Sysco common stock on the day prior to the grant and valued the options at an adjusted Black-Scholes value of $4.00 per option in determining actual share awards. The Black-Scholes value based on standard assumptions was less than $4.00, and the adjustment reduced the value of options granted. See the footnotes to the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table below for detailed explanation of the Black-Scholes calculation for the options as of the date of grant. The Committee determined that Mr. Fernandez would not receive any additional form of long-term incentives, such as CPUs, would not participate in the Management Incentive Plan (“MIP”) annual incentive award, other MIP benefits or the SERP, but would participate in the broad-based employee benefits program.

Analysis

The Committee structured the pay for the newly created Executive Chairman position to appropriately compensate Mr. Fernandez for his unique skills and experience, while linking the compensation of this newly-defined role to the key principles of Sysco’s executive compensation program. The Committee considered various factors in the decision to set Mr. Fernandez’s total direct compensation:

The Committee met with the other non-employee directors to discuss the responsibilities and time requirements the role would require;

The Committee considered that Mr. Fernandez would be working closely with Sysco’s CEO and would not be relieving the CEO of any duties or responsibilities and that Mr. Fernandez would be splitting time between the corporate headquarters and various remote locations and therefore targeted Mr. Fernandez’s pay to be approximately 60% of Sysco’s CEO total direct target compensation;

The Committee also considered significant financial opportunities Mr. Fernandez would forgo upon his election to the Executive Chairman position, including the Sysco non-executive director compensation that Mr. Fernandez would no longer be eligible to receive and other fees and wealth accumulation opportunities relinquished by Mr. Fernandez upon his retirement from other company boards in order to assume the Executive Chairman role at Sysco. At the request of the Committee, CAP provided market data about other public companies with an executive chairman position. The Committee reviewed the data from the identified group of companies and the surveys, to obtain a general understanding of current compensation practices and general pay norms for such position. The Committee reviewed CAP’s competitive analysis of market norms; however, the Committee did not specifically target a market position and noted that because the Executive Chairman role is not sufficiently prevalent in the marketplace, compensation practices vary widely and typically reflect the company’s and individual’s specific circumstances.

Because Mr. Fernandez’s role as Executive Chairman is to primarily support Sysco’s management team with his leadership and technological experience and expertise and to therefore help drive long-term stockholder value, the Committee determined that a significant portion of Mr. Fernandez’s pay would consist of long-term incentive compensation and he would not be eligible to participate in the MIP or SERP. Approximately 84% of Mr. Fernandez’s total compensation in his role of Executive Chairman is structured as long-term incentive compensation, in the form of RSUs and stock options. The Committee chose a vesting schedule of one-third per year for both the RSUs and stock options. The Committee determined that three year time vesting rquirements for each component of the long-term incentives granted appropriately links Sysco’s long-term performance with Mr. Fernandez’s performance in this role and was in accordance with the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan. The Committee chose to split the long-term incentive compensation equally between stock options and RSUs, each valued at the time of grant at $2.5 million for a total value of $5 million, and the Committee ascribed a value to the stock options of $4.00 per share for the purpose of determining the actual grant/share award levels.

The Committee determined the compensation provided a total pay opportunity for Mr. Fernandez that was attractive, that was appropriately balanced between short-term and long-term compensation and short-term and long-term interest of the business and linked the interest of our Executive Chairman with those of our stockholders. The Committee plans to review Mr. Fernandez’s compensation and pay opportunities in May 2013.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   51


Back to Contents

Executive Compensation Governance and Other Information

Severance and Employment Agreements

None of Sysco’s executive officers are currently parties to any severance or employment agreements providing for guaranteed severance or other compensation upon termination. Consistent with our approach of rewarding performance, employment is not guaranteed, and either the Company or the NEO may terminate the employment relationship at any time. In some cases, the Committee or Board of Directors may agree to provide separation payments to departing executives upon their termination to obtain an extended non-compete, non-solicitation and non-disclosure agreement and a release of claims.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement54

Back to Contents

Relocation Expenses

To address the Committee’s desire for Sysco to comply with best corporate governance and compensation practices, in October 2010, the Committee adopted an executive relocation expense reimbursement policy that applies to all of the named executive officers.NEOs. The reimbursement policy provides that Sysco will not reimburse any of such executives for any loss on the sale of the executive’s house sold in connection with the executive’s relocation. The reimbursement policy also provides that only certain pre-approved relocation expenses will be eligible for increased payments to cover all applicable taxes on the reimbursed amounts, such as state and federal income taxes, FICA, and Medicare taxes. The relocation expenses subject to such increased payments to cover applicable taxes will be limited to the cost of moving the executive’s household goods and vehicles; real estate fees incurred in selling the executive’s residence; closing costs associated with the purchase of a new residence, including cost of credit reports, mortgage and deed taxes, recording fees and title search, title insurance, surveys, if required, and reasonable attorney’s fees; and up to six months’ rental expense for a temporary residence in the area to which the executive has been asked to relocate. No other relocation expenses will be eligible for increased payments to cover applicable taxes. In addition, the reimbursement policy provides that all future relocation agreements with any named executive officer will include a clawbackrecoupment provision that requires the executive to reimburse Sysco for all or a part of the reimbursement if his employment is terminated for any reason other than death, disability or change of control of Sysco, or termination without cause or for good reason, within a specified amount of time after receiving the reimbursement.

The Committee approved a relocation package for Mr. Green in fiscal 2011 to be paid in fiscal 2012, in connection with his relocation to the Sysco corporate office in Houston, which is consistent with the executive relocation expense reimbursement policy discussed immediately above.

Benefits Following Change in Control

We currently have no separate severance or similar agreements that would cause an immediate or “single trigger” cash payment obligation solely as a result of a change in control of Sysco. We have included change of control provisions in several of Sysco’s benefit plans and agreements, including an immediate payoutpayment of CPUs at the target payoutpayment level for grants, undera prorated pay out of MIP annual incentive payment through the 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan,date of change of control, and 100% vesting of SERP benefits, EDCP benefits, options, restricted stock and restricted stock unitsRSUs upon a change in control. See “Executive Compensation — Compensation—Quantification of Termination/Change in Control Payments” for a detailed explanation of potential benefits under the various provisions.

For equity-based awards issued to date under the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan, the Board has approved the concept of “double-trigger” for accelerated vesting for future long-term incentive grants under certain change of control scenarios.

The Committee continues to believe that these provisions will preserve executive morale and productivity and encourage retention in the face of the disruptive impact of an actual or rumored change in control of Sysco. The Committee has balanced the impact of these acceleration provisions with corresponding provisions in the MSP, the SERP andand/or the EDCP that provide for a reduction in benefits to the extent they are not deductible under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code.

Executive Compensation RecoupmentClawback Policy

In the event of a restatement of our financial results, other than a restatement due to a change in accounting policy, it is the Committee’s policy that it will review all incentive payments made to MIP participants, including the named executive officers,NEOs, within the 36 month36-month period prior to the restatement on the basis of having met or exceeded specific performance targets in grants or awards made on or after May 14, 2009. If such incentive payments would have been lower had they been calculated based on the restated results, the Committee will, to the extent permitted by applicable law, seek to recoup any such excess payments for the benefit of Sysco. The MIP annual incentive awards and CPU grants made by the Committee forsince fiscal 2011 and later years contain a contractual provision binding the grantee to this recovery right, and the Committee anticipates that future grants will contain similar provisions. The Committee has the sole discretion, subject to applicable law, to determine the form and timing of the recoupment,clawback, which may include repayment from the MIP participant or an adjustment to the payoutpayment of a future incentive. In addition, the executives’ benefits under the SERP, EDCP and EDCPMSP may be subject to forfeiture or adjustment as a result of any such restatement of financial results. These remedies would be in addition to, and not in lieu of, any actions imposed by law enforcement agencies, regulators or other authorities.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   52


Back to Contents

Tax Impact on Compensation

Income Deduction Limitations

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code generally sets a limit of $1 million on the amount of non-performance-based compensation that Sysco may deduct for federal income tax purposes in any given year with respect to the compensation of each of the named executive officersNEOs other than the chief financial officer. The Committee has adopted a general policy of structuring the performance-based compensation arrangements, including the MIP bonus and CPUs, in order to preserve deductibility to the extent feasible after taking into account all relevant considerations. However, the Committee also believes that Sysco needs flexibility to meet its pay objectives, even if Sysco may not deduct all of the compensation paid to the named executive officers.NEOs. The Committee has structured its 20132015 and 2016 incentive program for the named executive officers,NEOs, and intends to structure future annual incentive programs for the named executive officers,NEOs, under an umbrella plan program in order to maintain this flexibility and ensureobtain deductibility of the annual bonus under Section 162(m)., generally, but maintains flexibility to pay compensation or make certain awards that may not be deductible under 162(m) if the Committee determines in its discretion that it is in the best interest of the Company.

Based on the factors discussed under “What We Paid and Why,” in fiscal 20122015 Sysco paid, and in fiscal 20132016 the Committee expects Sysco to pay, Mr. DeLaneycertain NEOs a base salary that, when aggregated with anticipated vesting of restricted stock units, will exceed $1 million in value. In addition, in fiscal 2013, the Committee expects Sysco to pay Mr. Fernandez a base salary that, when aggregated with anticipated vesting of restricted stock units, will exceedRSUs, exceeds $1 million in value. The Committee believes that this compensation to Mr. DeLaney and Mr. Fernandez is necessary in order to maintain the competiveness of theireach of the total compensation packagespackage in light of peer compensation practices, and as a result, has determined that it is appropriate, even though approximately $842,409certain amounts of Mr. DeLaney’s fiscal 20122015 compensation will not be deductible, and the excess of Mr. DeLaney’s and Mr. Fernandez’ anticipated salariessalary plus the value of their restricted stock unitsRSUs vesting in fiscal 20132016 over $1 million, respectively, will not be deductible for federal income tax purposes.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement55

Back to Contents

Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code

Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code deals specifically with non-qualified deferred compensation plans. WeAlthough the Company makes no guarantees with respect to exemption from, or compliance with, Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, we have designed all of our executive benefit plans includingwith the SERP, EDCP, 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan, and the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, suchintention that they are exempt from, or otherwise comply with, the requirements of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

Stock Ownership Guidelines for NEOs and Executive Chairman

In August 2011, the Compensation Committee, together with the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, upon the recommendation of management and following consultation with CAP, modified our stock ownership guidelines for executive officers other than the Executive Chairman. The Compensation Committee and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee are comprised of the same individual directors. The modifications included a decrease in the amount of time required to meet the full ownership requirements from eight to five years — to be phased in over five years, an increase in each of the named executive officers’ other than Mr. DeLaney’s ownership requirement to 60,000 shares, and changes in rules regarding the counting of RSUs. These changes were recommended by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and approved by the Board of Directors primarily in order to bring Sysco’s policies more in line with its peer group and strengthen such guidelines. In May 2012, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee modified our stock ownership guidelines for the newly created Executive Chairman position. Mr. Fernandez’ stock ownership requirements increased in connection with his election as Executive Chairman. See “Stock Ownership — Stock Ownership Guidelines” for a description of our executive stock ownership guidelines and stock retention policies and these recent changes.

Forward-Looking Statements

Statements made in this proxy statement that look forward in time or that express management’s beliefs, expectations or hopes are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements reflect the views of management at the time such statements are made and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties, estimates, and assumptions that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations. These statements include those regarding certain agreements and plans that will require us to provide compensation to our named executive officers upon the occurrence of future events, such as the achievement of company and/or individual objectives and the termination of an individual’s employment or a change in control of the company, and those regarding expectations that certain performance targets for management will be attained. These future events may not occur as and when expected, if at all, and, together with the company’s business, are subject to various risks and uncertainties. These risks and uncertainties include that future compensation to our named executive officers, and the events that could trigger such payments, vary materially from the descriptions described herein due to factors beyond our control, such as the timing during the year of a triggering event, the amount of future bonuses, the value of our stock on the date of a triggering event and the life expectancy of each of our executives and his spouse. Management’s and Sysco’s ability to attain certain performance targets could be affected by conditions in the economy and our industry and internal factors such as the ability to control expenses, including fuel costs. We have experienced delays in the implementation of our Business Transformation Project and the expected costs of our Business Transformation Project may be greater or less than currently expected, as we may encounter the need for changes in design or revisions of the project calendar and budget. Sysco’s future results could be affected by competitive price pressures, availability of supplies, work stoppages, success or failure of our strategic initiatives, successful integration of acquired companies, conditions in the economy and the industry, and internal factors such as the ability to control expenses.

For additional risks impacting the company’s business, see the Risk Factors section of the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2012, and the company’s subsequent Form 10-Q filings. The company does not undertake to update its forward-looking statements.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   53


Back to Contents

REPORT OF THE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Sysco Corporation has reviewed and discussed the foregoing Compensation Discussion and Analysis as required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K with management and, based on such review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K and this Proxy Statement.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE

John M. Cassaday,Chairman


Judith B. Craven


Larry C. Glasscock


Jackie M. Ward

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement56

Back to Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The following discussion, as well as the Compensation Discussion and Analysis contained herein, contains references to target performance levels for our long-term incentive compensation. These targets and goals are discussed in the limited context of Sysco’s compensation programs and should not be interpreted as management’s expectations or estimates of results or other guidance. We specifically caution stockholders not to apply these statements to other contexts.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   54


Back to Contents

Summary Compensation Table

The following table sets forth information with respect to each of the named executive officers —NEOs – our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, and the three most highly compensated of the other executive officers of Sysco and its subsidiaries employed at the end of fiscal 2012.2015. In determining the most highly compensated executive officers, we excluded the amounts shown under “Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings.”

Name and

Principal Position

Fiscal

Year

Salary

($)

Bonus

($)(1)

Stock

Awards

($)(2)

Option

Awards

($)(3)

Non-Equity

Incentive Plan

Compensation

($)(4)

Change in

Pension

Value and

Nonqualified

Deferred

Compensation

Earnings

($)(5)

All Other

Compensation

($)(6)

Total ($)

William J. DeLaney

President and
Chief Executive Officer

2012

$

1,150,000

$

$

1,719,403

$

3,165,375

$

857,482

$

1,941,349

$

1,066

$

8,834,675

2011

1,000,000

686,000

1,250,071

1,990,000

0

790,155

9,275

5,725,501

2010

800,000

880,824

1,615,680

1,638,230

713,212

12,587

5,933,638

Robert C. Kreidler

Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer

2012

600,000

523,297

963,375

304,195

 

142,678

7,096

2,540,641

2011

525,000

367,500

395,519

626,850

0

16,956

694,694

2,626,519

2010

378,766

423,740

853,800

760,000

19,552

113,522

2,643,475

Manuel A. Fernandez(7)

Executive Chairman

2012

615,385

2,685,010

2,425,000

 

47,874

190

5,773,459

2011

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2010

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Michael W. Green

Executive Vice President
and Group President

2012

650,000

526,412

969,109

386,688

 

1,419,955

211,021

4,163,185

2011

550,000

385,000

412,841

656,700

0

686,125

5,476

2,696,142

2010

494,000

334,768

612,765

1,002,641

937,527

15,517

3,500,493

Larry G. Pulliam

Executive Vice President
and Group President

2012

600,000

485,918

894,562

374,552

 

2,201,367

1,066

4,557,465

2011

550,000

385,000

412,841

656,700

0

1,108,191

18,540

3,131,272

2010

532,000

359,464

658,665

1,129,030

1,479,450

43,654

4,312,423

(1)

These amounts relate to discretionary performance-based bonuses paid in August 2011 with respect to fiscal 2011. The bonus amounts were based on Sysco’s satisfying certain financial criteria and the named executive officers achieving certain non-financial goals.

(2)

With respect to Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Green and Pulliam, these amounts relate to grants of restricted stock units made in fiscal 2012, 2011 and 2010. With respect to fiscal 2012, we valued the restricted stock units at $27.65, being the closing price of our common stock on the first business day prior to the November 15, 2011 grant date. With respect to fiscal 2011, we valued the restricted stock units at $28.87 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the first business day prior to the November 11, 2010 grant date. With respect to fiscal 2010, we valued the restricted stock units at $27.44 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the first business day prior to the November 10, 2009 grant date.

With respect to Mr. Fernandez, these amounts relate to a grant of restricted stock units on April 13, 2012 in connection with his election as Executive Chairman that was valued at $29.44 per unit, being the closing price of our common stock on the first business day prior to the grant date, and a grant of restricted stock on November 15, 2011 that he received during his tenure as a non-employee director that was valued at $27.65 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the first business day prior to the grant date. The amounts in this column also reflect the grant date fair value of awards computed in accordance with ASC 718, “Compensation — Stock Compensation” with respect to a 50% stock match for Mr. Fernandez related to his tenure as a non-employee director during a portion of fiscal 2012, whereby he elected to receive a portion of his annual retainer fee in common stock, which was valued at $25,000 on the date of grant. The value of any “elected” shares is included in the column entitled “Salary” as described in footnote (7) below. See “Director Compensation – Directors Stock Plans” above for a more detailed description. Although we credit shares to a director’s account each quarter, the shares are not actually issued until the end of the calendar year unless the director’s service as a member of the Board of Directors terminates. The number of additional shares actually credited to Mr. Fernandez’s account during fiscal 2012 is 2,618. Directors may choose to defer receipt of the restricted stock and the matched shares described in this footnote under the Sysco Corporation 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan (DSDP). The number of shares of restricted stock and matched shares deferred by Mr. Fernandez during fiscal 2012 (which are included in the additional shares described above) was 2,618. To the extent cash dividends are paid on our common stock, Mr. Fernandez also received the equivalent amount of the cash dividend, in stock units, credited to his account with respect to all deferred restricted stock awards and all matched shares that are deferred. As discussed in the narratives accompanying the Fiscal 2012 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table, approximately $80,000 of Mr. Fernandez’ November 2011 restricted award and approximately $160,000 of Mr. Fernandez’ April 2012 RSUs were also deferred under the DSDP. Because Mr. Fernandez chose to defer the receipt of the above-described awards, they will be credited to his account and issued in accordance with his deferral election and the terms of the DSDP.

(3)

The amounts in these columns reflect the grant date fair value of the awards. See Note 15 of the consolidated financial statements in Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July 3, 2010, Note 15 of the consolidated financial statements in Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July 2, 2011 and Note 17 of the consolidated financial statements in Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2012 regarding assumptions underlying valuation of equity awards.

With respect to Mr. Fernandez, the amount relates to a grant of options on April 13, 2012 in connection with his election as Executive Chairman.

(4)

These amounts include the MIP annual incentive award paid in August 2012 with respect to fiscal 2012. We did not pay a MIP annual incentive award for fiscal 2011 because Sysco did not achieve the required performance levels. The amounts shown also include payments made in August 2012 for the three-year performance period ending in fiscal 2012 with respect to the cash performance unit grants previously made under our 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan. The amounts shown also include payments made in August 2010 for the three-year performance period ending in fiscal 2010 with respect to the cash performance unit grants previously made under our 2004 Cash Performance Unit Plan. The cash performance unit grants for the three-year performance period ending in fiscal 2011 expired unpaid because the performance criteria were not met.

(5)

The amounts reported in the “Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings” column reflect above-market interest on amounts in the EDCP (or with respect to Mr. Fernandez, the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan), and the actuarial increase in the present value of the named executive officers’ benefits under all pension plans established and maintained by Sysco, determined using interest rate and mortality rate assumptions consistent with those used in Sysco’s financial statements. The pension plan amounts, some of which may not be currently vested, include:

increase in pension plan value; and

increase in Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, or SERP, value.

To the extent that the aggregate change in the actuarial present value of the named executive officer’s accumulated benefit under the pension plan and the SERP was a decrease, this decrease is not included in the amounts shown in the column.

The following table shows, for each named executive officer, the change in the actuarial present value for each of the pension plan and the SERP and the above-market interest on amounts in the EDCP (or with respect to Mr. Fernandez, the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan) for fiscal 2012:

Name and
Principal Position
 Fiscal
Year
 Salary
($)(1)
 Bonus
($)(2)
 Stock
Awards
($)(3)
 Option
Awards
($)(4)
 Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
($)(5)
 Change in
Pension Value and
Nonqualified Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($)(6)
 All Other
Compen-
sation
($)(7)
 Total
($)
 
William J. DeLaney 2015 $1,220,583   $2,017,963 $3,322,980 $2,356,410 $251,301 $158,696 $9,327,933 
President and 2014  1,194,583    1,819,225  2,858,081  657,919  1,132,628  152,958  7,815,394 
Chief Executive Officer 2013  1,170,833    4,611,949  2,400,000  1,470,280  1,227,127  5,800  10,885,989 
Robert C. Kreidler 2015  732,875    653,235  1,075,693  944,423  7,469  152,630  3,566,325 
Executive Vice President 2014  712,500  429,000  633,097  994,626  261,667  78,752  141,670  3,251,312 
and Former Chief 2013  683,333    1,828,489  980,000  530,198  165,874  6,437  4,194,331 
Financial Officer                           
Thomas L. Bené(8) 2015  681,250    530,226  873,127  1,050,851  1,883  93,341  3,230,678 
Executive Vice President 2014  616,667  375,000  513,890  807,323  228,730  353  77,433  2,619,396 
and President, Foodservice                           
Operations                           
Russell T. Libby(9) 2015  538,125    411,145  677,011  693,458  3,337  110,322  2,433,398 
Executive Vice President,                           
Administration and                           
Corporate Secretary                           
Wayne Shurts 2015  601,675    497,986  820,043  772,933  901  44,829  2,738,367 
Executive Vice President 2014  585,000  267,400  482,636  758,240  221,510  30,740  54,973  2,400,499 
and Chief Technology Officer 2013  407,292  150,000  945,987  747,501  174,379  12  85,619  2,510,790 

(1)The salary amounts reflect the actual base salary payments earned by the NEOs in applicable fiscal year.
(2)Mr. Bené was paid a new hire bonus of $250,000, less applicable withholding for taxes, in September 2013, subject to clawback provisions requiring Mr. Bené to repay the full amount of the bonus in the event of a voluntary resignation or an involuntary termination for cause (as defined in the offer letter) within one year after the 6-month anniversary of his start date. Mr. Shurts was paid a new hire bonus in two installments, $150,000 on his start date in October 2012 and an additional $150,000 in October 2013, to partially replace the value of certain compensation and other benefits forfeited upon his acceptance of employment with Sysco. In March 2014, the following named executive officers received transaction incentive awards relating to the proposed merger with USF Holding Corp.: Mr. Kreidler ($429,000), Mr. Bené ($125,000), and Mr. Shurts ($117,400). See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis— What We Paid and Why—Compensation for NEOs—Fiscal 2014 Transaction Incentive Bonus Pool – Detailed Information” above for further discussion.
(3)With respect to Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Libby, Bené and Shurts, these amounts relate to grants of restricted stock units made in fiscal 2015, 2014 and 2013, as applicable. With respect to fiscal 2015, we valued the RSUs granted on November 18, 2014 at $38.89 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the last business day before the grant date. With respect to fiscal 2014, we valued the RSUs granted on November 15, 2013 at $33.57 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the last business day before the grant date. With respect to fiscal 2013, we valued the RSUs granted on November 13, 2012 at $29.96 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the last business day before the grant date; the RSUs granted on November 14, 2012 at $29.96 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the last business day before the grant date; and the RSUs granted on February 12, 2013 at $31.56 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the last business day before the grant date.
(4)The amounts in these columns reflect the grant date fair value of the awards. See Note 18 of the consolidated financial statements in Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 27, 2015, See Note 18 of the consolidated financial statements in Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 28, 2014, and Note 17 of the consolidated financial statements in Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 29, 2013, regarding assumptions underlying valuation of equity awards.
(5)These amounts include the annual incentive award paid in August 2015 with respect to fiscal 2015, paid in August 2014 with respect to fiscal 2014, and paid in August 2013 with respect to fiscal 2013. The amounts shown also include payments made in August 2013 for the three-year performance period ending in fiscal 2013 with respect to the cash performance unit grants previously made under our 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan as disussed below under “Cash Performance Units.”
(6)The amounts reported in the “Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings” column reflect above-market interest on amounts in the EDCP and MSP, and the actuarial increase in the present value of the NEOs’ benefits under all pension plans established and maintained by Sysco, determined using interest rate and mortality rate assumptions consistent with those used in Sysco’s financial statements. The pension plan amounts, some of which may not be currently vested, include:
increase in pension plan value; and
increase in Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, or SERP, value.
To the extent that the aggregate change in the actuarial present value of the named executive officer’s accumulated benefit under the pension plan and the SERP was a decrease, this decrease is not included in the amounts shown in the column.
The following table shows, for each named executive officer, the change in the actuarial present value for each of the pension plan and the SERP and the above-market interest on amounts in the EDCP and MSP for fiscal 2015:

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    5557


Back to Contents
    Change in     Above-Market    
    Pension Plan  Change in SERP  Interest on Deferred    
 Name   Value   Value  Compensation   Total 
 DeLaney  $17,351  $207,911  $26,039  $251,301 
 Kreidler   945   4,136   2,388   7,469 
 Bené   N/A   N/A   1,883   1,883 
 Libby   603   2,734      3,337 
 Shurts   632   N/A   269   901 

(7)Fiscal 2015 amounts include the following:
a.the full amount paid for life insurance coverage for each individual (the excess coverage over the amounts paid for other employees is not determinable since the deductibles and coverages may be different);
b.the following amounts of 401(k) Plan and Management Savings Plan Company contributions with respect to the 2015 fiscal year:

  401(k) Employer  MSP Employer 
Name Contribution  Contribution 
DeLaney $22,250  $136,446 
Kreidler  14,450   138,180 
Bené  14,918   32,999 
Libby  14,888   95,434 
Shurts  14,338   30,491 

c.Mr. Bené received $380 during fiscal 2015 to reimburse him for taxes associated with certain benefits he received in connection with his relocation to Houston following acceptance of his position.
d.the following perquisites and personal benefits (the aggregate value of all perquisites and personal benefits received by each NEO, other than Mr. Bené, in fiscal 2015 was less than $10,000 and was excluded from the table above):
the amounts paid for accidental death and dismemberment insurance coverage;
the amounts paid for long-term care insurance;
the amounts reimbursed to the individual for annual medical exams;
the amounts paid for long-term disability coverage under the company’s welfare benefit plan;
the amounts reimbursed to the individual for books, magazines and other periodicals;
with respect to Mr. Bené, reimbursement of $39,548 for certain expenses in connection with his relocation to Houston, Texas; and
reimbursement of certain expenses for Messrs. Kreidler and Shurts in connection with their respective relocations.
Except for the reimbursement of relocation expenses incurred by Mr. Bené, no named executive officer received any single perquisite or personal benefit with respect to fiscal 2015 with a value greater than $25,000, and no named executive officer received any other item of compensation with respect to fiscal 2015 required to be disclosed in this column with a value of $10,000 or more.
(8)Mr. Bené was not an NEO for fiscal 2013; as a result, only his fiscal 2014 and fiscal 2015 compensation information is included.
(9)Mr. Libby was not an NEO for fiscal 2013 or 2014; as a result, only his fiscal 2015 compensation information is included.

Transaction Incentive Awards

On March 21, 2014, the Compensation Committee approved incentive and retention cash awards for certain officers of the Company, including the NEOs other than Mr. DeLaney, related to Contentsthe proposed merger with USF. These awards are described in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis— What We Paid and Why—Compensation for NEOs—Fiscal 2014 Transaction Incentive Bonus Pool – Detailed Information.”

Name

Change in

Pension Plan Value

Change in

SERP Value

Above-Market

Interest on Deferred

Compensation

DeLaney

$

136,377

$

1,775,522

$

29,450

Kreidler

35,937

105,370

1,371

Fernandez

43,908

N/A

3,966

Green

126,860

1,293,095

0

Pulliam

145,575

2,023,420

32,372

(6)

Fiscal 2012 amounts include the following:

a.

a deferred match payment of $6,030 for Mr. Kreidler, being 15% of the first 20% of the annual incentive bonus which he elected to defer under the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan, respectively (the terms of this plan are described in more detail under “Executive Deferred Compensation Plan”);

b.

the full amount paid for life insurance coverage for each individual (the excess coverage over the amounts paid for other employees is not determinable since the deductibles and coverages may be different);

c.

the amount of 401(k) Plan matching contributions paid in September 2012 with respect to the 2012 fiscal year; and

d.

the following perquisites and personal benefits (the aggregate value of all perquisites and personal benefits received by each named executive officer in fiscal 2012 was less than $10,000):

the amount paid for accidental death and dismemberment insurance coverage;

the amount paid for long-term care insurance;

the amount reimbursed to the individual for annual medical exams;

the amounts paid for long-term disability coverage under the company’s disability income plan;

payment of fees by Sysco related to the preparation of foreign tax returns required to be filed by the executive for attendance at meetings or other travel related to Sysco business in foreign jurisdictions;

the amount paid for spousal travel in connection with business events, which amounts reflect only commercial travel; no incremental costs were incurred in connection with travel of spouses on the company plane with executive officers to and from business events;

the estimated amount paid for spousal meals in connection with business events; and

with respect to Mr. Green, reimbursement of $205,824 for certain expenses in connection with his move to Houston, Texas.

Except for the reimbursement of relocation expenses incurred by Mr. Green, no named executive officer received any single perquisite or personal benefit with respect to fiscal 2012 with a value greater than $25,000 and no named executive officer received any other item of compensation with respect to fiscal 2012 required to be disclosed in this column with a value of $10,000 or more.

(7)

Compensation for Mr. Fernandez is provided only for fiscal 2012 because he was not a named executive officer in fiscal 2011 or fiscal 2010. Fiscal 2012 salary for Mr. Fernandez includes $425,000 in fees earned as a non-employee director prior to his election as Executive Chairman in April 2012 and $190,385 in pro-rated salary received as Executive Chairman after his election as Executive Chairman. The amount of $425,000 in fees earned as a non-employee director prior to his election as Executive Chairman in April 2012, includes retainer fees paid in cash and any retainer fees for which Mr. Fernandez elected to receive shares of Sysco common stock in lieu of cash and fees for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2012 that were paid at the beginning of fiscal 2013. Although we credit shares to a director’s account each quarter, the elected shares are not actually issued until the end of the calendar year unless the director’s service as a member of the Board of Directors terminates. The number of shares of stock actually credited to Mr. Fernandez’s account in lieu of cash during fiscal 2012, excluding match shares, which are reported in the column titled “stock awards,” was 1,746 shares. Directors may choose to defer receipt of the elected shares described in this footnote under the Sysco Corporation 2009 Board of Directors Stock Deferral Plan. The number of elected shares of stock deferred by Mr. Fernandez during fiscal 2012 (which are included in the elected shares described above) was 1,746 shares. To the extent cash dividends are paid on our common stock, Mr. Fernandez also received the equivalent amount of the cash dividend credited to his account, in stock units, with respect to all elected shares that are deferred. Because Mr. Fernandez chose to defer the receipt of the shares, they will be credited to his account and issued in accordance with his deferral election and the terms of the DSDP.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    5658


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

The following table provides information on CPU grants, annual incentive award opportunities under the MIP,our 2009 Management Incentive Plan, stock options, restricted stock and restricted stock units granted during fiscal 20122015 to each of the named executive officers.NEOs.

Name

Grant

Date

 

Number

of Shares,

Units

or Other

Rights

 

 

Estimated Future Payouts Under

Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards

All Other

Stock

Awards:

Number of

Shares of

Stock or

Units(#)(1)

All Other

Option

Awards:

Number of

Securities

Underlying

Options(#)(2)

Exercise

or Base

Price of

Option

Awards

($/Sh)(3)

Closing

Market

Price

on the

Date Of

Grant($)

Grant Date

Fair Value

of Stock

and Option

Awards($)(4)

Threshold($)

Target($)

Maximum($)

DeLaney

11/15/11

(5)

1,725,000

$

862,500

$

1,725,000

$

2,587,500

11/15/11

862,500

$

27.65

$

27.84

$

3,165,375

11/15/11

62,185

1,719,403

8/26/11

(6)

862,500

1,725,000

2,587,500

Kreidler

11/15/11

(5)

525,000

262,500

525,000

787,500

11/15/11

262,500

$

27.65

$

27.84

963,375

11/15/11

18,926

523,297

8/26/11

(6)

300,000

600,000

900,000

Fernandez

11/15/11

5,787

160,010

4/13/12

84,918

2,500,000

4/13/12

625,000

$

29.44

$

29.31

2,425,000

Green

11/15/11

(5)

528,125

264,063

528,125

792,188

11/15/11

264,063

$

27.65

$

27.84

969,109

11/15/11

19,038

526,412

8/26/11

(6)

406,250

812,500

1,218,750

Pulliam

11/15/11

(5)

487,500

243,750

487,500

731,250

11/15/11

243,750

$

27.65

$

27.84

894,563

11/15/11

17,574

485,918

8/26/11

(6)

375,000

750,000

1,125,000

(1)

With respect to Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Green and Pulliam, we granted the restricted stock units under the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan and they vest one-third per year for three years beginning on the first anniversary of the grant date. With respect to Mr. Fernandez, we also granted the restricted stock units under the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, and they vest one-third per year for three years beginning on the first anniversary of the grant date. Vesting of the restricted stock units granted to each named executive officer is contingent upon executive’s continued service with the company, except that the restricted stock units will remain in effect and continue to vest according to the vesting schedule upon executive’s termination of employment due to retirement in good standing or disability. Currently, only Messrs. DeLaney, Pulliam, and Fernandez are eligible to retire. Additionally, the restricted stock units will vest immediately upon executive’s death or a change in control of the company. In addition, other than with respect to Mr. Fernandez’ April 2012 RSU grant, the executive will forfeit all of his unvested restricted stock units if the Committee finds by a majority vote that, either before or after termination of his employment, he:

committed fraud, embezzlement, theft, a felony, or proven dishonesty in the course of his employment and by any such act, damaged us or our subsidiaries;

disclosed our trade secrets; or

participated, engaged or had a financial or other interest in any commercial venture in the United States competitive with our business in violation of our Code of Conduct or that would have violated our Code of Conduct had he been an employee when he engaged in the prohibited activity.

Mr. Fernandez also received a grant of restricted stock under the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan on November 15, 2011 that vests in full on the first anniversary of the grant date. Mr. Fernandez will forfeit the award if he ceases to serve as a director of Sysco, unless he leaves the Board after serving out his term. The restricted stock will automatically vest upon his death.

(2)

With respect to Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Green and Pulliam, we granted the options under the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, and they vest 20% per year for five years beginning on the first anniversary of the grant date. With respect to Mr. Fernandez, we also granted the options under the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, and they vest 1/3 per year beginning on the first anniversary of the grant date. If an executive retires in good standing or leaves our employment because of disability, his options will remain in effect, vest and be exercisable in accordance with their terms as if he had remained employed. If an executive dies during the term of his option, all unvested options will vest immediately and may be exercised by his estate at any time until the earlier to occur of three years after his death, or the option’s termination date. In addition, an executive will forfeit all of his unexercised options if the Committee finds by a majority vote that, either before or after termination of his employment, he:

committed fraud, embezzlement, theft, a felony, or proven dishonesty in the course of his employment and by any such act, damaged us or our subsidiaries;

disclosed our trade secrets; or

participated, engaged or had a financial or other interest in any commercial venture in the United States competitive with our business in violation of our Code of Conduct or that would have violated our Code of Conduct had he been an employee when he engaged in the prohibited activity.

(3)

We granted all of these options under our 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, which directs that the exercise price of all options is the closing price of our stock on the New York Stock Exchange on the first business day prior to the grant date.

(4)

We determined the estimated grant date present value for the options issued on November 15, 2011 of $3.67 per share and the options issued on April 13, 2012 of $3.88 per share using a modified Black-Scholes pricing model. With respect to the November 2011 grants, we assumed a volatility of 23.40%, a 1.04% risk-free rate of return, a dividend yield at the date of grant of 3.67% and a 5.4-year expected option life when applying the model. With respect to the April 2012 grants, we assumed a volatility of 23.4%, a 1.0% risk-free rate of return, a dividend yield at the date of grant of 3.67% and a 5.4-year expected option life when applying the model. We did not assume any option exercises or risk of forfeiture during the expected option life in determining the valuation of the option awards. Had we done so, such assumptions could have reduced the reported grant date value. The actual value, if any, an executive may realize upon exercise of options will depend on the excess of the stock price over the exercise price on the date the option is exercised. Consequently, there is no assurance that the value realized, if any, will be at or near the value estimated by the modified Black-Scholes model.

We valued the restricted stock units granted on November 15, 2011 at $27.65 per share and the restricted stock units granted on April 13, 2012 at $29.44, being the closing price of our common stock on the first business day prior to each respective grant date.

We valued the restricted stock granted on November 15, 2011 at $27.65 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the first business day prior to the grant date.

(5)

These amounts relate to cash performance units with a three-year performance period that we granted in November 2011 under our 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan.

(6)

These amounts relate to MIP annual incentive award agreements made in August 2011 with respect to fiscal 2012. In approving the MIP agreements for fiscal 2012, the Committee targeted each named executive officer’s MIP bonus at the following percentages of base salary: 150% for Mr. DeLaney, 125% for Messrs. Green and Pulliam and 100% for Mr. Kreidler.

              All Other
Stock Awards:
 All Other Option
Awards: Number
 Exercise
or Base
 Closing
Market
 Grant Date
Fair Value
 
      Estimated Future Payouts Under Non- Number of of Securities Price of Price on of Stock 
    Number of Equity Incentive Plan Awards Shares of Underlying Option the Date and Option 
Name Grant Date Shares, Units or
Other Rights
 Threshold
($)
  Target
($)
  Maximum
($)
 Stock or Units
(#)(1)
 Options
(#)(2)
 Awards
($/Sh)(3)
 of Grant
($)
 Awards
($)(4)
 
DeLaney 11/18/14(5)  2,786,875 $1,393,438  $2,786,875  $4,180,313                
  11/18/14                   574,910 $38.89 $39.14 $3,322,980 
  11/18/14                51,889           2,017,963 
  8/21/14(6)     735,000   1,837,500   2,756,250                
Kreidler 11/18/14(5)  902,151  451,076   902,151   1,353,227                
  11/18/14                   186,106 $38.89 $39.14  1,075,693 
  11/18/14                16,797           653,235 
  8/21/14(6)     294,580   736,450   1,104,675                
Bené 11/18/14(5)  732,266  366,133   732,266   1,098,398                
  11/18/14                   151,060 $38.89 $39.14  873,127 
  11/18/14                13,634           530,226 
  8/21/14(6)     362,500   906,250   1,359,375                
Libby 11/18/14(5)  567,788  283,894   567,788   851,681                
  11/18/14                   117,130 $38.89 $39.14  677,011 
  11/18/14                10,572           411,145 
  8/21/14(6)     216,300   540,750   811,125                
Shurts 11/18/14(5)  687,744  343,872   687,744   1,031,616                
  11/18/14                   141,876 $38.89 $39.14  820,043 
  11/18/14                12,805           497,986 
  8/21/14(6)     241,844   604,610   906,915                
(1)With respect to Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Bené, Libby and Shurts, we granted the RSUs under the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan on November 18, 2014. The RSUs vest one-third per year for three years beginning on the first anniversary of the grant date. Vesting of the RSUs granted to each NEO is contingent upon the executive’s continued service with the company, except that the RSUs will remain in effect and continue to vest according to the vesting schedule upon executive’s termination of employment due to qualifying retirement in good standing or disability. Currently, only Mr. DeLaney is eligible to retire. Additionally, the RSUs will vest immediately upon the executive’s death or a change in control of the company. In addition, the executive will forfeit all of his unvested RSUs if the Committee finds by a majority vote that, either before or after termination of his employment, he:
committed fraud, embezzlement, theft, a felony, or proven dishonesty in the course of his employment and by any such act, damaged us or our subsidiaries;
disclosed our trade secrets; or
participated, engaged or had a financial or other interest in any commercial venture in the United States competitive with our business in violation of our Code of Conduct or that would have violated our Code of Conduct had he been an employee when he engaged in the prohibited activity.
(2)With respect to Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Libby, Bené and Shurts, we granted the options under the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan on November 18, 2014. Option grants under the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan have a maximum term of 10 years. All option awards vest 20% per year for five years beginning on the first anniversary of the grant date. If an executive experiences a qualifying retirement in good standing or leaves our employment because of disability, his options will remain in effect, vest and be exercisable in accordance with their terms as if he had remained employed. If an executive dies during the term of his option, all unvested options will vest immediately and may be exercised by his estate at any time until the earlier to occur of three years after his death, or the option’s termination date. In addition, an executive will forfeit all of his unexercised options if the Committee finds by a majority vote that, either before or after termination of his employment, he:
committed fraud, embezzlement, theft, a felony, or proven dishonesty in the course of his employment and by any such act, damaged us or our subsidiaries;
disclosed our trade secrets; or
participated, engaged or had a financial or other interest in any commercial venture in the United States competitive with our business in violation of our Code of Conduct or that would have violated our Code of Conduct had he been an employee when he engaged in the prohibited activity.
(3)Pursuant to the plans under which these options were granted, the exercise price of all options may not be less than the Fair Market Value on the date of the grant, which is defined under our 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan as the closing sale price during regular trading hours of the stock on the immediately preceding date on the principal securities market in which shares of stock is then traded, or, if there were no trades on that date, the closing sale price during regular trading hours of the stock on the first trading day prior to that date.
(4)We determined the estimated grant date present value for the options issued on November 18, 2014 of $5.78 per option, using a Black-Scholes pricing model. With respect to the November 2014 grants, we assumed a volatility of 20.7%, a 2.0% risk-free rate of return, a dividend yield at the date of grant of 3.2% and a 7.3-year expected option life when applying the model. We did not assume any option exercises or risk of forfeiture during the expected option life in determining the valuation of the option awards. Had we done so, such assumptions could have reduced the reported grant date value. The actual value, if any, an executive may realize upon exercise of options will depend on the excess of the stock price over the exercise price on the date the option is exercised. Consequently, there is no assurance that the value realized, if any, will be at or near the value estimated by the Black-Scholes model. We valued the restricted stock units granted on November 18, 2014 at $38.89 per share, being the closing price of our common stock on the last business day before the grant date.
(5)These amounts relate to cash performance units with a three-year performance period that we granted in November 2014 under our 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan.
(6)These amounts relate to annual incentive awards made pursuant to our 2009 Management Incentive Plan in August 2014 with respect to fiscal 2015. In approving the annual incentive awards for fiscal 2015, the Committee targeted each named executive officer’s annual incentive opportunity at the following percentages of base salary: 150% for Mr. DeLaney, and 100% for Messrs. Kreidler, Bené, Libby and Shurts. The target for Mr. Bené was increased by the Compensation Committee from 100% to 125% of his base salary, effective January 1, 2015, upon his promotion to Executive Vice President and President, Foodservice Operations.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    5759


Back to Contents

Employment Arrangements with Messrs. Bené and Shurts

Mr. Bené.Pursuant to Contents

Cash Performance Unit Plan

The 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan provides certain key employees, including the named executive officers,terms and conditions of an offer of employment dated February 28, 2013, Sysco offered, and Mr. Bené accepted, employment with Sysco as the Executive Vice President and Chief Merchandising Officer. This offer of employment stated his initial annual base salary of $575,000, confirmed his eligibility for a pro-rated fiscal 2013 annual incentive opportunity to earn cash incentive payments based on pre-established performance criteria over performance periodswith an initial target of at least three years. We refer to these units as “CPUs.” The Committee currently makes grants annually100% of base salary, and provided for performance periods ending at the endone-time bonus awards of the third fiscal year, including the year$500,000 within 30 days of grant. The Plan provides that, in the event of the death of a participant, payments are determined using Sysco’s performance for the entire three-year performance period. Payments following a change of control are based on target performance values. With respect to participants whose employment terminates due to retirement or death, such individuals will receive a pro-rata payment based upon the number of years during which the participant was actively employed during the relevant performance period. Beginning with the grants made in fiscal 2010, the Committee began the practice of setting the performance goals for the awards during the first ninetyhis hire date and an additional $250,000 within 30 days of the fiscal year and granting individual awards at its meeting the following November. The plan will expire on November 30, 2014, unless sooner terminated by the Board.

Under the plan, the Committee may select performance goals from those specified in the plan, based on the performancesix month anniversary of Sysco generally or on the performance of subsidiaries or divisions. With respecthis employment, subject to the grants in fiscal 2010 that we paid in August 2012 and the grants in fiscal 2011, the Committee set performance criteria based on the average increases in Sysco’s earnings per share and sales over the performance periods. With respect to the grants in fiscal 2012, the Committee set the performance criteria based on total shareholder return, as described below. In addition to the awards that we granted to the named executives that were received in fiscal 2010 and that we paid to them in August 2012, as discussed in footnote (4) to the Summary Compensation Table, as of September 17, 2012, the named executives held cash performance unit grants in the amounts and for the performance periods set forth below:

Name

Fiscal Year in

Which Granted

Target Value

Per Unit

Number of

Performance

Units Held

Performance

Period

Payout Amount

Minimum

Target

Maximum

DeLaney

2012

$

1

1,725,000

7/3/2011-
6/28/2014

$ 862,500

$1,725,000

$2,587,500

2011

$

1

1,250,000

7/4/2010-
6/29/2013

312,500

1,250,000

1,875,000

Kreidler

2012

$

1

525,000

7/3/2011-
6/28/2014

262,500

525,000

787,500

2011

$

1

393,750

7/4/2010-
6/29/2013

98,438

393,750

590,625

Green

2012

$

1

528,125

7/3/2011-
6/28/2014

264,063

528,125

792,188

2011

$

1

412,500

7/4/2010-
6/29/2013

103,125

412,500

618,750

Pulliam

2012

$

1

487,500

7/3/2011-
6/28/2014

243,750

487,500

731,250

2011

$

1

412,500

7/4/2010-
6/29/2013

103,125

412,500

618,750

certain conditions regarding his continued employment. Mr. Fernandez does not currently hold any cash performance units, and heBené is currently not eligible to participate in Sysco’s disability income plan, all broad based employee benefits plans, as well as all executive benefit and retirement savings programs. In addition, Sysco agreed to reimburse Mr. Bené for certain temporary housing and moving expenses, subject to his obligation to repay any such expenses if he is terminated by Sysco for certain reasons within one year of such reimbursements.

Upon the Cash Performance Unit Plan.

Followingrecommendation of Sysco management and consistent with the conclusionoffer of each three-year performance period, if we meetemployment, the relevant performance criteria, we will pay each named executive an amount obtained by multiplying the number of performance units that the executive received by the value assignedCompensation Committee granted to each unit and then multiplying the resulting product byMr. Bené (1) a specified percentage. Each CPU is assignedone-time RSU grant in May 2013 with a value of $1.00 per unit.$1,000,000 and (2) an annual long term incentive award in November 2013 representing 325% of his annual base salary and consisting of 50% of the value in stock options, 25% in CPUs and 25% in RSUs.

The CPU grants that we made

Mr. Shurts.Pursuant to the terms and conditions of an offer of employment dated September 13, 2012, Sysco offered, and Mr. Shurts accepted, employment with Sysco as the Executive Vice President, Chief Technology Officer. This offer of employment stated his initial annual base salary of $575,000, confirmed his eligibility for a pro-rated fiscal 2013 annual incentive opportunity with an initial target of 100% of base salary, and provided for one-time bonus award of $150,000 within 30 days of his hire date and an additional $150,000 on the first anniversary of his employment, subject to certain conditions regarding his continued employment. Mr. Shurts is eligible to participate in fiscal 2011,Sysco’s disability income plan, all broad based employee benefits plans, as well as those that we made in fiscal 2010all executive benefit and paid in Augustretirement savings programs. In addition, Sysco agreed to reimburse Mr. Shurts for certain temporary housing and moving expenses, subject to his obligation to repay any such expenses if he is terminated by Sysco for certain reasons within one year of such reimbursements.

In November 2012, containedupon the recommendation of Sysco management and consistent with the offer of employment, the Compensation Committee granted to Mr. Shurts (1) a sliding scale for each component for the performance periods as follows:

one-halfone-time RSU grant with a value of $500,000 and (2) an annual long-term incentive award representing 325% of his annual base salary and consisting of 50% of the payout was based on average growthvalue in diluted earnings per share;stock options, 25% in CPUs and 25% in RSUs.

one-half of the payout was based on average increase in sales.

All of these performance measures relate to performance for completed fiscal years. For period to period comparisons, we compare results in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent basis, and we adjust them for any fiscal year containing 53 weeks. Samples of the payment criteria and payout percentages for the awards granted in fiscal 2011, as well as those granted in fiscal 2010 and paid in August 2012, including the threshold, target and maximum payment criteria and payout percentages for each component are set forth below. The amounts shown reflect a simplified grid of payment criteria and payout amounts; they do not include incremental criteria and payouts between the amounts shown. Between the levels shown in the table, the payout percentage increase incrementally, approximately in proportion to increases in the criteria. The minimum percentage payout would be 25% if only one of the performance criteria is satisfied at the minimum level and the maximum percentage payout would be 150% if the maximum levels for both criteria are satisfied. Our adjusted sales growth over the three-year performance period ended on June 30, 2012 was 4.85% and our average growth in adjusted fully diluted earnings per share over the performance period was 2.54%, which resulted in a CPU payout of $12.04 per unit in August 2012. See Annex I for a reconciliation of these adjusted measures to the comparable GAAP measures.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   58


Back to Contents

Fiscal Years

Part 1 — Growth in Earnings Per Share

Minimum

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

2011-2013

6

%

7.5

%

9

%

10.5

%

12

% and up

2010-2012 (paid August 2012)

6

%

7.5

%

9

%

10.5

%

12

% and up

Applicable Payout

25

%

37.5

%

50

%

62.5

%

75

%

PLUS

Fiscal Years

Part 2 — Growth in Sales

Minimum

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

2011-2013

4

%

5

%

6

%

7

%

8

% and up

2010-2012

4

%

5

%

6

%

7

%

8

% and up

Applicable Payout

25

%

37.5

%

50

%

62.5

%

75

%

We will make all payments due with respect to the cash performance units in cash. No payments made under the Cash Performance Unit Plans to any named executive in any fiscal year may be higher than 1% of Sysco’s earnings before income taxes, as publicly disclosed in the “Consolidated Results of Operations” section of Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended immediately before the applicable payment date.

With respect to the CPUs granted in November 2011, the Committee replaced the previous performance criteria with a measure based on Sysco’s total shareholder return over the three fiscal year performance period including fiscal 2012, 2013 and 2014 relative to that of the S&P 500. Based upon where Sysco’s total shareholder return for that period falls relative to the other S&P 500 companies, CPUs are expected to pay at a rate from 50% to 150% of the aggregate value of the CPUs, which are valued at $1 per unit. In order to compute total shareholder return, the following sum is first calculated:

the closing price of a share of Sysco’s common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, on the day immediately preceding the last day of the three fiscal year performance period, plus,

the per share cash dividends paid on company common stock during the three fiscal year performance period, minus,

the closing price of a share of Sysco’s common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, on the day immediately preceding the first day of the three fiscal year performance period.

Total shareholder return is then computed as that sum divided by the closing price of a share of Sysco’s common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, on the day immediately preceding the first day of the three fiscal year performance period. The threshold payment level requires Sysco’s total shareholder return for the three fiscal year performance period to equal or exceed that of the 30th percentile of the S&P 500, the target payment level requires company performance to equal the 45th percentile, and the maximum payment level is expected to be reached at the 75th percentile, with graduated bonus levels in between the threshold and maximum levels. These grants are subject to Sysco’s clawback policies.

Benefits upon Termination or Change in Control under the Plan

If the executive’s employment terminates during a performance period because the executive leaves our employment due to disability, the executive will nonetheless receive the specified payment on the applicable payment date, as if he remained employed on that date. If the executive’s employment terminates during a performance period because the executive retires in good standing or due to the executive’s death, the executive will receive the specified payment on the applicable payment date, as if he remained employed on that date, reduced on a pro-rata basis based on the number of years during which the executive was actively employed during the applicable three-year performance period. The executive will get credit for a fiscal year if the executive was actively employed by Sysco at any time during a relevant fiscal year. If the executive’s employment terminates before the end of the performance period for any reason other than retirement in good standing, death or disability, we will cancel the executive’s performance units, and the executive will not receive any payments under the plan with respect to the cancelled performance units. The plan provides that if a change in control occurs during a performance period we will pay the executive the target amount payable under the plan for the executive’s performance units for that performance period, as if the target performance levels had been achieved. In such instances, the performance units awarded with respect to the performance period will be considered vested and payment will be made to the executive within 90 days after the date of the change in control.

Management Incentive Plan

Our 2009 Management Incentive Plan provides(the “2009 Plan”), which expired in November 2014, provided key executives, including the named executive officers other than Mr. Fernandez,NEOs, with the opportunity to earn bonuses through the grant of annual performance-based incentive awards, payable in cash. Until the fiscal 2012 grants, theThe Committee generally madegranted annual incentive awards under the plan in May or June prior to the beginning of the fiscal year to which they relate. Beginning with the fiscal 2012 grants, the Committee began granting annual incentive awards2009 Plan in the first quarter of the fiscal year to which the awards relate. We paypaid amounts owed under such awards in Augustduring the first fiscal quarter following the conclusion of the fiscal year.year corresponding to such awards. Annual incentive opportunities awarded to corporate participants, including the named executive officers other than Mr. Fernandez,NEOs, under the MIP may be2009 Plan were based on any one or more of the following:

return on stockholders’ equity and increases in earnings per share;

return on capital and/or increases in pretax earnings of selected divisions or subsidiaries;

return on assets;

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   59


Back to Contents

total shareholder return;

improvements in certain financial measures (including working capital and the ratio of sales to net working capital);

general comparisons with other peer companies or industry groups or classifications; and

return on stockholders’ equity and earnings per share;
return on capital and/or increases in pretax earnings of selected divisions or subsidiaries;
return on assets;
total shareholder return;
improvements in certain financial measures (including working capital and the ratio of sales to net working capital);
general comparisons with other peer companies or industry groups or classifications; and
one or more specified Sysco, division or subsidiary performance factors described in the plan.

All of these performance measures relate to performance for completed fiscal years or multiple completed fiscal year periods. For period to period comparisons, we comparecompared results in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent basis, and we adjustadjusted them for any fiscal year containing 53 weeks. The Committee hashad the discretion to determine which performance factors will be used for a particular award and the relative weights of the factors. No named executive officer may receivecould have received an aggregate bonus for any given fiscal year under the MIP2009 Plan in excess of $10,000,000. The Committee will determinedetermined and paypaid all annual incentive awards within 90 days following the end of the fiscal year for which the award was earned.

The MIP allows2009 Plan provided that, if a change in control occurred during the performance period, we would pay a cash bonus to each participant, within 90 days of the change in control, equal to a pro-rata portion of the bonus amount that would have been paid to the participant based on actual performance under the performance measures, for the period from the start of the performance period through the date of the change in control. For these purposes, actual performance would have been determined based on results of the most recently completed fiscal quarter that occurred during the performance period. In addition, if (1) any participant remained employed from the date of the change in control through the end of the original performance period and (2) the amount of the cash bonus that would have been paid under the 2009 Plan in the absence of the change in control exceeded the amount actually received following the change in control, then the participant would have received the amount of such excess.

The 2009 Plan allowed for the Compensation Committee to make certain permissible deviations from GAAP standards and provides for permissible methods for modifying bonus formulas after the first 90 days of the applicable fiscal year in order to give the Compensation Committee additional flexibility in structuring performance metrics. Application of any permissible deviations from GAAP standard or changes to any performance metrics with respect to “covered employees” under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, which includes each of the named executive officersNEOs except the CFO, iswas limited to circumstances where any deviations from GAAP are objectively determinable and the modification of performance metrics compliescomplied with the “performance-based compensation” exception under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. The MIP2009 Plan also includes a provision implementing Sysco’s clawback policies. Beginning with the fiscal 2013 MIPannual incentive grants under the 2009 Plan, the Compensation Committee has implemented a bonus pool concept designed to overlay the MIPannual incentive program and help to ensure income tax deductibility for purposes of Section 162(m). The 2009 Plan expired on November 18, 2014. Future annual cash incentive awards after that date will be made under the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement60

Back to Contents

Fiscal 20122015 MIP Annual Incentive Awards

In August 2014, the Compensation Committee approved the incentive award framework for fiscal 2015 (the “2015 MIP”) pursuant to the 2009 Plan. The NEOs’ fiscal 2015 annual incentive award payment calculation under the 2015 MIP was based on the corporate financial objectives and weightings as shown in the chart below. Corporate financial results accounted for 80% of the target annual incentive opportunity. In addition, the remaining 20% of the target annual incentive opportunity was determined based on the Compensation Committee’s review and evaluation of each NEO’s performance with respect to his pre-established strategic bonus objectives, or SBOs.

Calculating the Corporate Financial Performance Factor (80% of target annual incentive opportunity)
Performance Metric Potential
Payment
 Weightingx2015
Performance
=Payment (% of target)
Adjusted Fully Diluted Earnings Per Share(1) 0% - 150% 50% 125% 62.5%
Adjusted Sales Growth/Gross Profit Dollar Growth(2) 0% - 150% 30% 150% 45.0%
Adjusted ROIC(3) 0% - 150% 20% 124% 24.8%
TOTAL 0% - 150% 100%   132.3%
(1)The calculation of adjusted results for this performance metric excluded the following items: severance charges, financing and merger integration costs associated with the proposed US Foods merger, the impact of consolidated joint ventures in the first year of operations, and the impact of changes in foreign exchange rates. The Committee had the discretion to include certain of these excluded items, except where such inclusion would have caused an NEO’s annual incentive payment to become non-deductible for federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code; however, the Committee did not use such discretion.
(2)The calculation of the adjusted results for each of these performance metrics excluded the following items: the impact of consolidated joint ventures in the first year of operations and the impact of changes in foreign exchange rates. The Committee had the discretion to include certain of these excluded items, except where such inclusion would have caused an NEO’s annual incentive payment to become non-deductible for federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code; however, the Committee did not use such discretion.
(3)ROIC is computed by dividing the Company’s adjusted net after-tax earnings for fiscal 2015 by the Company’s adjusted total invested capital for that year. Adjusted total invested capital is computed as the sum of (i) adjusted stockholder’s equity, computed as the average of adjusted stockholders’ equity at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year; and (ii) adjusted long-term debt, computed as the average of the adjusted long-term debt at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year.

The fiscal 2015 program provided for minimum annual incentive payments upon achieving adjusted fully diluted earnings per share of at least $1.78, adjusted sales growth of at least 2% and gross profit dollar growth of at least 2%, and/or adjusted return on invested capital of at least 11.25%. The various levels of financial performance required to reach threshold, target and maximum payments are set forth below:

  2015 MIP Financial Performance Targets - Fiscal 2015 
  Adjusted Sales
Growth
  Gross Profit
Dollar Growth
  Adjusted Fully
Diluted Earnings
Per Share
  Adjusted Return on
Invested Capital
 
Threshold  2.0%  2.0% $1.78   11.25%
Target  3.5%  3.5% $1.84   12.50%
Maximum  5.0%  4.5% $1.88   13.75%

For the fiscal 2012 annual incentive awards made in August 2011, the Committee substantially changed the structure of the MIP, as discussed under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — What We Paid and Why — Annual Incentive Award — Detailed Information — MIP Annual Incentive Award for Fiscal 2012.” With the exception of Mr. DeLaney (and Mr. Fernandez, who does not participate in the MIP), the named executive officers could have earned a fiscal 2012 annual incentive award equal to the sum of the following:

between 25% and 75% of target (50% of the total possible MIP annual incentive award) determined based on the percentage increase in2015 program, actual results included adjusted fully diluted earnings per share for fiscal 2012 as compared to fiscal 2011;

between 15% and 45% of $1.86(exceeded target (30% of the total possible MIP annual incentive award) determined based on the percentage increase inperformance level), adjusted sales for fiscal 2012 as compared to fiscal 2011;growth of 5.2%(exceeded maximum performance level), gross profit dollars growth of 5.2%(exceeded maximum performance level), and

between 10% and 30% of target (20% of the total possible MIP annual incentive award) determined based on the adjusted return on invested capital of 13.1%(exceeded target performance level). Based on these results, which approached or exceeded maximum performance for each metric, we paid a fiscal 2012. Return on invested capital is computed by dividing the company’s adjusted net after-tax earnings for fiscal 2012 by the company’s adjusted total invested capital for that year. Adjusted total invested capital is computed as the sum of:

Adjusted stockholder’s equity, computed as the average2015 MIP annual incentive award of adjusted stockholders’ equity at the beginningapproximately 132.3% of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year; and

Adjusted long-term debt, computed as the average of the adjusted long-term debt at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year.

We refer to this calculation as the Business Performance Factor.

The calculation of the adjusted resultstarget with respect to eachthe portion of the performance measures excluded from eachannual incentive opportunity based on corporate financial performance. SeeAnnex Ifor a reconciliation of these adjusted measures to the following items, the returns from which were generally expected to be outside fiscal 2012: expendituresmost directly comparable GAAP measures. Acquisition expenses, acquisition debt, if any, and any gains or losses relating to Sysco’s Business Transformation Project, the impact of majoror resulting from acquisitions and divestitures (those with a purchase price over $40 million), and any withdrawals by Sysco operating companies from multi-employer pension plans. The Compensation Committee was given the discretion to include certainin excess of these$100 million are excluded items, but only if such inclusion would not cause a named executive officer’s MIP bonus to become non-deductible for federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. When determining the sales growth over the prior year, the Committee excluded sales of $38.7 million resulting from the only acquistion indetermination. During fiscal 20122015, Sysco had no acquisitions with a purchase price of over $40$100 million.

These three performance measures were independent of each other, and one portion of the incentive award could be earned even if the threshold level of one or both of the other measures was not achieved. If the threshold requirements for one or more of the bonus measures were not met, those portions of the incentive award would not be paid.

Fiscal 2015 Summary of Annual Incentive Award Payments
Name Ending Base
Salary
  Target
Annual
Incentive
(% of Base
Salary)
  Financial
Performance
Factor
  Amount
of Award
Funding on
Financial
Performance
Factor
  Individual SBO
Performance
Factor(1)
  Amount
of Award
Funding on
SBO
Factor
  Total
Annual
Incentive
Payment
(% of Base
Salary)
 Total Earned
Award
for FY15
Performance
 
DeLaney $1,225,000   150.0%  132.3% $1,944,810   112.0% $411,600   192.4% $2,356,410 
Kreidler $736,450   100.0%  132.3% $779,459   112.0% $164,965   128.2% $944,423 
Bené(2) $725,000   112.5%  132.3% $863,258   115.0% $187,594   144.9% $1,050,851 
Libby $540,750   100.0%  132.3% $572,330   112.0% $121,128   128.2% $693,458 
Shurts $604,610   100.0%  132.3% $639,919   110.0% $133,014   127.8% $772,933 

Mr. DeLaney’s fiscal 2012 annual incentive award was subject to a maximum amount that was equal to 110% of the award he would have received based solely on the initial Business Performance Factor. Mr. DeLaney’s fiscal 2012 annual incentive award was initially calculated as equal to the maximum amount. The actual Business Performance Factor used to determine Mr. DeLaney’s award was subject to further review by the Compensation Committee, which could have resulted in an adjustment to the Business Performance Factor as described below.

The Committee also reviewed Mr. DeLaney’s performance with respect to the following non-financial performance goals:

Continue to Effectively Carry Out Implementation of Business Transformation Initiative;

Further Improve Customer Retention;

Successfully Execute Board Approved Strategic Acquisitions;

Communicate Broadly the Strategic Direction of the Corporation to All Key Stakeholders; and

Make Continued Strides Toward Implementing an Effective Human Capital Plan.

The Committee had the discretion to adjust Mr. DeLaney’s Award payout based on his performance with respect to these goals. If Mr. DeLaney’s performance with respect to the above non-financial performance goals had met the target levels established by the Committee, Mr. DeLaney’s 2012 Award for FY12 Performance would have equaled 100% of the annual incentive award determined by using the initial, unadjusted Business Performance Factor. If Mr. DeLaney’s performance with respect to the above goals had exceeded the target levels established by the Committee, Mr. DeLaney’s 2012 Award for FY12 Performance would have equaled between 100% and 110% of the annual incentive award determined by using the initial, unadjusted Business Performance Factor. If Mr. DeLaney’s performance was below the target levels of performance established by the Committee, Mr. DeLaney’s 2012 Award for FY12 Performance would have equaled between 80% and 100% of the annual incentive award determined by using the initial, unadjusted Business Performance Factor. In no event could Mr. DeLaney’s fiscal 2012 MIP annual incentive award have exceeded the maximum bonus amount. For the reasons discussed in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis - What We Paid and Why - Annual Incentive Award - Analysis”, the Committee adjusted the Business Performance Factor and awarded Mr. DeLaney a 2012 MIP annual incentive award equal to 96% of the annual incentive award that would have been paid using the initial, unadjusted Business Performance Factor, or 32.2% of target.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    6061


Back to Contents
(1)For each NEO, the fiscal 2015 annual incentive award provided 80% of their target incentive opportunity, based on corporate financial performance, which amounted to a payment of 132.3% of target based on actual financial results. The remaining 20% of the target annual incentive opportunity depended on individual performance with regard to pre-established individual SBOs, which the Committee has the discretion to pay out between 0% - 150% based the assessment of the NEO’s performance. These goals included, but were not limited to, performance against financial strategic goals and the NEO’s personal performance. The Committee believes the use of individual SBOs further promotes the overall executive compensation pay philosophy to link individual pay to performance. For further discussion of the Committee’s evaluation with respect to the individual SBOs of each NEO, please see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—What We Paid and Why—Compensation for NEOs—Annual Incentive Award—Analysis” above.
(2)Mr. Bené’s 2015 annual incentive payment was calculated using different targets for portions of fiscal 2015. For 50% of his 2015 annual incentive payment, covering the period from the beginning of the fiscal year to January 1, 2015, the effective date of his promotion, a target annual incentive percentage of 100% was applied. For the remaining 50% of his annual incentive payment, covering the period from January 1, 2015 to the end of the fiscal year, a target annual incentive percentage of 125% was applied. The target annual incentive percentage reflected in the table represents a blended rate.

In approving the agreements for fiscal 2012, the Committee targeted each named executive officer’s MIP annual incentive award at the following percentages of base salary: 150% for Mr. DeLaney, 125% for Messrs. Green and Pulliam and 100% for Mr. Kreidler. Executive Compensation Clawback Policy.The fiscal 2012 annual incentive2015 awards wereare also subject to clawback provisions that provide that, subject to applicable governing law, all or a portion of the annual incentive award paid pursuant to the 20122015 awards may be recovered by Sysco if there is a restatement of our financial results, other than a restatement due to a change in accounting policy, within 36 months of the payment of the award and the restatement would result in the payment of a reduced award if the award was recalculated using the restated financial results. The Committee has the sole discretion to determine the form and timing of the repayment. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Executive Compensation Governance and Other Information—Executive Compensation Clawback Policy.”

Calculating the Business Performance Factor

Performance Metric(1)

Potential

Payout

Weighting

x

2012

Performance

=

Payout

Adjusted Fully Diluted Earnings Per Share

0% - 150%

50

%

0

%

0.0

%

Sales

0% - 150%

30

%

112

%

33.5

%

ROIC(2)

0% - 150%

20

%

0

%

0.0

%

TOTAL

0% - 150%

100

%

 

 

 

 

33.5

%

(1)

The calculation of the adjusted results with respect to each of the performance metrics excluded from each measure the following items, the financial returns from which we expected to be outside fiscal 2012: expenditures relating to Sysco’s Business Transformation Project, the impact of major acquisitions and divestitures, and withdrawals by Sysco operating companies from multi-employer pension plans. The Compensation Committee had the discretion to include certain of these excluded items, but only if such inclusion would not have caused a named executive officer’s MIP bonus to become non-deductible for federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, but did not choose to do so.

(2)

ROIC is calculated as is computed by dividing the company’s adjusted net after-tax earnings for fiscal 2012 by the company’s adjusted total invested capital for that year. Adjusted total invested capital is computed as the sum of (i) adjusted stockholder’s equity, computed as the average of adjusted stockholders’ equity at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year; and (ii) adjusted long-term debt, computed as the average of the adjusted long-term debt at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year.

Summary of Payments

NEO(1)

Base Salary

x

Target %

x

Business

Performance

Factor

=

Award for FY12

Performance

DeLaney

$

1,150,000

150

%

32.2

%(2)

$

554,760

Kreidler

$

600,000

100

%

33.5

%

$

201,000

Pulliam

$

600,000

125

%

33.5

%

$

251,250

Green

$

650,000

125

%

33.5

%

$

272,188

(1)

The Executive Chairman is not included. See “—Compensation of Executive Chairman.

(2)

The Committee had the discretion to adjust Mr. DeLaney’s Annual Incentive Award pursuant to his strategic business objectives, as described below.

The

Fiscal 2016 Annual Incentive Awards

In August 2015, the Compensation Committee approved the fiscal year 2012 program provided for minimum bonus payouts upon increases in adjusted diluted earnings per share of at least 4%, increases in adjusted sales of at least 4% and an adjusted return on invested capital of at least 17.3%. Because Sysco did not meet the minimum levels of adjusted diluted earnings per share and adjusted return on invested capital, we did not pay a bonus with respect to those performance measures. Based on Sysco’s achieving approximately a 7.7% increase in adjusted sales (which corresponded to a 7.8% GAAP sales increase), we paid a fiscal 2012 MIP2016 annual incentive award of approximately 33.5% of target.

The various levels of performance to reach threshold, target and maximum payouts are described in the table below.

 

MIP Annual Incentive Award Targets - Fiscal 2012

Sales Growth

Adjusted Fully

Diluted Earnings

Per Share Growth

Return on

Invested Capital

Threshold

4.0

%

4.0

%

17.3

%

Target

7.0

%

7.5

%

17.8

%

Maximum

10.0

%

11.0

%

18.3

%

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   61


Back to Contents

Fiscal 2013 MIP Awards

In approving the annual incentive award opportunity for fiscal 2013, the Committee provided for:

Each named executive officer’s MIP bonus to be targeted at the following percentages of base salary: 150% for Mr. DeLaney, 125% for Messrs. Green and Pulliam and 100% for Mr. Kreidler;

Three bonus measures under the 2013 MIP annual incentive award program that are independent of each other, whereby one portion of the award can be earned even if the threshold level of one or both of the other measures is not achieved; and

The same performance measures as were used in fiscal 2012: adjusted sales, adjusted fully diluted earnings per share and adjusted return on invested capital calculated the same way as in 2012, with the same weighting for each performance measure as in fiscal 2012.

To align with the construct of the CEO’s award and performance assessment, the Committee also refined the MIP annual incentive awardopportunities for the eligible NEOs by providing thatunder the Committee may consider pre-established individual strategic business objectives to adjust anySysco Corporation Fiscal 2016 Management Incentive Program For Corporate MIP incentive award based on factors determinedBonus-Eligible Participants, which was adopted by the Committee including but not limited to, performance against financial strategic goals and the NEO’s personal performance. Based on the each NEO’s performance with respectpursuant to the pre-established objectives, the Committee may either increase the NEO’s bonus by up to 10% or decrease the NEO’s bonus by up to 20%, subject to the bonus pool maximum discussed below. The Committee will review each NEO’s performance against such goals2013 Sysco Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan and adjust the Business Performance Factorbonus accordingly. The Committee believes this will further promote the overall executive compensation pay philosophy to link executive pay to performance.which is described in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—What We Paid and Why—Compensation for NEOs—Annual Incentive Award—Detailed Information— Annual Incentive Award Potential for Fiscal 2016.”

Limit on Fiscal 2013 maximum bonus payouts. In August 2012, the2015 and Fiscal 2016 Maximum Annual Incentive Award Payments

The Committee further refined the MIPestablished an annual incentive awardspool limit for each of fiscal 2015 and fiscal 2016 for the NEOs, by establishing a bonus pool for fiscal year 2013 forCFO and certain “covered employees” of Sysco, as defined in Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) to help ensure compliance with the deductibility requirements of Section 162(m) of the Code, as well asCode. Under the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan, the maximum dollar amount that may be paid under all cash-based awards granted to any individual for Mr. Kreidler. The bonus pool was set to be equal to two percent (2%) of Sysco’s net earnings forany a fiscal year 2013 and in no event canunder the sumPlan is 1% of the individual percentagesCompany’s earnings before income taxes as publicly disclosed in the “Consolidated Results of Operations” section of the bonus pool grantedCompany’s annual report to the participants inSecurities and Exchange Commission on Form 10-K for the pool exceed one hundred percent (100%). fiscal year ended immediately before the date the applicable award is paid.

 Percent of 2015 Incentive PoolPercent of 2016 Incentive Pool
Participant’s TitleAllocated to ParticipantAllocated to Participant
CEO40%41%
CFO15%13%
NEO 315%20%
NEO 415%13%
NEO 515%13%

The maximum award for each Participant, expressed as a percentageumbrella structure of the Bonus Pool for the Program Year, is set forth below and in no event can it exceed the individual award maximum set forth in the plan document:

Participant’s Title

Percent of Bonus Pool

Allocated to Participant

CEO

40

%

CFO

15

%

NEO 3

15

%

NEO 4

15

%

NEO 5

15

%

The bonusincentive pool limit serves only to provide a ceiling on the maximum bonusannual incentive amount that any NEO may receive, and the actual bonusincentive amount paid to each NEO will be determined pursuant to the fiscal 2013applicable incentive award opportunityprogram described above.

Cash Performance Units

Fiscal 2015 CPU Awards

The Company’s cash performance units, which we refer to as “CPUs,” provide certain key employees, including the NEOs, the opportunity to earn cash incentive payments based on pre-established performance criteria over performance periods of at least three years. The Committee currently makes grants annually for three year performance periods, including the year of grant. CPUs awarded prior to fiscal year 2016 were issued pursuant to the 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan, as amended, which expired on November 30, 2014. Future grants of CPUs may be made pursuant to the Sysco 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    62


Back to Contents

Under these plans, the Committee may select performance goals from those specified in the applicable plan, based on the performance of Sysco generally or on the performance of subsidiaries or divisions. The Committee establishes the performance goals for the CPU awards during the first ninety days of the performance period, and communicates individual awards after its meeting the following November.

With respect to Contentsthe grants in fiscal 2013, 2014 and 2015, the Committee set the performance criteria based on Sysco’s relative total shareholder return, as described below. As of September 21, 2015, the named executive officers listed below held cash performance unit grants in the amounts and for the performance periods set forth below:

Arrangements

            Payout Amount ($) 
   Fiscal Year in  Target Value Number of Performance        
Name  Which Granted  Per CPU CPUs Held Period Minimum  Target Maximum 
DeLaney   2015  $1  2,786,875  6/28/14-7/1/17 $1,393,438  $2,786,875 $4,180,313 
    2014   1  2,516,850  7/1/13-6/30/16  1,258,425   2,516,850  3,775,275 
Kreidler   2015   1  902,151  6/28/14-7/1/17  451,076   902,151  1,353,227 
    2014   1  875,875  7/1/13-6/30/16  437,938   875,875  1,313,813 
Bené   2015   1  732,266  6/28/14-7/1/17  366,133   732,266  1,098,398 
    2014   1  710,938  7/1/13-6/30/16  355,469   710,938  1,066,406 
Libby   2015   1  567,788  6/28/14-7/1/17  283,894   567,788  851,681 
    2014   1  283,333  7/1/13-6/30/16  141,667   283,333  425,000 
Shurts   2015   1  687,744  6/28/14-7/1/17  343,872   687,744  1,031,616 
    2014   1  667,713  7/1/13-6/30/16  333,856   667,713  1,001,569 

Following the conclusion of each three-year performance period, if we meet the relevant performance criteria, we will pay each named executive an amount obtained by multiplying the number of performance units that the executive received by the value assigned to each unit and then multiplying the resulting product by a specified percentage. Each CPU is assigned a value of $1.00 per unit. We make all payments due with respect to the Executive ChairmanCPUs in cash. No payments made under the 2008 Cash Performance Unit Plan to any named executive officer in any fiscal year may be higher than 1% of Sysco’s earnings before income taxes, as publicly disclosed in the “Consolidated Results of Operations” section of Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended immediately before the applicable payment date.

With respect to the CPU grants that we made in fiscal year 2013, which were scheduled to pay out in August 2015, the Committee established performance criteria based on Sysco’s total shareholder return over the three-year performance period including fiscal years 2013, 2014 and 2015, relative to that of the S&P 500. Based upon Sysco’s total shareholder return for that period relative to the other S&P 500 companies, CPUs are expected to pay at a rate from 50% to 150% of the aggregate value of the CPUs, which are valued at $1 per unit. In order to compute total shareholder return, the following sum is first calculated:

the closing price of a share of Sysco’s common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, on the day immediately preceding the last day of the three fiscal-performance period, plus,
the per share cash dividends paid on company common stock during the three-year performance period, minus,
the closing price of a share of Sysco’s common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, on the day immediately preceding the first day of the three-year performance period.

Total shareholder return is then computed as that sum divided by the closing price of a share of Sysco’s common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, on the day immediately preceding the first day of the three-year performance period. The threshold payment level requires Sysco’s total shareholder return for the three-year performance period to equal or exceed that of the 30thpercentile of the S&P 500, the target payment level requires company performance to equal the 45thpercentile, and the maximum payment level is expected to be reached at the 75thpercentile, with graduated bonus levels in between the threshold and maximum levels. These grants are subject to Sysco’s clawback policies.

Based on Sysco’s shareholder return during the three-year performance period ending June 27, 2015, which was in the 28thpercentile relative to the S&P 500, the threshold performance was not achieved and the named executive officers did not receive a payment with respect to the CPUs issued in fiscal year 2013.

CPU Benefits upon Termination of Employment or Change in Control

If the executive’s employment terminates during a performance period because the executive leaves our employment due to disability, the executive will nonetheless receive the specified payment on the applicable payment date, as if he remained employed on that date, which payment is determined using Sysco’s performance for the entire three-year performance period.

If the executive’s employment terminates during a performance period because the executive experiences a retirement in good standing or due to the executive’s death, the executive will receive the specified payment on the applicable payment date, as if he remained employed on that date, reduced on a pro-rata basis based on the number of fiscal years during which the executive was actively employed, at any time, during the applicable three-year performance period. The executive will get credit for any fiscal year in the applicable performance period if the executive was actively employed by Sysco at any time during that fiscal year, and the payment will be determined using Sysco’s performance for the entire three-year performance period.

If the executive’s employment terminates before the end of the performance period for any reason other than retirement in good standing, death or disability, we will cancel the executive’s CPUs, and the executive will not receive any payments with respect to such cancelled CPUs.

If a change in control occurs during a performance period, we will pay the executive the target amount payable for the executive’s CPUs for that performance period, as if the target performance levels had been achieved. In such instances, the CPUs awarded with respect to the performance period will be considered vested and payment will be made to the executive within 90 days after the date of the change in control.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement63

Back to Contents

Fiscal 2016 CPU Awards

In April 2012, Mr. FernandezNovember 2015, the Committee expects to approve awards of CPUs to eligible named executives under Sysco’s Fiscal Year 2016 Cash Performance Unit Program, which was elected asadopted by the Executive Chairman of Sysco’s Board of Directors. In conjunction with his election to this position, Sysco agreed to pay Mr. Fernandez an annual base salary of $900,000 per year. He also received an equity grant of stock options to purchase 625,000 shares of Sysco common stock at a price of $29.44 and an equity grant of 84,918 restricted stock units. Both equity grants were madeCommittee in August 2015 pursuant to the Sysco’s stockholder-approved equity incentive plans2013 Sysco Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan. For purposes of these CPUs, the Committee has adopted modified financial performance metrics, as described in “Compensation Discussion and are described further above in the footnotesAnalysis—Executive Summary—Changes to the SummaryExecutive Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table. Sysco also agreed to reimburse Mr. Fernandez for travel expenses, including the necessary housing, transportation and other expenses to support his travel and stays in Houston in accordance with the performance of his job duties.Program—Fiscal 2016 Changes.”

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

While the 2007 Stock2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan and its predecessor, the 20042007 Stock OptionIncentive Plan, allow for options to vest and become exercisable in no more than one-third increments each year, option grants under the plans to the named executive officers other than Mr. FernandezNEOs have generally vested and become exercisable in five equal annual installments beginning one year after the grant date to create a long-term incentive for the executives. The Committee will at times, however, grant options that vest one-third per year beginning on the first anniversary of grant, as it did with the April 2012 grant to Mr. Fernandez upon his election to Executive Chairman.date of grant. The restricted stock units that have been granted pursuant to the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan and the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan generally vest one-third per year over three years. The 2007 Stock2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan allows the Committee the discretion to grant stock options, restricted stock, and restricted stock units, as well as other stock-based awards. See “Director Compensation – 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan” for a description the terms of the outstanding equity awards received by Mr. Fernandez prior to his election as Executive Chairman in April 2012.

According to the terms of the 2004 and 2007 Plans and the 2009 Non-Employee Director Stock Plan,our stock plans, the exercise price of options may not be less than the fair market valueFair Market Value on the date of the grant, which is defined in our plans2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan as the closing sale price during regular trading hours of the stock on the immediately preceding date on the principal securities market in which shares of stock is then traded, or, if there were no trades on that date, the closing sale price during regular trading hours of the stock on the first trading day prior to that date, and which is defined in our 2007 Stock Incentive Plan as the closing price of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on the last business day precedingbefore the grant date. Our stock plans specifically prohibit repricing of outstanding grants without stockholder approval. The Committee now grants all of our stock options and restricted stock units pursuant to our equity grant guidelines. Pursuant to our equity grant guidelines in effect prior to August 2011, the Committee generally made option and restricted stock unit grants on the second Tuesday in November each year, a date when we were typically in a trading “window” under our Policy on Trading in Company Securities. In August 2011, the Committee revised our equity grant guidelines to provide that grants may be made during any open trading windows pursuant to our Policy on Trading in Company Securities, subject to certain conditions and qualifications. The guidelines provide that the Committee should generally make equity grants at a point in time when we have publicly disseminated all material information likely to affect the trading price of Sysco’s common stock. Under the guidelines, the Committee will generally not make grants during a period preceding an anticipated event that is likely to cause a substantial increase or a substantial decrease in the trading price of Sysco’s common stock, such as an earnings release. If we have grants scheduled to occur when Sysco is in possession of material non-public information, then:

management must inform the Committee or the Board of Directors, as the case may be, of all material information in its possession regarding Sysco; and
if, in the Committee’s or Board’s judgment, such information is reasonably likely to affect the trading price of Sysco’s common stock, then due consideration should be given to the number and exercise price of options and the number of any equity grants that may be granted in light of such material non-public information.

management must inform the Committee or the Board of Directors, as the case may be, of all material information in its possession regarding Sysco; andSYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement64

if, in the Committee’s or Board’s judgment, such information is reasonably likely to affect the trading price of Sysco’s common stock, then due consideration should be given to the number and exercise price of options and the number of any equity grants that may be granted in light of such material non-public information.

Back to Contents

The following table provides information on each named executive officer’s stock option restricted stock and restricted stock unit grants outstanding as of June 30, 2012.27, 2015.

  Option Awards Stock Awards
    Number of Number of          
    Securities Securities      Number of   
    Underlying Underlying      Shares or  Market Value of
    Unexercised Unexercised Option    Units of Stock  Shares or Units
    Options Options Exercise Option  That Have  of Stock That
    Exercisable Unexercisable Price Expiration  Not Vested  Have Not Vested
Name Date Granted (#) (#) ($) Date  (#)  ($)(1)
DeLaney November 2014      51,889(2)  1,990,981
  November 2014  574,910(3) 38.89 11/18/2024    
  November 2013      36,128(4)  1,386,231
  November 2013 122,140 488,561(5) 33.40 11/14/2023    
  February 2013      10,298(6)  395,134
  November 2012      38,313(7)  1,470,070
  November 2012      19,180(8)  735,937
  November 2012 300,000 450,000(9) 29.96 11/13/2019    
  November 2011 300,000 300,000(10) 27.65 11/14/2018    
  November 2010 200,000 100,000(11) 28.87 11/10/2017    
  November 2009 140,800  27.44 11/9/2016    
  February 2009 64,400  23.36 2/10/2016    
  November 2008 25,001  24.99 11/10/2015    
Kreidler November 2014      16,797(2)  644,501
  November 2014  186,106(3) 38.89 11/18/2024    
  November 2013      12,572(4)  482,388
  November 2013 42,505 170,022(5) 33.40 11/14/2023    
  November 2012      24,622(7)  944,746
  November 2012      6,665(8)  255,736
  November 2012 122,500 183,750(9) 29.96 11/13/2019    
  November 2011 157,500 105,000(10) 27.65 11/14/2018    
  November 2010 126,000 31,500(11) 28.87 11/10/2017    
  November 2009 72,000  27.44 11/9/2016    
  October 2009 42,303  24.38 10/5/2016    
Bené November 2014      13,634(2)  523,137
  November 2014  151,060(3) 38.89 11/18/2024    
  November 2013      10,205(4)  391,566
  November 2013 34,501 138,004(5) 33.40 11/14/2023    
  May 2013      9,488(12)  364,055
Libby November 2014      10,572(2)  405,648
  November 2014  117,130(3) 38.89 11/18/2024    
  November 2013      5,694(4)  218,479
  November 2013 12,031 48,125(5) 33.40 11/14/2023    
  November 2012      18,570(7)  712,531
  November 2012      2,901(8)  111,311
  November 2012 26,666 40,001(9) 29.96 11/13/2019    
  November 2011 25,000 25,000(10) 27.65 11/14/2018    
  November 2010 4,200 2,100(11) 28.87 11/10/2017    
  November 2009 4,000  27.44 11/9/2016    
Shurts November 2014      12,805(2)  491,328
  November 2014  141,876(3) 38.89 11/18/2024    
  November 2013      9,584(4)  367,738
  November 2013 32,403 129,614(5) 33.40 11/14/2023    
  November 2012      5,441(7)  208,771
  November 2012      5,084(8)  195,073
  November 2012 93,437 140,157(9) 29.96 11/13/2019    

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    6365


Back to Contents

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

Name

Option Awards

 

Stock Awards

Date Granted

Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Exercisable
(#)

Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Unexercisable

(#)

 

Option
Exercise
Price($)

Option
Expiration
Date

Number of
Shares or
Units of Stock
That Have Not
Vested (#)

 

Market Value of
Shares or Units
of Stock That
Have Not Vested
($)(1)

DeLaney

November 2011

 

62,185

(11)

$

1,853,735

November 2011

862,500

(12)

$

27.65

11/14/2018

 

November 2010

 

28,867

(2)

860,515

November 2010

100,000

400,000

(3)

28.87

11/10/2017

 

November 2009

 

10,700

(4)

318,967

November 2009

140,800

211,200

(5)

27.44

11/9/2016

 

February 2009

193,200

128,800

(6)

23.36

2/10/2016

 

November 2008

75,000

50,000

(7)

24.99

11/10/2015

 

November 2007

58,400

14,600

(8)

33.39

11/12/2014

 

September 2006

14,500

31.70

9/6/2013

 

September 2005

12,600

33.01

9/7/2012

 

September 2003

12,500

31.75

9/10/2013

 

September 2002

30,000

30.57

9/11/2012

 

Kreidler

November 2011

 

 

 

18,926

(11)

 

564,184

November 2011

262,500

(12)

27.65

11/14/2018

 

November 2010

 

9,133

(2)

272,255

November 2010

31,500

126,000

(3)

28.87

11/10/2017

 

November 2009

 

3,668

(4)

109,343

November 2009

48,000

72,000

(5)

27.44

11/9/2016

 

October 2009

 

1,666

(9)

49,663

October 2009

30,000

45,000

(10)

24.38

10/5/2016

 

Fernandez

April 2012

 

84,918

(13)

2,531,405

April 2012

625,000

625,000

(14)

29.44

4/12/2019

 

November 2011

 

5,787

(15)

172,510

November 2009

 

1,943

(16)

57,921

November 2006

3,500

34.99

11/9/2013

 

Green

November 2011

 

19,038

(11)

567,523

November 2011

264,063

(12)

27.65

11/14/2018

 

November 2010

 

9,533

(2)

284,179

November 2010

33,000

132,000

(3)

28.87

11/10/2017

 

November 2009

 

4,068

(4)

121,267

November 2009

53,400

80,100

(5)

27.44

11/9/2016

 

November 2008

60,000

40,000

(7)

24.99

11/10/2015

 

November 2007

31,200

7,800

(8)

33.39

11/12/2014

 

September 2006

39,000

31.70

9/6/2013

 

September 2005

39,000

33.01

9/7/2012

 

September 2003

20,000

31.75

9/10/2013

 

September 2002

22,000

30.57

9/11/2012

 

Pulliam

November 2011

 

17,574

(11)

523,881

November 2011

243,750

(12)

27.65

11/14/2018

 

November 2010

 

9,533

(2)

284,189

November 2010

33,000

132,000

(3)

28.87

11/10/2017

 

November 2009

 

4,368

(4)

130,210

November 2009

57,400

86,100

(5)

27.44

11/9/2016

 

November 2008

60,000

40,000

(7)

24.99

11/10/2015

 

November 2007

58,400

14,600

(8)

33.39

11/12/2014

 

September 2006

73,000

31.70

9/6/2013

 

September 2005

73,000

33.01

9/7/2012

 

September 2003

45,000

31.75

9/10/2013

 

September 2002

50,000

30.57

9/11/2012

 

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   64


Back to Contents

Back to Contents
(1)

The aggregate dollar value is calculated using the closing price of our common stock on June 29, 201226, 2015, of $29.81.

$38.37.

(2)

These restricted stock units vest in equal portions on November 1118 of 20122015, 2016 and 20132017, and may be settled solely by delivery of an equal number of shares of Sysco common stock. Vesting is contingent upon executive’s continued service with the company, except that the units will remain in effect and continue to vest according to the vesting schedule upon executive’s termination of employment due to retirement in good standing or disability. Additionally, the units will vest immediately upon executive’s death or a change in control of the company.

(3)

These options vest in equal portions on November 1118 of 2012, 2013, 20142015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2015.

2019.

(4)

These restricted stock units vest in equal portions on November 15 of 2015 and 2016, and may be settled solely by delivery of an equal number of shares of Sysco common stock. Vesting is contingent upon executive’s continued service with the company, except that the units will remain in effect and continue to vest according to the vesting schedule upon executive’s termination of employment due to retirement in good standing or disability. Additionally, the units will vest immediately upon executive’s death or termination by the Company of executive’s employment within 12 months before, or 24 months following, a change in control of the Company.
(5)These options vest in equal portions on November 15 of 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018.
(6)These restricted stock units vest on November 10, 2012February 12, 2016 and may be settled solely by delivery of an equal number of shares of Sysco common stock. Vesting is contingent upon executive’s continued service with the company, except that the units will remain in effect and continue to vest according to the vesting schedule upon executive’s termination of employment due to retirement in good standing or disability. Additionally, the units will vest immediately upon executive’s death or a change in control of the company.

(5)

These options vest in equal portions on November 10 of 2012, 2013 and 2014.

(6)

These options vest in equal portions on February 11 of 2013 and 2014.

(7)

These options vest in equal portions on November 11 of 2012 and 2013.

(8)

These options vest on November 13, 2012.

(9)

These restricted stock units vest on October 5, 2012 and may be settled solely by delivery of an equal number of shares of Sysco common stock. Vesting is contingent upon Mr. Kreidler’s continued service with the company, except that the units will vest immediately upon Mr. Kreidler’s retirement in good standing, death, disability, or a change in control of the company.

(10)

These options vest in equal portions on October 5 of 2012, 2013 and 2014.

(11)

These restricted stock units vest in equal portions on November 1514 of 2012, 20132015, 2016 and 20142017 and may be settled solely by delivery of an equal number of shares of Sysco common stock. Vesting is contingent upon executive’s continued service with the company, except that the units will remain in effect and continue to vest according to the vesting schedule upon executive’s termination of employment due to retirement in good standing or disability. Additionally, the units will vest immediately upon executive’s death or a change in control of the company.

(12)

These options vest in equal portions on November 15 of 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016.

(13)

(8)These restricted stock units vest in equal portions on AprilNovember 13, of 2013, 2014 and 2015, and may be settled solely by delivery of an equal number of shares of Sysco common stock. Vesting is contingent upon executive’s continued service with the company, except that the units will remain in effect and continue to vest according to the vesting schedule upon executive’s termination of employment due to retirement in good standing or disability. Additionally, the units will vest immediately upon executive’s death or a change in control of the company. Although they will vest as described above, the executive has elected that a portion of these units (5,435) will not be distributed until cessation of the executive’s board service.

(14)

(9)These options vest in equal portions on AprilNovember 13 of 2013, 20142015, 2016 and 2017.
(10)These options vest in equal portions on November 15 of 2015 and 2016.
(11)These options vest on November 11, 2015.

(15)

(12)These restricted stock units vest on November 15, 2012May 16, 2016, and may be settled solely by delivery of an equal number of shares of Sysco common stock. Generally, ifVesting is contingent upon executive’s continued service with the director ceases to serve as a director of Sysco, he or she will forfeit allcompany, except that the unvested restricted stock and restricted stock units that he or she holds. However, if the director leaves the board after serving out his or her term, or for any reason after reaching age 71, his or her restricted stock and restricted stock units will remain in effect and continue to vest as ifaccording to the director had remained a directorvesting schedule upon executive’s termination of Sysco.employment due to retirement in good standing or disability. Additionally, the restricted stock units will vest immediately upon the director’sexecutive’s death or a change in control of the company. Although they will vest as described above, the director has elected that a portion of these units (2,893.50) will not be distributed until cessation of the director’s board service.

(16)

These restricted stock units vest on November 10, 2012 and may be settled solely by delivery of an equal number of shares of Sysco common stock. Generally, if the director ceases to serve as a director of Sysco, he or she will forfeit all the unvested restricted stock and restricted stock units that he or she holds. However, if the director leaves the board after serving out his or her term, or for any reason after reaching age 71, his or her restricted stock and restricted stock units will remain in effect and continue to vest as if the director had remained a director of Sysco. Additionally, the restricted stock units will vest immediately upon the director’s death or a change in control of the company.

Awards pursuant to the 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan and 2007 Stock Incentive Plan and the 2004 Stock Option Plan

All of the option awards listed above provide that, if the executive’s employment terminates as a result of retirement in good standing or disability, the option will remain in effect, vest and be exercisable in accordance with its terms as if the executive remained an employee of Sysco. All unvested options will vest immediately upon the executive’s death. Furthermore, the options provide that the executive’s estate or designees may exercise the options at any time within three years after his death, for grants made in 2005 and later and within one year after his death for grants made prior to 2005, but in no event later than the original termination date.

All of the options listed above granted prior to November 2013 provide for the vesting of unvested options upon a change in control. In addition, grants made in 2005 and laterprior to November 2013 provide that, if the named executive’s employment is terminated other than for cause during the 24 month period following a change in control, the outstanding options under the plans will be exercisable to the extent the options were exercisable as of the date of termination for 24 months after employment termination or until the expiration of the stated term of the option, whichever period is shorter.

Awards pursuant to

The options granted in November 2013 provide that, if the 2009 Non-Employee Director Stock PlanCompany terminates the executive’s employment within 12 months before, or 24 months following, a change in control of the Company, then the option will remain in effect, vest and be exercisable in accordance with its terms as if the executive had remained an employee of Sysco.

As noted above, the equity awards granted to Mr. Fernandez prior to April 2012 were made to him in his capacity as a non-employee director of Sysco pursuant to the 2009 Non-Employee Director Stock Plan. See “Director Compensation – 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan” for a description the terms of these outstanding equity awards.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   65


Back to Contents

Option Exercises and Stock Vested

The following table provides information with respect to aggregate option exercises and the vesting of stock awards during the last fiscal year for each of the NEOs.

  Option Awards  Stock Awards 
  Number          
  of Shares Acquired  Value Realized  Number of Shares  Value Realized on 
  on Exercise  on Exercise  Acquired on Vesting  Vesting 
Name (#)  ($)  (#)  ($)(1) 
DeLaney    $   81,040  $3,138,972 
Kreidler        27,467   1,063,389 
Bené        14,591   550,492 
Libby  21,603   108,080   14,943   578,536 
Shurts        15,318   594,757 
(1)We computed the value realized upon vesting by multiplying the number of shares of stock that vested by the closing price of Sysco’s common stock on the last business day before the purchase date.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement66

Back to Contents

Fiscal 2015 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

The following table provides information regarding executive contributions and related company matches, earnings and account balances under the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (“EDCP”) and the Management Savings Plan (“MSP”) for each of the NEOs during fiscal 2015. No executive officer made any withdrawals or received any distributions under these plans with respect to fiscal 2015.

    Executive  Registrant  Aggregate  Aggregate 
    Contributions  Contributions  Earnings in  Balance at 
  Applicable for Fiscal 2015  for Fiscal 2015  Fiscal 2015  June 27, 2015 
Name Plan ($)(1)  ($)(2)  ($)(3)  ($)(4) 
DeLaney MSP $93,336  $136,446  $12,780  $468,381 
  EDCP        74,895   1,405,514 
Kreidler MSP  26,167   138,180   7,119   301,549 
  EDCP        6,857   154,995 
Bené MSP  451,505   32,999   17,096   758,967 
  EDCP            
Libby MSP  29,092   95,434   7,911   244,415 
  EDCP            
Shurts MSP  88,136   30,491   6,631   203,786 
  EDCP            
(1)For the MSP, the amount shown for each of Messrs. DeLaney, Bené, Libby and Shurts represents the deferral of a portion of the salary paid to the NEO for fiscal 2015. This amount is included in the Summary Compensation Table under the “Salary” column for 2015.
(2)As discussed below, the MSP allows participants to defer a portion of their salary and annual incentive award and provides for Company contributions to participants’ accounts, including matching, non-elective and transitional contributions. The amount shown is composed of the following Company contributions for each current NEO:

  Non-elective  Match  Pension Transition  SERP Transition 
DeLaney $48,158  $40,131  $48,157  $ 
Kreidler  21,714   18,083      98,382 
Bené  17,999   15,000       
Libby  13,439   11,199      70,796 
Shurts  16,631   13,860       
(3)The above-market interest portion of these amounts is included in the fiscal 2015 disclosure under the “Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings” column and footnote 6 of the Summary Compensation Table, in the following amounts: $23,835 for EDCP and $2,204 for MSP for Mr. DeLaney, $1,172 for EDCP and $1,216 for MSP for Mr. Kreidler, $1,883 for MSP for Mr. Bené, and $269 for MSP for Mr. Shurts.
(4)Portion of the amounts disclosed in this column for Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Bené and Shurts have previously been reported in Summary Compensation Tables for previous years, including the following amounts: for Mr. DeLaney: $25,833 for fiscal 2014 and $30,850 for fiscal 2013; for Mr. Kreidler: $1,661 for fiscal 2014 and $2,136 for fiscal 2013; for Mr. Bené: $353 for fiscal 2014; and for Mr. Shurts: $76 for fiscal 2014 and $12 for fiscal 2013.

About the MSP — In order to provide certain highly compensated employees of the Company with the continued opportunity to build retirement savings on a tax-deferred basis through deferrals and Company contributions, Sysco adopted the MSP, effective November 14, 2012. The MSP is a competitive plan for nonqualified executive retirement benefits and is designed to supplement our 401(k) plan. It allows participants, including the current NEOs, to defer a portion of their salary compensation and up to 100% of their annual incentive award. The MSP also provides for Company contributions to participants’ accounts, including non-elective and matching contributions, as well as transition contributions, which are designed to compensate participants for a portion of the value lost as a result of the freezing of Sysco’s then-current plans. The MSP allows for deferrals and contributions that would not be permitted under the Company’s 401(k) plan due to IRS limits. The following discussion summarizes the material terms of the MSP that are applicable to the named executive officers.officers who participate in it. The definition of bonus for purposes of the MSP includes amounts that are paid as a bonus or annual incentive award under the 2009 Plan or as a substitute for or in lieu of such bonus or annual incentive award.

Name

Option Awards

 

Stock Awards

Number

of Shares

Acquired on

Exercise (#)

Value Realized

on Exercise ($)

Number

of Shares

Acquired on

Vesting (#)

Value Realized

on Vesting ($)(1)

DeLaney

0

$

-

 

25,133

$

692,391

Kreidler

0

-

 

9,900

269,326

Fernandez

0

-

 

7,487

206,319

Green

0

-

 

8,833

243,323

Pulliam

0

-

 

9,133

251,569

(1)

We computed the value realized upon vesting by multiplying the number of shares of stock that vested by the closing price of Sysco’s common stock on the first business day preceding the vesting date.

Executive Deferrals and Company Contributions— Participants may initially elect to defer up to fifty percent (50%) of their annual salary and/ or all or a portion of their bonus under the MSP. A deferral election, once made, is irrevocable for the applicable calendar year (for salary deferrals) or fiscal year (for bonus deferrals). Bonus deferral elections are contingent upon the participant’s award qualifying as “performance based compensation” under Section 409A of the Code. The Committee retains the discretion to alter the minimum and maximum percentages of awards that may be deferred, but such discretion must be exercised prior to the beginning of the applicable fiscal year for which such award may be earned. Salary deferrals were effective for calendar year 2013, with performance based annual incentive award deferrals effective beginning in fiscal 2014.

Sysco will make a matching contribution (determined based on compensation not taken into account under the Company’s 401(k) plan), to the account of participants who elect to defer a portion of their compensation under the MSP (the “Company Match”). The Company Match will be made on a calendar year basis. The Company Match, determined on a combined plan basis for the MSP and 401(k) plan, will be a maximum of fifty percent (50%) of the first five percent (5%) of a participant’s annual base salary and bonus deferred by the participant.

In addition to the Company Match described above, Sysco will credit an automatic Company contribution equal to three percent (3%) of the participant’s gross base salary and bonus, less the amount of a similar Company contribution into the participant’s 401(k) account, to the participant’s account in the MSP (the “Non-elective Contribution”). The Company will credit this contribution regardless of whether the participant defers any amounts under the MSP or 401(k).

In addition to the contributions described above, for a period of ten years through 2023, or until a participant ceases employment with Sysco, whichever is earlier, Sysco will credit an automatic Company contribution of three percent (3%) of the participant’s gross base salary and bonus,

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement67

Back to Contents

less the amount of a similar Company contribution into the participant’s 401(k) account, to the MSP account of eligible participants (the “Pension Transition Contribution”). To be eligible to receive the Pension Transition Contribution, a participant must have been accruing benefits under Sysco’s pension plan as of December 31, 2012 and be at least age fifty (50) with fifteen (15) or more years of Sysco service as of that date. The Company will credit this contribution regardless of whether the participant defers any amounts under the MSP or 401(k) so long as he remains employed by Sysco or leaves for retirement, death or disability in such calendar year. Mr. DeLaney is eligible to receive these contributions.

In addition to the contributions described above, Mr. Libby’s MSP account will be credited annually with an automatic fully vested Company contribution of ten percent (10%) of his base salary and bonus for a period of ten years through 2023 (each contribution referred to as a “SERP Transition Contribution”) so long as the executive remains employed by Sysco or leaves for retirement, death or disability in such calendar year.

Investment Options — The portion of a participant’s account attributable to salary and bonus deferrals will be deemed invested and reinvested in certain investments, as designated by the participant from a list of available investment options. The investment options include a variety of generally available investment funds. The portion of a participant’s account attributable to Sysco company contributions will be deemed invested as directed by the participant.

Vesting of Deferrals and Company Contributions— Participant deferrals, including associated investment earnings and losses, will be fully vested at all times. The Company Match, as adjusted for associated investment earnings and losses, will vest based upon a participant’s number of years of service. As of June 27, 2015, Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler and Libby were fully vested, and Messrs. Bené and Shurts were each 25% vested, with the remainder to vest through the fifth anniversary of service. In addition, each of Messrs. Bené and Shurts will become fully vested in the event of his death or disability or a defined change of control of Sysco. The Non-elective contribution, the Pension Transition Contribution, and the SERP Transition Contribution, as such amounts are adjusted for associated investment earnings and losses, will be fully vested at all times.

Timing and Form of Distributions — Other than elected in-service distributions or deferrals, the participant’s vested account may generally only be distributed at the earliest to occur of the following: (i) the participant’s death; (ii) the participant’s disability; (iii) the participant’s retirement; or (iv) the participant’s termination (for a reason other than death, disability or retirement). Except with respect to in-service distributions or distributions following a participant’s termination (for a reason other than death, disability or retirement), the participant may elect to have his account distributed in (i) a lump sum; (ii) annual installments over a period of up to 20 years; or (iii) a combination of a lump sum and installments. In-service distributions and distributions following a participant’s termination will be distributed in a lump sum.

Delay of Distributions to NEOs — Distributions to a specified employee, including a named executive, upon the specified employee’s or named executive officer’s “separation from service” as defined under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, will be delayed for a period of six months to the extent that making payments during such six-month period would violate Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

Forfeiture — The MSP contains a forfeiture provision whereby participants will forfeit the balance of their accounts attributable to Company contributions, adjusted for deemed investment losses and earnings, and even if such amounts may have previously vested, in the event the Committee finds that the participant engaged in fraudulent or certain other illegal acts while employed by the Company, or impermissibly competes with the Company after termination. Participants also have an obligation to repay any amounts previously distributed to them under the MSP attributable to Company contributions if the Committee finds they engaged in such acts.

About the EDCP— Sysco maintained the EDCP to provide certain executives the opportunity to defer the receipt of a portion of their annual salaries, bonuses and deemed earnings thereon on a tax-deferred basis. Federal income taxes on all amounts credited under the EDCP will be deferred until payout under current tax law. The EDCP is administered by the Compensation Committee.

Eligibility — All Sysco executives who are participants in the MIP, excluding those whose income is subject to Canadian income tax laws, were eligible to participate.

Executive Deferrals and Sysco Matching Credit — Executives were permitted to defer up to 40% of their bonuses under the MIP and up to 100% of salary. In September 2009, the EDCP was amended to clarify that any bonus paid in lieu of or as a substitute for the MIP bonus in the future was eligible for deferral under the EDCP. Sysco did not match salary deferrals under the EDCP. Sysco provided matching credit of 15% of the first 20% of bonus deferred, resulting in a maximum possible match credit of 3% of an executive’s bonus. The Committee was permitted to authorize additional discretionary company contributions, although it did not authorize any from fiscal year 2008 through the date on which the EDCP was frozen.

Investment Options — An executive may invest the deferral portion of his or her account among nine investment options, which may be changed as often as daily. Participants are also permitted to direct the investment of company matches under the EDCP.

Vesting — An executive is always 100% vested in his or her deferrals and each Sysco match, but any portion of an executive’s account attributable to Sysco matches, including associated deemed investment return, and the net investment gain, if any, credited on his or her deferrals, is subject to forfeiture for specified cause or competing against Sysco in certain instances.

In-Service Distribution Elections and Hardship Withdrawals — Unless an executive has previously made an in-service distribution election, an executive will generally not have access to amounts deferred under the EDCP while employed by Sysco unless he or she requests and qualifies for a hardship withdrawal. Such withdrawals are available under very limited circumstances in connection with an unforeseeable emergency.

Distribution Events — We will distribute the vested portion of the amount credited to an executive’s EDCP account upon the earlier to occur of the executive’s death, disability, retirement or other separation event.

Distributions — Effective January 1, 2009, a participant who terminates employment, other than due to death, disability or a qualifying retirement, will receive a lump sum. A participant may elect the form of distribution of his account in the event of death or disability, or if the participant terminates employment after the earlier of age 60, or age 55 with 10 years of service with the company.

An executive who has the right to elect the form of payment of his vested account balance may choose annual or quarterly installments over a specified period of up to 20 years, a lump sum or a combination of both. An executive may change his distribution elections prior to separation, subject to limitations in the EDCP required by Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

When we pay installments under the EDCP, we will credit the executive’s unpaid vested account balance with a fixed investment return during the entire payout period. This fixed return will equal the Moody’s Average Corporate Bond Yield for either the six- or twelve-month period ending two months prior to the month of the first installment payment, whichever is higher.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement68

Back to Contents

As with the SERP amendments described above, the November 2012 amendments to the EDCP did not alter the benefit commencement schedule for any EDCP participant.

Delay of Distributions to NEOs — Distributions to a specified employee, including a named executive, upon the specified employee or named executive officer’s “separation from service” as defined under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code will be delayed for a period of six months to the extent that making payments during such six-month period would violate Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

Forfeiture for Cause or Competition — Any portion of an executive’s account attributable to Sysco matches, including associated deemed investment return, and the net investment gain, if any, credited on his deferrals, is subject to forfeiture for specified cause or competition. No such forfeiture can occur, however, for a participant who is discharged (i) during a plan year in which a change in control occurs or (2) during the three plan years thereafter.

Limits on Excess Parachute Payments — The EDCP contains cutback provisions that will reduce amounts payable to each named executive officer by the amount of any payments that cannot be deducted by Sysco under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code.

Pension Benefits

Sysco maintains two defined benefit pension plans. One is the Sysco Corporation Retirement Plan, or pension plan, which is intended to be a tax-qualified plan under the Internal Revenue Code. The second is the Sysco Corporation Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, or SERP, which is not a tax-qualified plan. The pension plan will ceaseceased all non-union participant accruals effective December 31, 2012. In November 2012, the SERP was further amended to freeze benefits and non-union employeesstop future accruals, effective June 29, 2013. Participants covered by the SERP as of June 29, 2013 were granted accelerated vesting. For those who retire and are not eligible for immediate commencement of their SERP benefit, they will no longer earn additionalbe deemed 100% vested, with benefits payable upon reaching age 65.

For those who are eligible for a SERP benefit at the time of retirement, benefits underan early retirement reduction factor will be used to determine the pension plan.amount available. As of January 1, 2013, the broad-based, tax-qualified Sysco Corporation SavingsEmployee’s 401(k) Plan (401(k) plan) will be(the “401(k) plan”) was enhanced to provide a higher benefit going forward. While these changes will potentially impact the actual SERP benefit for an executive who terminates in calendar 2013 or later, the changes do not impact the benefit that has been earned through fiscal year 2012, reported in the table below. The following table shows the years of credited service for benefit accrual purposes and the present value of the accrued benefits for each of the named executive officersNEOs under each of the pension plan and SERP as of June 30, 2012.27, 2015. Mr. FernandezBené is not a participant in either of the Sysco maintained defined benefit plans, Mr. Shurts is not a participant in the SERP and, as such, has no accruals in the plan. No named executive officer received payments under either defined benefit plan during the last fiscal year.SERP.

Name

Plan Name

Number of

Years Credited

Service (#)

Present Value

of Accumulated

Benefit

DeLaney

Pension Plan

23.333

$

504,481

SERP

23.333

5,830,252

Kreidler

Pension Plan

2.667

72,445

SERP

2.667

105,370

Green

Pension Plan

21.333

419,513

SERP

21.333

6,801,094

Pulliam

Pension Plan

25.083

538,292

SERP

25.083

11,178,998

Fernandez

Pension Plan

0.167

43,908

SERP

N/A

N/A

    Number of       
    Years Credited  Present Value    
    Service  of Accumulated  Payments During 
Name Plan Name (#)  Benefit  Last Fiscal Year 
DeLaney Pension Plan  26.333  $611,734  $ 
  SERP  26.333   8,251,333    
Kreidler Pension Plan  5.667   88,839    
  SERP  5.667   334,886    
Bené Pension Plan  N/A   N/A   N/A 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 
Libby Pension Plan  7.667   116,074    
  SERP  7.667   181,418    
Shurts Pension Plan  2.167   31,296    
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 

We will pay the pension plan benefits in the form of a life annuity with payments guaranteed for five years. As required by SEC rules, we calculated the participating officers’ accrued benefits under the pension plan by assuming that the named executives will remain in service with the company until age 65, which is the earliest age at which the named executive officersNEOs can retire without any reduction in benefits.

For the SERP, we calculated the participating officers’ accrued benefits by assuming that the named executives will remain in service with Sysco until they become 100% vested in their SERP benefits, which is the earliest age they could retire without any reduction in SERP benefits. The 100% vestingThis date is at age 60.417 for Mr. DeLaney, age 63 for Mr. Kreidler and age 5761 for Mr. Green and age 60 for Mr. Pulliam.Libby. These ages differ because the SERP vesting isearly retirement factors are based on a combination of the participant’s age, Sysco service, and/or MIP service. Note that some of these ages may represent the executive’s current age as of the 20122015 fiscal year-end due to prior attainment of their 100% vestingearliest unreduced date. We pay SERP benefits as a joint lifelife-only annuity with a 10-year guarantee; however, married members also have the option to elect a joint-life annuity, reducing to two-thirds upon the death of either the executive or his spouse, with the unreduced payment guaranteed for at least 10 years.

We calculated the present value of the accumulated pension plan and SERP benefits based on a 4.81%4.84% discount rate for the pension plan and a 4.89%4.63% discount rate for the SERP, with a post-retirement mortality assumption based on Mercer’s Industry Longevity Experience Study, Consumer Goods and Food & Drink, gender-distinct and no collar, applying the RP2000 Combined Healthy table, gender distinct, projected to 2019, withMSS2007 scale AA.for annuitants.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   66


Back to Contents

Following are the estimated accrued benefits earned through the fiscal year ending 20122015 for the pension plan or SERP, as noted. These annual amounts would be payable at the earliest unreduced retirement age, as described above, if the named executive officer remains in the service of Sysco until such age. Projected benefits that may be earned due to pay and service after the fiscal year ended June 30, 201227, 2015 are not included in these estimates.

Name

Plan Name

Earliest

Unreduced

Retirement Age

Expected

Years of

Payments

Estimated

Annual Benefit

DeLaney

Pension Plan

65

19.2

$

62,038

SERP

60.417

26.0

484,588

Kreidler

Pension Plan

65

19.2

12,922

SERP

63

23.8

15,214

Green

Pension Plan

65

19.2

61,285

SERP

57

28.9

539,237

Pulliam

Pension Plan

65

19.2

65,935

SERP

60

26.3

902,602

Fernandez

Pension Plan

66.167

18.3

3,750

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement69

Back to Contents
    Earliest Unreduced  Expected Years of  Estimated Annual 
Name Plan Name Retirement Age  Payments  Benefit 
DeLaney Pension Plan  65   21.1  $62,038 
  SERP  60.417   27.4   561,029 
Kreidler Pension Plan  65   21.6   12,922 
  SERP  63   25.6   38,055 
Bené Pension Plan  N/A   N/A   N/A 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 
Libby Pension Plan  65   21.7   18,854 
  SERP  61   27.5   19,022 
Shurts Pension Plan  65   21.3   3,750 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 

In addition to the above, theeligible participating officers are entitled to a temporary social security bridge benefit commencing at their earliest unreduced retirement age until the earlier of death or age 62. The amount of this monthly benefit for each eligible participating officer, based on the SERP early retirement assumptions above, is $1,846$1,912 for Mr. DeLaney $0and $1,586 for Mr. Kreidler, $1,479 for Mr. Green and $1,625 for Mr. Pulliam.Libby.

Pension Plan

The pension plan, which is intended to be tax-qualified, is funded through an irrevocable tax-exempt trust and covered approximately 28,000 eligible employees48,310 participants as of the end of fiscal 2012.December 31, 2014. In general, a participant’s accrued benefit is equal to 1.5% times the participant’s average monthly eligible earnings for each year or partial year of service with Sysco or a subsidiary. As previously noted above, beginningas of January 1, 2013, non-union employees will no longer earn additional retirement benefits under the pension plan, so earnings and service after December 31, 2012, willwere not be taken into account for determining non-union participants’ accrued benefits under the pension plan. The accrued benefit under the pension plan is expressed in the form of a monthly annuity for the participant’s life, beginning at age 65, the plan’s normal retirement age, and with payments guaranteed for five years. If the participant remains with Sysco until at least age 55 with 10 years of service, the participant is entitled to early retirement payments. In such case, we reduce the benefit 6.67% per year for the first 5 years prior to normal retirement age and an additional 3.33% per year for years prior to age 60. Employees vest in the pension plan after five years of service, and the amendment to freeze benefit accruals under the pension plan after December 31, 2012 willdid not impact service determination for vesting purposes.

Benefits provided under the pension plan are based on compensation up to a limit, which is $250,000$265,000 for calendar year 2012,2015, under the Internal Revenue Code. In addition, annual benefits provided under the pension plan may not exceed a limit, which is $200,000$210,000 for calendar year 2012,2015, under the Internal Revenue Code.

Elements Included in Benefit Formula— Compensation included in the pension plan’s benefit calculation is generally earned income excluding deferred bonuses.

Policy Regarding Extra Years of Credited Service— Generally, we do not credit service in the pension plan beyond the actual number of years an employee participates in the plan. We base the years of credited service for the named executive officersNEOs only on their service while eligible for participation in the plan.

Benefit Payment OptionsExecutive Deferrals and Sysco Matching CreditParticipants may chooseExecutives were permitted to defer up to 40% of their methodbonuses under the MIP and up to 100% of payment from several options, including a life annuity option, spousal joint and survivor annuity, Social Security leveling and life annuity options with minimum guaranteed terms. Only de minimis lump sums are available.

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

We offer supplemental retirement plans, includingsalary. In September 2009, the SERP, to approximately 159 eligible executives to provide for retirement benefits beyond the amounts available under Sysco’s various broad-based US and Canadian pension plans. Each of the named executive officers other than Mr. Fernandez participates in the SERP. It is our intent that the SERP comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code in both form and operation. The SERP is an unsecured obligation of Sysco and is not qualified for tax purposes. In December 2008, the Board of Directors substantially revised the SERP to limit the class of employees eligible to participate in the SERP on or after June 28, 2008 and added an alternative MIP Retirement Program, which generally provides for lesser benefits than the SERP, for certain employees who would otherwise have participated in the SERP. None of the named executive officers participates in this alternative program. In May 2011, the SERPEDCP was amended in order to close the SERP to future participants.

The SERP is designed to provide, in combination with other retirement benefits, 50% of an executive’s final average compensation, provided an executive had at least 20 years of Sysco service, including service with an acquired company, and was 100% vested. “Other retirement benefits” include Social Security, benefits from the pension plan, and employer matching amounts under Sysco’s 401(k) plan and similar qualified plans of acquired companies. We reduce the gross accrued benefit of 50% of final average compensation by 5% per year for each year of Sysco service including service with an acquired company of less than 20 years. Employees are generally not eligible for benefits if they leave the company prior to age 55. Under the SERP, final average compensation is determined using the monthly average of a participant’s eligible earnings for the last 10 fiscal years prior to retirement, or the date he ceases to be covered under the SERP, if earlier. With respect to the determination of a participant’s accrued benefit as of June 28, 2008, as discussed below, final average compensation is determined using the monthly average of a participant’s eligible earnings for the highest 5 of the 10 fiscal years prior to retirement.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   67


Back to Contents

Eligible earnings refers to compensation taken into account for SERP purposes. As discussed below, beginning with fiscal 2009, the portion of a participant’s MIP bonus counted as eligible earnings is capped at 150% of the participant’s rate of base salary as of the last day of the applicable fiscal year. Eligible earnings for fiscal years prior to fiscal 2009, including eligible earnings for purposes of determining a participant’s accrued benefit as of June 28, 2008, as discussed below, are not affected by this plan change. The definition of eligible earningsclarify that places a cap on the MIP bonus for fiscal years after fiscal 2008 will be used in all benefit calculations except for certain death benefit calculations and a participant’s accrued benefit as of June 28, 2008, as discussed below.

A Sysco corporate officer will receive a SERP benefit equal to the greater of:

The accrued benefit determined as of the date service with Sysco ends; or

The accrued benefit determined as of June 28, 2008, but with vesting, the monthly benefit limit and eligibility for immediate benefit payments determined as of the date service with Sysco ends, using the following components:

average pay, based on the highest five fiscal years, which need not be successive, of eligible earnings in the ten fiscal year period ending June 28, 2008;

full years of service with Sysco, including service with companies acquired by Sysco, as of June 28, 2008; and

offsets as of June 28, 2008, with the standard adjustment to reflect the form and timing of the SERP benefit payments as of the date service with Sysco ends.

Under the SERP, Sysco has the ability to cause the forfeiture of any remaining SERP payments to a participant who was not discharged for “cause,” but who after his termination was determined by the Compensation Committee to have engaged in behavior while employed that would have constituted grounds for a discharge for “cause.” For this purpose, termination for “cause” includes termination for fraud or embezzlement. Sysco also has the ability to cause a forfeiture of any remaining SERP payments to a participant if the participant violates certain non-competition covenants. These non-competition covenants are applicable to the entire period over which any SERP benefits are to be paid.

Vesting in the SERP is based upon age and MIP participation service and/or Sysco service. Executives are 50% vested when they reach the earlier of age 60 with 10 years of Sysco service or age 55 with 15 years of MIP participation service. The vesting percentage increases with additional years of age and/or MIP participation service or Sysco service. An executive with at least 20 years of Sysco service (including service with companies acquired by Sysco) can retire with unreduced benefits when 100% vested. The executive generally becomes 100% vested on the earliest of:

age 65 if he has at least 10 years of Sysco service;

age 55 if he has at least 15 years of MIP service, but only if the sum of his age and MIP service is equal to or exceeds 80; and

age 62 if he has at least 25 years of Sysco service and at least 15 years of MIP service.

Upon the occurrence of a change in control, each named executive officer will become 100% vested in his SERP benefit accrued prior to the change in control. The executive will also be 100% vested in any SERP benefit that accrues after the date of the change in control. Notwithstanding this, the SERP contains cutback provisions that will reduce amounts payable to each named executive officer by the amount of any payments that cannot be deducted by Sysco under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code.

We pay the SERP benefit as a monthly life annuity with a guaranteed minimum period of 10 years if the participant is not married at the time payments commence. If the participant is married at the time payments commence, the participant and spouse are entitled to a monthly annuity for life with a guaranteed minimum period of 10 years, and generally, on the participant’s or spouse’s death, the survivor is entitled to receive a monthly annuity for life with each payment equal to two-thirds of each payment made to the couple. The benefit payable upon the death of a vested, terminated participant prior to age 55 reflects an actuarial reduction for the difference between age 55 and the executive’s age at death.

We provide a temporary Social Security bridge benefit to an executive commencing SERP benefits before age 62, payable until the earlier of age 62 or death.

Elements of Compensation included in Benefit Formula — Compensation generally includes base pay, the MIP bonus or any bonus paid in lieu of or as a substitute for the MIP bonus (although this is limited to 150%in the future was eligible for deferral under the EDCP. Sysco did not match salary deferrals under the EDCP. Sysco provided matching credit of 15% of the annual ratefirst 20% of base salary forbonus deferred, resulting in a maximum possible match credit of 3% of an executive’s bonus. The Committee was permitted to authorize additional discretionary company contributions, although it did not authorize any from fiscal 2009 and later years),year 2008 through the fiscal 2007 supplemental performance bonus, and stockdate on which the EDCP was frozen.

Investment Options — An executive may invest the deferral portion of his or her account among nine investment options, which may be changed as often as daily. Participants are also permitted to direct the investment of company matches under the 2005 Management Incentive PlanEDCP.

Vesting — An executive is always 100% vested in his or her deferrals and predecessor plans with respecteach Sysco match, but any portion of an executive’s account attributable to fiscal 2005Sysco matches, including associated deemed investment return, and prior fiscal years.the net investment gain, if any, credited on his or her deferrals, is subject to forfeiture for specified cause or competing against Sysco in certain instances.

Funding Status In-Service Distribution Elections and Hardship WithdrawalsSysco’s obligationsUnless an executive has previously made an in-service distribution election, an executive will generally not have access to amounts deferred under the SERPEDCP while employed by Sysco unless he or she requests and qualifies for a hardship withdrawal. Such withdrawals are partially funded byavailable under very limited circumstances in connection with an unforeseeable emergency.

Distribution Events — We will distribute the vested portion of the amount credited to an executive’s EDCP account upon the earlier to occur of the executive’s death, disability, retirement or other separation event.

Distributions — Effective January 1, 2009, a rabbi trust holding life insurance and an interestparticipant who terminates employment, other than due to death, disability or a qualifying retirement, will receive a lump sum. A participant may elect the form of distribution of his account in certain real property occupied by Sysco. Sysco’s obligations under the SERP are maintained as a book reserve account. In the event of Sysco’s bankruptcydeath or insolvency, however,disability, or if the life insurance,participant terminates employment after the real property interest, and any other assets held byearlier of age 60, or age 55 with 10 years of service with the rabbi trust becomecompany.

An executive who has the right to elect the form of payment of his vested account balance may choose annual or quarterly installments over a specified period of up to 20 years, a lump sum or a combination of both. An executive may change his distribution elections prior to separation, subject to limitations in the claimsEDCP required by Section 409A of Sysco’s general creditors.the Internal Revenue Code.

Policy with Regard to Extra Years of Credited Service — Generally, Sysco does not award extra years of credited service

When we pay installments under the SERP. However, in certain cases,EDCP, we will credit the company may accelerate vesting ofexecutive’s unpaid vested account balance with a participant’s accrued benefit,fixed investment return during the entire payout period. This fixed return will equal the Moody’s Average Corporate Bond Yield for either the six- or award additional Sysco service for purposes of determining the reduction applicabletwelve-month period ending two months prior to the participant’s final average compensation. Asmonth of the date of this proxy statement, none offirst installment payment, whichever is higher.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement68

Back to Contents

As with the named executive officers have been awarded additional credited service, or accelerated vesting of their accrued benefits underSERP amendments described above, the SERP.November 2012 amendments to the EDCP did not alter the benefit commencement schedule for any EDCP participant.

Lump Sum Availability — Retirement benefits may not be paid as a lump sum.

Monthly Payment Limit — The SERP benefit cannot exceed the participant’s vested percentage multiplied by the “monthly payment limit” in effect for the fiscal year of his retirement. The monthly payment limit for participants retiring in fiscal year 2012 was $196,221; for participants retiring in fiscal 2013, the monthly limit is $199,486. Each subsequent fiscal year, the limit will be adjusted for inflation.

Delay of Distributions to Named ExecutivesNEOs — Distributions to a specified employee, including a named executive, officer upon the specified employee or named executive officer’s “separation from service” as defined under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code will be delayed for a period of six months to the extent that making payments during such six-month period would violate Section 409A.409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

Forfeiture for Cause or Competition — Any portion of an executive’s account attributable to Sysco matches, including associated deemed investment return, and the net investment gain, if any, credited on his deferrals, is subject to forfeiture for specified cause or competition. No such forfeiture can occur, however, for a participant who is discharged (i) during a plan year in which a change in control occurs or (2) during the three plan years thereafter.

Limits on Excess Parachute Payments — The EDCP contains cutback provisions that will reduce amounts payable to each named executive officer by the amount of any payments that cannot be deducted by Sysco under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code.

Pension Benefits

Sysco maintains two defined benefit pension plans. One is the Sysco Corporation Retirement Plan, or pension plan, which is intended to be a tax-qualified plan under the Internal Revenue Code. The second is the Sysco Corporation Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, or SERP, which is not a tax-qualified plan. The pension plan ceased all non-union participant accruals effective December 31, 2012. In November 2012, the SERP was further amended to freeze benefits and stop future accruals, effective June 29, 2013. Participants covered by the SERP as of June 29, 2013 were granted accelerated vesting. For those who retire and are not eligible for immediate commencement of their SERP benefit, they will be deemed 100% vested, with benefits payable upon reaching age 65.

For those who are eligible for a SERP benefit at the time of retirement, an early retirement reduction factor will be used to determine the amount available. As of January 1, 2013, the broad-based, tax-qualified Sysco Corporation Employee’s 401(k) Plan (the “401(k) plan”) was enhanced to provide a higher benefit going forward. The following table shows the years of credited service for benefit accrual purposes and the present value of the accrued benefits for each of the NEOs under each of the pension plan and SERP as of June 27, 2015. Mr. Bené is not a participant in either of the Sysco maintained defined benefit plans, Mr. Shurts is not a participant in the SERP.

    Number of       
    Years Credited  Present Value    
    Service  of Accumulated  Payments During 
Name Plan Name (#)  Benefit  Last Fiscal Year 
DeLaney Pension Plan  26.333  $611,734  $ 
  SERP  26.333   8,251,333    
Kreidler Pension Plan  5.667   88,839    
  SERP  5.667   334,886    
Bené Pension Plan  N/A   N/A   N/A 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 
Libby Pension Plan  7.667   116,074    
  SERP  7.667   181,418    
Shurts Pension Plan  2.167   31,296    
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 

We will pay the pension plan benefits in the form of a life annuity with payments guaranteed for five years. As required by SEC rules, we calculated the participating officers’ accrued benefits under the pension plan by assuming that the named executives will remain in service with the company until age 65, which is the earliest age at which the NEOs can retire without any reduction in benefits.

For the SERP, we calculated the participating officers’ accrued benefits by assuming that the named executives will remain in service with Sysco until the earliest age they could retire without any reduction in SERP benefits. This date is at age 60.417 for Mr. DeLaney, age 63 for Mr. Kreidler and age 61 for Mr. Libby. These ages differ because the SERP early retirement factors are based on a combination of the participant’s age, Sysco service, and/or MIP service. Note that some of these ages may represent the executive’s current age as of the 2015 fiscal year-end due to prior attainment of their earliest unreduced date. We pay SERP benefits as a life-only annuity with a 10-year guarantee; however, married members also have the option to elect a joint-life annuity, reducing to two-thirds upon the death of either the executive or his spouse, with the unreduced payment guaranteed for at least 10 years.

We calculated the present value of the accumulated pension plan and SERP benefits based on a 4.84% discount rate for the pension plan and a 4.63% discount rate for the SERP, with a post-retirement mortality assumption based on Mercer’s Industry Longevity Experience Study, Consumer Goods and Food & Drink, gender-distinct and no collar, applying the MSS2007 scale for annuitants.

Following are the estimated accrued benefits earned through the fiscal year ending 2015 for the pension plan or SERP, as noted. These annual amounts would be payable at the earliest unreduced retirement age, as described above, if the named executive officer remains in the service of Sysco until such age. Projected benefits that may be earned due to pay and service after the fiscal year ended June 27, 2015 are not included in these estimates.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    6869


Back to Contents
    Earliest Unreduced  Expected Years of  Estimated Annual 
Name Plan Name Retirement Age  Payments  Benefit 
DeLaney Pension Plan  65   21.1  $62,038 
  SERP  60.417   27.4   561,029 
Kreidler Pension Plan  65   21.6   12,922 
  SERP  63   25.6   38,055 
Bené Pension Plan  N/A   N/A   N/A 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 
Libby Pension Plan  65   21.7   18,854 
  SERP  61   27.5   19,022 
Shurts Pension Plan  65   21.3   3,750 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 

In addition to Contentsthe above, eligible participating officers are entitled to a temporary social security bridge benefit commencing at their earliest unreduced retirement age until the earlier of death or age 62. The amount of this monthly benefit for each eligible participating officer, based on the SERP early retirement assumptions above, is $1,912 for Mr. DeLaney and $1,586 for Mr. Libby.

Fiscal 2012 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

Pension Plan

The following table provides information regarding executive contributionspension plan, which is intended to be tax-qualified, is funded through an irrevocable tax-exempt trust and related company matches,covered approximately 48,310 participants as of December 31, 2014. In general, a participant’s accrued benefit is equal to 1.5% times the participant’s average monthly eligible earnings for each year or partial year of service with Sysco or a subsidiary. As previously noted above, as of January 1, 2013, non-union employees no longer earn additional retirement benefits under the pension plan, so earnings and service after December 31, 2012, were not taken into account balancesfor determining non-union participants’ accrued benefits under the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (EDCP) for each ofpension plan. The accrued benefit under the named executive officers other than Mr. Fernandez, who does not participatepension plan is expressed in the EDCP. The table also provides information regarding deferrals, earningsform of a monthly annuity for the participant’s life, beginning at age 65, the plan’s normal retirement age, and account balanceswith payments guaranteed for five years. If the participant remains with Sysco until at least age 55 with 10 years of service, the participant is entitled to early retirement payments. In such case, we reduce the benefit 6.67% per year for the first 5 years prior to normal retirement age and an additional 3.33% per year for years prior to age 60. Employees vest in the pension plan after five years of service, and the amendment to freeze benefit accruals under the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan (DDCP) and Directors Stock Deferral Plan (DSDP)pension plan after December 31, 2012 did not impact service determination for Mr. Fernandez. No executive officer made any withdrawals or received any distributions with respect to fiscal 2012.vesting purposes.

Name

Applicable Plan

 

Executive

Contributions for

Fiscal 2012 ($)(1)

Registrant

Contributions for

Fiscal 2012 ($)(2)

Aggregate

Earnings in

Fiscal 2012 ($)(3)

Aggregate

Balance at

June 30, 2012($)(4)

DeLaney

EDCP

 

$

$

$

71,772

$

1,192,436

Kreidler

EDCP

 

113,700

17,055

4,554

135,309

Fernandez

DDCP

DSDP

 

314,886(5)

10,663

11,036(6)

191,615

584,814(7)

Green

EDCP

 

Pulliam

EDCP

 

115,500

11,550

84,261

1,458,627

(1)

Amount shown with respect to the named executives other than Mr. Fernandez represents includes deferrals of a portion of the a discretionary bonus awarded during fiscal 2012 in August 2011 with respect to fiscal 2011, and a portion of an MIP annual incentive award paid in August 2012 with respect to fiscal 2012. This These amounts is are contained included in the Summary Compensation Table under the “Bonus” column for 2011, and the fiscal 2012 disclosure under the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column for 2012, respectively, of the Summary Compensation Table, as more specifically described in footnote 4 to the Table as follows: for Mr. Delaney: $0 for fiscal 2011 and $0 for fiscal 2012; for Mr. Kreidler: $73,500 for fiscal 2011 and $40,200 for fiscal 2012; for Mr. Green, $0 for fiscal 2011 and $0 for fiscal 2012; and for Mr. Pulliam, $115,500 for fiscal 2011 and $0 for fiscal 2012. The amounts shown with respect to the discretionary bonus awarded in August 2011 were previously reported in last year’s summary compensation table under the same column, for fiscal year 2011. Amounts shown for Mr. Fernandez are described in more detail below.

(2)

As discussed below, Sysco matches a portion of the annual incentive award deferred by an executive into the EDCP. Amount shown represents the Sysco match on the executive’s deferral of a portion of the 2011 and 2012 annual incentive awards. As noted above, this includes a discretionary bonus paid during fiscal 2012 in August 2011, and an MIP award paid for fiscal 2012 in August 2012. These match payments are included in the “All Other Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table, as follows: for Mr. DeLaney: $0 for 2011, and $0 for 2012; for Mr. Kreidler: $11,025 for fiscal 2011 and $6,030 for fiscal 2012; for Mr. Green, $0 for fiscal 2011 and $0 for fiscal 2012; and for Mr. Pulliam, $11,550 for fiscal 2011 and $0 for fiscal 2012. The amounts shown with respect to the discretionary bonus awarded in August 2011 were previously reported in last year’s summary compensation table under the same column, for fiscal year 2011. Neither the DDCP nor the DSDP, in which Mr. Fernandez was a participant during fiscal 2012, provides for a contribution by Sysco.

(3)

The above-market interest portion of these amounts is included in the fiscal 2012 disclosure under the “Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings” column of the Summary Compensation Table, in the following amounts: $29,450 for Mr. DeLaney, $1,371 for Mr. Kreidler, $32,372 for Mr. Pulliam and $3,966 for Mr. Fernandez.

(4)

A portion of the amounts disclosed in this column for Messrs. DeLaney and Pulliam have previously been reported in Summary Compensation Tables for previous years, including the following amounts: for Mr. DeLaney: $26,667 for fiscal 2011, $24,213 for fiscal 2010, $16,938 for fiscal 2009, and $451,522 for fiscal 2008; for Mr. Pulliam: $27,401 for fiscal 2011, $254,110 for fiscal 2010, $55,557 for fiscal 2009, $453,071 for fiscal 2008, and $22,638 for fiscal 2007.

(5)

The amount shown includes the deferral of restricted stock granted to Mr. Fernandez during his tenure as a non-employee director during fiscal 2012, “elected” and “match” shares credited to Mr. Fernandez with respect to Board retainer and non-executive chairman fees for services rendered during fiscal 2012, and plus the restricted stock units (RSUs) granted to Mr. Fernandez as of April 13, 2012. We valued all shares of stock and RSUs at the closing price of Sysco common stock on the business day prior the grant date. All of the amount shown is also included in the fiscal 2012 disclosure of the Summary Compensation Table, as follows: $74,874 in the “Salary” column and $240,011 in the “Stock Awards” column. See also footnotes 2 and 7 to the Summary Compensation Table.

(6)

The amount shown reflects additional shares credited to the account as a dividend equivalent, plus changes in stock price over the period.

(7)

The amount shown is the fair market value of shares held as of June 30, 2012, calculated based upon the closing price of Sysco common stock on June 29, 2012.

About the EDCP – Sysco maintains the EDCP to provide certain executives, including the named executives other than Mr. Fernandez, the opportunity to defer the receipt of a portion of their annual salaries, bonuses and deemed earnings thereon on a tax-deferred basis. Federal income taxes on all amounts credited

Benefits provided under the EDCP will bepension plan are based on compensation up to a limit, which is $265,000 for calendar year 2015, under the Internal Revenue Code. In addition, annual benefits provided under the pension plan may not exceed a limit, which is $210,000 for calendar year 2015, under the Internal Revenue Code.

Elements Included in Benefit Formula— Compensation included in the pension plan’s benefit calculation is generally earned income excluding deferred until payout under current tax law. The EDCP is administered by the Compensation Committee.bonuses.

EligibilityPolicy Regarding Extra Years of Credited ServiceAll Sysco executives who are participantsGenerally, we do not credit service in the MIP, excluding those whose income is subject to Canadian income tax laws, arepension plan beyond the actual number of years an employee participates in the plan. We base the years of credited service for the NEOs only on their service while eligible to participate. However,for participation in the Compensation Committee has the right to establish additional eligibility requirements and may exclude an otherwise eligible executive from participation.plan.

Executive Deferrals and Sysco Matching Credit — Executives maywere permitted to defer up to 40% of their bonuses under the MIP and for years prior to fiscal 2009 only, their supplemental performance bonuses, referred to in the aggregate as “bonus,” and up to 100% of salary. In September 2009, the EDCP was amended to clarify that any bonus paid in lieu of or as a substitute for the MIP bonus in the future iswas eligible for deferral under the EDCP. Sysco doesdid not match salary deferrals under the EDCP. Sysco providesprovided matching credit of 15% of the first 20% of bonus deferred, resulting in a maximum possible match credit of 3% of an executive’s bonus. The Committee maywas permitted to authorize additional discretionary company contributions, although it did not authorize any infrom fiscal year 2008 2009, 2010, 2011 or 2012.through the date on which the EDCP was frozen.

Investment Options — An executive may invest the deferral portion of his or her account among nine investment options, which may be changed as often as daily. The returns for these optionsParticipants are also permitted to direct the investment of varying risk/reward ranged from negative 18.2% to 6.78% for the year ended June 30, 2012.

Prior to July 2, 2008, Moody’s plus 1%, or the “risk free” option, was one of nine available deemed investment optionscompany matches under the EDCP and was the default investment option for participants who failed to make an investment election. In addition, company matches were automatically credited with interest at the Moody’s plus 1% rate, and interest credited during an installment payout period under a fixed payment distribution option available under the EDCP was credited at Moody’s plus 1%. For a given calendar year, the Moody’s + 1% option provides an annual return equal to the Moody’s Average Corporate Bond Yield for the higher of the six or twelve-month period ending on the preceding October 31, plus 1%. The Moody’s + 1% return was 7.1950% for calendar year 2008.EDCP.

Beginning as of July 2, 2008, the Moody’s plus 1%, or “risk free,” option and the default investment rate were changed to Moody’s without the addition of the 1%. As a result, the interest rate credited on company matches for future years, and the investment return on salary deferrals after July 1, 2008 and bonus deferrals for years after fiscal 2008, as well as any transfers from another investment option to the risk free option after July 1, 2008, are based on Moody’s and not Moody’s plus 1%.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   69


Back to Contents

In addition, for participants whose employment terminates after July 1, 2008, interest credited to the participant’s account during an installment payout period will be Moody’s and not Moody’s plus 1%.

Notwithstanding these changes, interest will continue to be credited at the Moody’s plus 1% rate on each participant’s accumulated company match account as of July 1, 2008, and on that portion of the participant’s deferral account invested in the Moody’s plus 1% option on July 1, 2008, and not otherwise transferred at a later time.

Vesting — An executive is always 100% vested in his or her deferrals and each Sysco match, but is at riskany portion of forfeiting thean executive’s account attributable to Sysco matches, including associated deemed investment return, and the net investment gain, if any, credited on thehis or her deferrals, is subject to forfeiture for specified cause or competing against Sysco in certain instances. Each Sysco match and the associated deemed investment return will be 100% vested at the earliest to occur of:

the tenth anniversary of the crediting date of the match;

the executive’s 60th birthday;

the executive’s death;

the executive’s disability; or

a specified change in control.

Any matches and associated investment returns not otherwise fully vested under one of the above provisions may vest under an alternative schedule when the executive is at least age 55 and has at least 15 years of MIP participation service. Vesting under this alternative schedule is based on the sum of the executive’s age and years of MIP participation service, as follows:

Sum

Vested %

Sum

Vested %

Sum

Vested %

Under 70

0

%

73

65

%

77

85

%

70

50

%

74

70

%

78

90

%

71

55

%

75

75

%

79

95

%

72

60

%

76

80

%

80

100

%

The Committee has the discretion to accelerate vesting when it determines specific situations warrant such action. Executives may forfeit vested amounts, other than salary and bonus deferrals, as described under “Forfeiture for Cause or Competition” below.

In-Service Distribution Elections and Hardship Withdrawals — Unless an executive has previously made an in-service distribution election, an executive will generally not have access to amounts deferred under the EDCP while employed by Sysco unless he or she requests and qualifies for a hardship withdrawal. Such withdrawals are available under very limited circumstances in connection with an unforeseeable emergency. An executive may make separate in-service distribution elections with respect to a given year’s salary deferral and bonus deferral, concurrent with that year’s deferral election. None of the named executives made an in-service distribution election in fiscal 2012.

Distribution Events — We will distribute the vested portion of the amount credited to an executive’s EDCP account upon the earlier to occur of the executive’s death, disability, retirement or other separation event.

Distributions— Effective January 1, 2009, a participant who terminates employment, other than due to death, disability or disability prior to the earlier of age 60, or age 55 with 10 years of service with the company,a qualifying retirement, will receive a lump sum. A participant may elect the form of distribution of his account in the event of death or disability, or if the participant terminates employment after the earlier of age 60, or age 55 with 10 years of service with the company. A participant may also elect the form of payment of his vested account balance in the event of death or disability.

An executive who has the right to elect the form of payment of his vested account balance may choose annual or quarterly installments over a specified period of up to 20 years, a lump sum or a combination of both. An executive may change his distribution elections prior to separation, subject to limitations in the EDCP required by Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

When we pay installments under the EDCP, we will credit the executive’s unpaid vested account balance with a fixed investment return during the entire payout period. This fixed return will equal the Moody’s Average Corporate Bond Yield for either the six- or twelve-month period ending two months prior to the month of the first installment payment, whichever is higher.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement68

Back to Contents

As with the SERP amendments described above, the November 2012 amendments to the EDCP did not alter the benefit commencement schedule for any EDCP participant.

Delay of Distributions to Named Executives NEOs— Distributions to a specified employee, including a named executive, upon the specified employee or named executive officer’s “separation from service” as defined under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code will be delayed for a period of six months to the extent that making payments during such six-month period would violate Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

Forfeiture for Cause or Competition— Any portion of an executive’s account attributable to Sysco matches, including associated deemed investment return, and the net investment gain, if any, credited on his deferrals, is subject to forfeiture for specified cause or competition. The Committee shall determine if the executive was terminatedNo such forfeiture can occur, however, for cause or violated the applicable non-compete provisions. However, these forfeiture provisions will not apply to an executive whose employment endsa participant who is discharged (i) during the fiscala plan year in which a specified change in control occurs or (2) during the next three fiscalplan years unless the Committee makes a finding of cause and an arbitrator confirms such finding. In addition, the Compensation Committee may cause a forfeiture of a participant’s remaining company matches and investment earnings and interest credited to his account, if after a participant terminates employment for a reason other than for “cause,” the Compensation Committee determines that the participant engaged in conduct while employed by Sysco that would have resulted in his discharge for “cause.” In addition, the Compensation Committee may cause a forfeiture of a participant’s remaining company matches and investment earnings and interest credited to his account, if a participant discloses trade secrets or confidential information to a competitor.thereafter.

Change in ControlLimits on Excess Parachute PaymentsUpon the occurrence of a change in control, each named executive officer will become 100% vested in his company match under the EDCP that has accrued prior to the change in control. The executive will also be 100% vested in any company match under the EDCP that accrues after the date of the change in control. Notwithstanding this, the EDCP contains cutback provisions that will reduce amounts payable to each named executive officer by the amount of any payments that cannot be deducted by Sysco under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code.

AboutPension Benefits

Sysco maintains two defined benefit pension plans. One is the DDCPSysco Corporation Retirement Plan, or pension plan, which is intended to be a tax-qualified plan under the Internal Revenue Code. The DDCP allows non-employee directorssecond is the Sysco Corporation Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, or SERP, which is not a tax-qualified plan. The pension plan ceased all non-union participant accruals effective December 31, 2012. In November 2012, the SERP was further amended to defer upfreeze benefits and stop future accruals, effective June 29, 2013. Participants covered by the SERP as of June 29, 2013 were granted accelerated vesting. For those who retire and are not eligible for immediate commencement of their SERP benefit, they will be deemed 100% vested, with benefits payable upon reaching age 65.

For those who are eligible for a SERP benefit at the time of retirement, an early retirement reduction factor will be used to 100%determine the amount available. As of all fees payableJanuary 1, 2013, the broad-based, tax-qualified Sysco Corporation Employee’s 401(k) Plan (the “401(k) plan”) was enhanced to provide a higher benefit going forward. The following table shows the years of credited service for benefit accrual purposes and the present value of the accrued benefits for each of the NEOs under each of the pension plan and SERP as of June 27, 2015. Mr. Bené is not a participant in either of the Sysco maintained defined benefit plans, Mr. Shurts is not a participant in the SERP.

    Number of       
    Years Credited  Present Value    
    Service  of Accumulated  Payments During 
Name Plan Name (#)  Benefit  Last Fiscal Year 
DeLaney Pension Plan  26.333  $611,734  $ 
  SERP  26.333   8,251,333    
Kreidler Pension Plan  5.667   88,839    
  SERP  5.667   334,886    
Bené Pension Plan  N/A   N/A   N/A 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 
Libby Pension Plan  7.667   116,074    
  SERP  7.667   181,418    
Shurts Pension Plan  2.167   31,296    
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 

We will pay the pension plan benefits in the form of a life annuity with payments guaranteed for five years. As required by SEC rules, we calculated the participating officers’ accrued benefits under the pension plan by assuming that the named executives will remain in service with the company until age 65, which is the earliest age at which the NEOs can retire without any reduction in benefits.

For the SERP, we calculated the participating officers’ accrued benefits by assuming that the named executives will remain in service with Sysco until the earliest age they could retire without any reduction in SERP benefits. This date is at age 60.417 for Mr. DeLaney, age 63 for Mr. Kreidler and age 61 for Mr. Libby. These ages differ because the SERP early retirement factors are based on a combination of the participant’s age, Sysco service, and/or MIP service. Note that some of these ages may represent the executive’s current age as of the 2015 fiscal year-end due to prior attainment of their earliest unreduced date. We pay SERP benefits as a director.life-only annuity with a 10-year guarantee; however, married members also have the option to elect a joint-life annuity, reducing to two-thirds upon the death of either the executive or his spouse, with the unreduced payment guaranteed for at least 10 years.

We calculated the present value of the accumulated pension plan and SERP benefits based on a 4.84% discount rate for the pension plan and a 4.63% discount rate for the SERP, with a post-retirement mortality assumption based on Mercer’s Industry Longevity Experience Study, Consumer Goods and Food & Drink, gender-distinct and no collar, applying the MSS2007 scale for annuitants.

Following are the estimated accrued benefits earned through the fiscal year ending 2015 for the pension plan or SERP, as noted. These fees include all additional retainer fees paid for chairing committees and,annual amounts would be payable at the earliest unreduced retirement age, as described above, if the named executive officer remains in the caseservice of Mr. Fernandez, priorSysco until such age. Projected benefits that may be earned due to April 2012,pay and service after the fiscal year ended June 27, 2015 are not included his additional retainer paid for serving as non-executive Chairman of the Board. In order to respect Mr. Fernandez’ prior deferral elections made while he was still Non-executive Chair, Sysco allowed Mr. Fernandez to defer $25,000 of his calendar year 2012 Executive Chair salary into the DDCP. It is not anticipated that any future deferrals into the DDCP by Mr. Fernandez will be allowed for salary paid to him as an Executive Chair. The DDCP allows directors to select from a menu of investment options as frequently as daily. The investment options under the DDCP are the same as those provided under the EDCP and described in more detail above under “--About the EDCP.” Amounts credited to a director’s account are 100% vested at all times. Distributions under the DDCP are made when the director leaves the board, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, or upon death or disability, unless the participant requests and qualifies for a hardship withdrawal. Participants are allowed to select to receive distributions either as a lump sum payment or in quarterly or annual installments over a period of up to 20 years.these estimates.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7069


Back to Contents
    Earliest Unreduced  Expected Years of  Estimated Annual 
Name Plan Name Retirement Age  Payments  Benefit 
DeLaney Pension Plan  65   21.1  $62,038 
  SERP  60.417   27.4   561,029 
Kreidler Pension Plan  65   21.6   12,922 
  SERP  63   25.6   38,055 
Bené Pension Plan  N/A   N/A   N/A 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 
Libby Pension Plan  65   21.7   18,854 
  SERP  61   27.5   19,022 
Shurts Pension Plan  65   21.3   3,750 
  SERP  N/A   N/A   N/A 

In addition to Contentsthe above, eligible participating officers are entitled to a temporary social security bridge benefit commencing at their earliest unreduced retirement age until the earlier of death or age 62. The amount of this monthly benefit for each eligible participating officer, based on the SERP early retirement assumptions above, is $1,912 for Mr. DeLaney and $1,586 for Mr. Libby.

About

Pension Plan

The pension plan, which is intended to be tax-qualified, is funded through an irrevocable tax-exempt trust and covered approximately 48,310 participants as of December 31, 2014. In general, a participant’s accrued benefit is equal to 1.5% times the DSDP – Under the DSDP,participant’s average monthly eligible earnings for each year or partial year of service with Sysco or a non-employee director may elect to defer receiptsubsidiary. As previously noted above, as of up to 100% of the shares of common stock issuedJanuary 1, 2013, non-union employees no longer earn additional retirement benefits under the 2009 Non-Employee Directors Stock Plan, whether such shares are to be issued as a grant of restricted stock, elected shares or additional shares, or upon the vesting of a restricted stock unit grant. In order to respect Mr. Fernandez’ prior deferral elections made while he was still Non-executive Chair, Sysco allowed Mr. Fernandez to defer $160,000 of RSUs awarded to Mr. Fernandez inpension plan, so earnings and service after December 31, 2012, in his capacity as Executive Chair. It iswere not anticipated that any future deferralstaken into the DSDP by Mr. Fernandez will be allowedaccount for RSUs or any other stock awards payable to him as Executive Chair.

To the extent cash dividends are paid on Sysco common stock, additional shares are credited to accountsdetermining non-union participants’ accrued benefits under the pension plan. The accrued benefit under the pension plan with respect to all vested shares in the account, including previously deferred restricted stock awards, matched shares that are deferred, and previous stock units credited as a dividend equivalent. The number of share units credited with respect to dividend equivalents on vested shares in the account equals the number of shares of common stock that could have been purchased at the then fair market value of the shares, calculated as the closing price for the common stock on the previous business day, with the dividends that would have been paid on vested shares in the account. The terms of the RSUs which were issued to Mr. Fernandez in April 2012 provide for dividend equivalents to be accrued and paid upon vesting of the RSUs. These dividend equivalents are made pursuant to the RSU award and not the DSDP. They are credited to his account in the DSDP but are distributableis expressed in the form of cash rather than stocka monthly annuity for the participant’s life, beginning at age 65, the plan’s normal retirement age, and with payments guaranteed for five years. If the participant remains with Sysco until at least age 55 with 10 years of service, the participant is entitled to early retirement payments. In such case, we reduce the benefit 6.67% per year for the first 5 years prior to normal retirement age and an additional 3.33% per year for years prior to age 60. Employees vest in the pension plan after five years of service, and the amendment to freeze benefit accruals under the pension plan after December 31, 2012 did not impact service determination for vesting purposes.

Benefits provided under the pension plan are based on compensation up to a limit, which is $265,000 for calendar year 2015, under the Internal Revenue Code. In addition, annual benefits provided under the pension plan may not exceed a limit, which is $210,000 for calendar year 2015, under the Internal Revenue Code.

Elements Included in Benefit Formula— Compensation included in the pension plan’s benefit calculation is generally earned income excluding deferred bonuses.

Policy Regarding Extra Years of Credited Service — Generally, we do not credit service in the pension plan beyond the actual number of years an employee participates in the plan. We base the years of credited service for the NEOs only on their service while eligible for participation in the plan.

Benefit Payment Options — Participants may choose their method of payment from several options, including a life annuity option, spousal joint and survivor annuity, Social Security leveling and life annuity options with minimum guaranteed terms. Only de minimis lump sums are available.

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

We maintain a supplemental executive retirement plan, which we refer to as the SERP, for the benefit of 112 eligible executives, as of June 27, 2015, to provide for retirement benefits beyond the amounts available under Sysco’s various broad-based US and Canadian pension plans. Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler and Libby participate in the SERP. It is our intent that the SERP comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code in both form and operation. The SERP is an unsecured obligation of Sysco and is not qualified for tax purposes. In November 2012, the SERP was amended to freeze benefits and stop future accruals, effective June 29, 2013. Participants covered by the SERP as of June 29, 2013 were granted accelerated vesting. For those who retire and are not eligible for immediate commencement of their SERP benefit, they will be deemed 100% vested, with benefits payable upon reaching age 65. For those who are eligible for a SERP benefit at the same time of retirement, an early retirement reduction factor will be used to determine the amount available.

The SERP was designed to provide, in combination with other retirement benefits, 50% of an executive’s final average compensation, provided an executive had at least 20 years of Sysco service, including service with an acquired company. “Other retirement benefits” include Social Security, benefits from the pension plan, and employer contributions under Sysco’s 401(k) plan and similar qualified plans of acquired companies. We reduce the gross accrued benefit of 50% of final average compensation by 5% per year for each year of Sysco service including service with an acquired company of less than 20 years. For purposes of this service calculation, Sysco service was frozen effective June 29, 2013. Additionally, final average compensation is determined using the monthly average of a participant’s eligible earnings for the last 10 fiscal years prior to June 29, 2013, or the date he ceases to be covered under the SERP, if earlier. With respect to the determination of a participant’s accrued benefit as of June 28, 2008, as discussed below, final average compensation is determined using the monthly average of a participant’s eligible earnings for the highest 5 of the 10 fiscal years prior to, and including, the fiscal year ended June 28, 2008.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement70

Back to Contents

The term “eligible earnings” refers to compensation taken into account for SERP purposes. As discussed below, beginning with fiscal 2009, the portion of a participant’s MIP bonus counted as eligible earnings is capped at 150% of the participant’s rate of base salary as of the last day of the applicable fiscal year. Eligible earnings for fiscal years prior to fiscal 2009, including eligible earnings for purposes of determining a participant’s accrued benefit as of June 28, 2008, as discussed below, are not affected by this plan change. The definition of eligible earnings that his deferred RSUsplaces a cap on the MIP bonus for fiscal years after fiscal 2008 will be used in all benefit calculations except for certain death benefit calculations and a participant’s accrued benefit as of June 28, 2008, as discussed below.

A SERP participant will receive a SERP benefit equal to the greater of:

The accrued benefit determined as of June 29, 2013 (the plan freeze date); or
The accrued benefit determined as of June 28, 2008, but the early retirement factor and eligibility for immediate benefit payments determined as of the date service with Sysco ends, using the following components:
average pay, based on the highest five fiscal years, which need not be successive, of eligible earnings in the ten fiscal year period ending June 28, 2008;
full years of service with Sysco, including service with companies acquired by Sysco, as of June 28, 2008; and
offsets as of June 28, 2008, with the standard adjustment to reflect the form and timing of the SERP benefit payments as of the date service with Sysco ends.

Under the SERP, Sysco has the ability to cause the forfeiture of any remaining SERP payments to a participant who was not discharged for “cause,” but who, after termination, was determined by the Compensation Committee to have engaged in behavior while employed that would have constituted grounds for a discharge for “cause.” For this purpose, termination for “cause” includes termination for fraud or embezzlement. Sysco also has the ability to cause a forfeiture of any remaining SERP payments to a participant if the participant violates certain non-competition covenants. These non-competition covenants are applicable for the year following termination and to the entire period over which any SERP benefits are to be paid.

Participants covered by the SERP as of June 29, 2013 are 100% vested. For those who are eligible for early payment at retirement, their benefits may be reduced by an early retirement factor. The early retirement factor is based upon age and MIP participation service and/or Sysco service. The early retirement factor is 50% when participants reach the earlier of age 60 with 10 years of MIP participation service and 20 years of Sysco service or age 55 with 15 years of MIP participation service. The early retirement factor increases with additional years of age and/or MIP participation service or Sysco service. A participant with at least 20 years of Sysco service (including service with companies acquired by Sysco) can retire with unreduced benefits when the early retirement factor is 100%. The participant generally attains an early retirement factor of 100% on the earliest of:

age 65 if the participant has at least 10 years of Sysco service;
age 55 if the participant has at least 15 years of MIP service, but only if the sum of his or her age and MIP service is equal to or exceeds 80; and
age 62 if the participant has at least 25 years of Sysco service and at least 15 years of MIP service.

Upon the occurrence of a change in control, the early retirement factor will become 100% for each participant. However, the criteria for determining whether a participant is eligible for early payment remains unchanged (i.e., the enhancement on the early retirement factor only impacts participants who otherwise meet the early payment criteria upon retirement). Notwithstanding this, the SERP contains cutback provisions that will reduce amounts payable to each participant by the amount of any related sharespayments that cannot be deducted by Sysco under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code.

We pay the SERP benefit as a monthly life annuity with a guaranteed minimum period of 10 years if the participant is not married at the time payments commence. If the participant is married at the time payments commence, the participant has the option to elect a joint life annuity whereby the participant and spouse are distributedentitled to hima monthly annuity for life with a guaranteed minimum period of 10 years, and generally, on the participant’s or spouse’s death, the survivor is entitled to receive a monthly annuity for life with each payment equal to two-thirds of each payment made to the couple. The benefit payable upon the death of a vested, terminated participant reflects a reduction of 5/9 of 1% for each of the first 120 months prior to age 65 and an actuarial reduction for the difference between age 55 and the executive’s age at death.

We provide a temporary Social Security bridge benefit to an executive commencing SERP benefits before age 62, payable until the earlier of age 62 or death.

Elements of Compensation included in Benefit Formula — Compensation generally includes base pay, the MIP bonus or any bonus paid in lieu of or as a substitute for the MIP bonus (although this is limited to 150% of the annual rate of base salary for fiscal 2009 and later years), the fiscal 2007 supplemental performance bonus, and stock matches under the 2005 Management Incentive Plan and predecessor plans with respect to fiscal 2005 and prior fiscal years. Compensation earned after June 29, 2013 is not applicable to the SERP.

Funding Status — Sysco’s obligations under the SERP are partially funded by a rabbi trust holding life insurance and an interest in certain real property occupied by Sysco. Sysco’s obligations under the SERP are maintained as a book reserve account. In the event of Sysco’s bankruptcy or insolvency, however, the life insurance, the real property interest, and any other assets held by the rabbi trust become subject to the claims of Sysco’s general creditors.

Lump Sum Availability — Retirement benefits may not be paid as a lump sum.

Delay of Distributions to NEOs — Distributions to an NEO upon the NEO’s “separation from service” as defined under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code will be delayed for a period of six months to the extent that making payments during such six-month period would violate Section 409A.

On November 14, 2012, the Committee amended the SERP to provide that benefit accruals for all participants were frozen as of June 29, 2013. Subsequent to June 29, 2013, the frozen SERP benefits continue to be payable pursuant to the terms of the DSDP. There are no earnings on these dividend equivalents.SERP, as amended.

With respect

Also effective June 29, 2013, all SERP participants vested in their then accrued benefit. However, an early retirement reduction factor has been added to each deferral, participants may elect for some portionapply in the case of an employee who retires before age 65 who would not have been fully vested at his retirement date under the SERP prior to the amendment. The early retirement factor mirrors the benefit reduction that would have occurred as a result of the award a distribution date that is at least one year after the endapplication of the plan year in whichvesting formula if the shares otherwise would have been issued. Any shares with respectparticipant had taken early retirement under the SERP as it existed prior to which no such electionits amendment. These changes do not alter the benefit commencement or other payment schedules for any SERP participant. In addition, the age threshold previously applicable to the SERP death benefit was made are generally deferred untilremoved, effective June 29, 2013. As a result, if an active participant dies, the earliestparticipant’s beneficiary will be entitled to occura monthly annuity actuarially equivalent to the greater of: (i) an annual payment equal to 25% of the participant’s three-year final average compensation for ten years certain, or (ii) the participant’s vested accrued benefit as of his date of death, reduced by an actuarial reduction factor to take into account age at death prior to normal retirement age of the non-employee director, the date on which the non-employee director ceases to be a director of the company, or a change of control of Sysco, unless the participant qualifies and applies for a hardship withdrawal. Distributions are made in lump sum by issuing common stock, except that cash is paid in lieu of fractional shares.65.

See “Director Compensation – Directors Deferred Compensation Plan” for a description of the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement71

Back to Contents

Quantification of Termination/Change in Control Payments

We have entered into certain agreements and maintain certain plans that will require us to provide compensation for the named executive officersNEOs in the event of specified terminations of their employment or upon a change in control of Sysco. We have listed the amount of compensation we would be required to pay to each named executive officer in each situation in the tables below. Amounts included in the tables are estimates and are forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Due to the number of factors that affect the nature and amount of any benefits provided upon the events discussed below, any actual amounts we pay or distribute may differ materially. Factors that could affect these amounts include the timing during the year of any such event, the amount of future bonuses, the value of our stock on the date of the change in control and the ages and life expectancy of each executive and his spouse. The amounts shown in the tables below assume that the event that triggered the payment occurred on June 30, 2012.27, 2015. All amounts shown represent total payments, except as otherwise noted. We expect to time the payment of all amounts shown to comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

WILLIAM J. DELANEY                
  Compensation Components 
                 Acceleration and       
                 Other Benefits       
     Payments           from Unvested       
     and Benefits  Payments  Payments     Stock Options       
  Severance  Under  and Benefits  and Benefits  CPU  and Restricted  Insurance    
Termination Scenario Payment  EDCP(1)  Under MSP(2)  Under SERP(3)  Payment(4)  Stock Units(5)  Payments(6)  Other(7) 
Retirement $  $680,467  $285,941  $7,781,823  $693,526  $16,356,975  $  $106,231 
Death     680,467   285,941   7,781,342   693,526   16,356,975   1,200,000   106,231 
Disability     680,467   285,941   7,781,823   2,090,156   16,356,975   1,454,167   106,231 
Voluntary Resignation     680,467   285,941   7,781,823   693,526   16,356,975      106,231 
Termination for Cause                        
Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason     680,467   285,941   7,781,823   693,526   16,356,975      106,231 
Change in Control w/o Termination(9)     680,467   285,941      5,303,725   16,356,975       
Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control(9)     680,467   285,941   8,760,011   5,303,725   16,356,975      106,231 

ROBERT C. KREIDLER                
  Compensation Components
                 Acceleration and       
                 Other Benefits       
     Payments           from Unvested       
     and Benefits  Payments  Payments     Stock Options       
  Severance  Under  and Benefits  and Benefits  CPU  and Restricted  Insurance    
Termination Scenario Payment  EDCP(1)  Under MSP(2)  Under SERP(3)  Payment(4)  Stock Units(5)  Payments(6)  Other(7) 
Retirement $  $41,295  $275,382$ 255,385  $N/A(8)  $N/A(8)  $N/A(8) $N/A(8)
Death     41,295   275,382   2,332,404   224,504   6,142,576   1,200,000   60,153 
Disability     41,295   275,382   255,385   676,613   6,142,576   3,836,667   60,153 
Voluntary Resignation     41,295   275,382   255,385             
Termination for Cause                        
Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason     41,295   275,382   255,385            60,153 
Change in Control w/o Termination(9)     41,295   275,382      1,778,026   6,142,576       
Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control(9)     41,295   275,382   255,385   1,778,026   6,142,576      60,153 

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7172


Back to Contents
THOMAS L. BENÉ                   
  Compensation Components
                 Acceleration and       
                 Other Benefits       
     Payments           from Unvested       
     and Benefits  Payments  Payments     Stock Options       
  Severance  Under  and Benefits  and Benefits  CPU  and Restricted  Insurance    
Termination Scenario Payment  EDCP(1)  Under MSP(2)  Under SERP(3)  Payment(4)  Stock Units(5)  Payments(6)  Other(7) 
Retirement $  $  $76,004  $  $N/A(8) $N/A(8)  $N/A(8)  $N/A(8) 
Death        76,004      182,227   1,964,662   1,200,000   51,038 
Disability        76,004      549,199   1,964,662   3,445,833   51,038 
Voluntary Resignation        76,004                
Termination for Cause                        
Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason        76,004               51,038 
Change in Control w/o Termination(9)        76,004      1,443,203   1,964,662       
Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control(9)        76,004      1,443,203   1,964,662      51,038 

Back to Contents

RUSSELL T. LIBBY                 
  Compensation Components
                 Acceleration and       
                 Other Benefits       
     Payments           from Unvested       
     and Benefits  Payments  Payments     Stock Options       
  Severance  Under  and Benefits  and Benefits  CPU  and Restricted  Insurance    
Termination Scenario Payment  EDCP(1)  Under MSP(2)  Under SERP(3)  Payment(4)  Stock Units(5)  Payments(6)  Other(7) 
Retirement $  $  $189,156  $58,991  $N/A(8)  $N/A(8)  $N/A(8)  $N/A(8) 
Death        189,156   1,408,717   141,296   2,311,503   1,200,000   43,197 
Disability        189,156   58,991   425,841   2,311,503   4,561,667   43,197 
Voluntary Resignation        189,156   58,991             
Termination for Cause                        
Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason        189,156   58,991            43,197 
Change in Control w/o Termination        189,156      851,121   2,311,503       
Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control(9)        189,156   58,991   851,121   2,311,503      43,197 

WILLIAM J. DELANEY

Termination Scenario

Compensation Components

Severance

Payment

Payments

and Benefits

Under EDCP(1)

Payments

and Benefits

Under SERP(2)

CPU

Payment(3)

Acceleration and

Other Benefits from

Unvested Stock

Options and Restricted

Stock Units(4)

Insurance

Payments(5)

Other(6)

Retirement

$

0

$

458,051

$

4,289,464

$

1,405,847

$

6,844,521

$

0

$

78,346

Death

0

467,389

4,555,696

1,405,847

6,844,521

1,200,000

78,346

Disability

0

467,389

4,289,464

2,585,000

6,844,521

2,351,667

78,346

Voluntary Resignation

0

458,051

4,289,464

0

0

0

0

Termination for Cause

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason

0

458,051

4,289,464

0

0

0

78,346

Change in Control w/o Termination

0

467,389

0

2,975,000

6,844,521

0

0

Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control

0

467,389

7,349,340

2,975,000

6,844,521

0

78,346

ROBERT C. KREIDLER

Termination Scenario

Compensation Components

Severance

Payment

Payments

and Benefits

Under EDCP(1)

Payments

and Benefits

Under SERP(2)

CPU

Payment(3)

Acceleration and

Other Benefits from

Unvested Stock

Options and Restricted

Stock Units(4)

Insurance

Payments(5)

Other(6)

Retirement

$

0

$

44,160

$

0

$

436,739

$

2,095,865

$

0

$

46,615

Death

0

61,809

2,004,139

436,739

2,095,865

1,200,000

46,615

Disability

0

61,809

0

795,900

2,095,865

4,734,167

46,615

Voluntary Resignation

0

44,160

0

0

0

0

0

Termination for Cause

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason

0

44,160

0

0

0

0

46,615

Change in Control w/o Termination

0

61,809

0

918,750

2,095,865

0

0

Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control

0

61,809

61,609

918,750

2,095,865

0

46,615

MANUEL A. FERNANDEZ

Termination Scenario

Compensation Components

Severance

Payment

Payments

and Benefits

Under Director

Deferred

Compensation

Plan(1)

Payments

and Benefits

Under SERP(2)

CPU

Payment(3)

Acceleration and

Other Benefits from

Unvested Stock

Options and Restricted

Stock Units(4)

Insurance

Payments(5)

Other(6)

Retirement

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

2,872,813

$

0

$

32,769

Death

0

0

0

0

2,872,813

225,000

32,769

Disability

0

0

0

0

2,872,813

0

32,769

Voluntary Resignation

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Termination for Cause

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason

0

0

0

0

0

0

32,769

Change in Control w/o Termination

0

0

0

0

2,872,813

0

0

Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control

0

0

0

0

2,872,813

0

32,769

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7273


Back to Contents
WAYNE R. SHURTS                
  Compensation Components
                 Acceleration and       
     Payments          Other Benefits from       
     and Benefits  Payments  Payments     Unvested Stock       
  Severance  Under  and Benefits  and Benefits  CPU  Options and Restricted  Insurance    
Termination Scenario Payment  EDCP(1)  Under MSP(2)  Under SERP(3)  Payment(4)  Stock Units(5)  Payments(6)  Other(7) 
Retirement $  $  $72,025  $  $N/A  $N/A  $N/A  $N/A 
Death        72,025      171,148   3,085,831   1,200,000   58,508 
Disability        72,025      515,808   3,085,831   2,568,333   58,508 
Voluntary Resignation        72,025                
Termination for Cause                        
Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason        72,025               58,508 
Change in Control w/o Termination(9)        72,025      1,355,456   3,085,831       
Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control(9)        72,025      1,355,456   3,085,831      58,508 
(1)See “Fiscal 2015 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation – About the EDCP” above for a discussion of the calculation of benefits and payout options under the EDCP, and events that may cause forfeiture of such benefits. The amounts disclosed reflect the vested value of the company match on elective deferrals, as well as investment earnings on both deferrals and vested company match amounts. These amounts do not include salary and bonus deferrals.
Mr. DeLaney has elected to receive annual installments over 5 years in the event of his death, disability or retirement.
Mr. Kreidler has elected to receive quarterly installments over 15 years in the event of his retirement and quarterly installments over 20 years in the event of his death or disability.
(2)See “Fiscal 2015 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation – About the MSP” above for a discussion of the calculation of benefits and payout options under the MSP, and events that may cause forfeiture of such benefits. The amounts disclosed reflect the vested value of the investment earnings on deferrals amounts. These amounts do not include salary and bonus deferrals. These amounts do not include company matches on salary and bonus deferrals.
Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler, Bené, Libby and Shurts have each elected to receive a lump sum distribution in the event of his death, disability or retirement.
(3)All amounts shown are present values of eligible benefits as of June 27, 2015, calculated using an annual discount rate of 4.63%, which represents the rate used in determining the values disclosed in the “Pension Benefits” table above. See “Pension Benefits” above for a discussion of the terms of the SERP and the assumptions used in calculating the present values contained in the table. The amount and expected number of benefit payments to each executive are based on each respective termination event, the form of payment, the age of the executive and his or her spouse, and mortality assumptions. During the SERP payout period, a participant’s remaining benefit under the SERP may be subject to forfeiture under certain circumstances if the committee administering the SERP finds that the participant has engaged in competition with the company, solicited business of the company, made disparaging remarks about the company, or misappropriated trade secrets or confidential information of the company. Following are specific notes regarding benefits payable to each of the NEOs who participate in the SERP (i.e., Messrs. DeLaney, Kreidler and Libby):
DeathIf an active participant dies, their spouse will receive a monthly benefit payable for life with 120 monthly payments guaranteed. The amounts shown reflect payments as follows:

  Estimated # of Payments  Amount of Payment  Payment Frequency
DeLaney  327  $42,946  Monthly
Kreidler  492   10,699  Monthly
Libby  445   6,729  Monthly
Disability; Involuntary Termination without Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason; Termination without Cause following a Change in Control
The amounts shown reflect the following monthly payments plus the amounts shown below attributable to the monthly PIA supplement, which is paid only until the executive reaches age 62. Because Mr. DeLaney has already met the conditions of Early Payment Criteria as of the 2015 fiscal year-end, his benefits were payable as of July 1, 2015. The other NEOs’ benefits listed below would be payable as of their normal retirement date (age 65).

MICHAEL W. GREEN

Termination Scenario

Compensation Components

Severance

Payment

Payments

and Benefits

Under EDCP(1)

Payments

and Benefits

Under SERP(2)

CPU

Payment(3)

Acceleration and

Other Benefits from

Unvested Stock

Options and Restricted

Stock Units(4)

Insurance

Payments(5)

Other(6)

Retirement

$

0

$

0

$

0

$

450,271

$

2,050,032

$

0

$

54,500

Death

0

0

2,232,332

450,271

2,050,032

1,200,000

54,500

Disability

0

0

0

811,925

2,050,032

3,459,167

54,500

Voluntary Resignation

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Termination for Cause

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason

0

0

0

0

0

0

54,500

Change in Control w/o Termination

0

0

0

940,625

2,050,032

0

0

Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control

0

0

3,659,759

940,625

2,050,032

0

54,500

  Disability, Involuntary Termination without Cause,
or Resignation for Good Reason
  Termination without Cause following
a Change in Control
     Monthly  Monthly PIA     Monthly  Monthly PIA 
  # of Monthly  Payment  Supplement  # of Monthly  Payment  Supplement 
Name Payments  Amounts  (Until Age 62)  Payments  Amounts  (Until Age 62) 
DeLaney  339  $41,667  $1,912   339  $46,940  $1,912 
Kreidler  323   2,599   0   323   2,599   0 
Libby  285   715   0   285   715   0 
Change in Control without TerminationBenefit payments are not triggered.

LARRY G. PULLIAM

Termination Scenario

Compensation Components

Severance

Payment

Payments

and Benefits

Under EDCP(1)

Payments

and Benefits

Under SERP(2)

CPU

Payment(3)

Acceleration and

Other Benefits from

Unvested Stock

Options and Restricted

Stock Units(4)

Insurance

Payments(5)

Other(6)

Retirement

$

0

$

0

$

8,846,528

$

436,779

$

1,985,677

$

0

$

62,769

Death

0

0

8,824,955

436,779

1,985,677

1,200,000

62,769

Disability

0

0

8,846,528

771,300

1,985,677

2,336,667

62,769

Voluntary Resignation

0

0

8,846,528

0

0

0

0

Termination for Cause

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Involuntary Termination w/o Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason

0

0

8,846,528

0

0

0

62,769

Change in Control w/o Termination

0

0

0

900,000

1,985,677

0

0

Termination w/o Cause following a Change in Control

0

0

14,011,452

900,000

1,985,677

0

62,769

(1)

See “Executive Deferred Compensation Plan and Director Deferred Compensation Plan” above for a discussion of the calculation of benefits and payout options under the EDCP, and events that may cause forfeiture of such benefits. The amounts disclosed reflect the vested value of the company match on elective deferrals, as well as investment earnings on both deferrals and vested company match amounts. These amounts do not include salary and bonus deferrals.

Mr. DeLaney has elected to receive annual installments over 5 years in the event of his disability, death or retirement.

Mr. Kreidler has elected to receive quarterly installments over 15 years in the event of his retirement and quarterly installments over 20 years in the event of his disability or death.

Mr. Green and Mr. Pulliam have each elected to receive a lump sum distribution in the event of disability, death or retirement.

With respect to Mr. Fernandez, amounts also reflect deferred compensation under the Directors Deferred Stock Plan during his tenure as a non-employee director of Sysco.

(2)

All amounts shown are present values of eligible benefits as of June 30, 2012, calculated using an annual discount rate of 4.89%, which represents the rate used in determining the values disclosed in the “Pension Benefits” table above. See “Pension Benefits” above for a discussion of the terms of the SERP and the assumptions used in calculating the present values contained in the table. The amount and expected number of benefit payments to each executive are based on each respective termination event, the form of payment, the age of the executive and his or her spouse, and mortality assumptions. During the SERP payout period, a participant’s remaining benefit under the SERP may be subject to forfeiture under certain circumstances if the committee administering the SERP finds that the participant has engaged in competition with the company, solicited business of the company, made disparaging remarks about the company, or misappropriated trade secrets or confidential information of the company. The amount for Mr. Delaney due to termination following a Change in Control also reflects a reduction of $352,492 pursuant to provisions in the SERP that provide for a reduction in benefits to the extent they are not deductible under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code. Following are specific notes regarding benefits payable to each of the named executive officers other than Mr. Fernandez, who does not participate in the SERP:

Death — Because Messrs. DeLaney and Pulliam have reached age 55, their death benefit would be payable on a monthly basis. The other named executive officers’ death benefits listed below would be paid on an annual basis. The amounts shown reflect payments as follows:

 

 

Estimated # of Payments

Amount of Payment

Payment Frequency

 

DeLaney

323

$

25,260

Monthly

Kreidler

10

246,125

Annual

Green

10

274,149

Annual

Pulliam

332

49,866

Monthly

Disability; Involuntary Termination without Cause, or Resignation for Good Reason; Termination without Cause following a Change in Control — The amounts shown reflect the following monthly payments plus the amounts shown below attributable to the monthly PIA supplement, which is paid only until the executive reaches age 62. Because Messrs. DeLaney and Pulliam already meet the conditions of Early Payment Criteria as of the 2012 fiscal year-end, their benefits are payable as of July 1, 2012. The other named executive officers’ benefits listed below would be payable as of their normal retirement date (age 65). The amount for Mr. DeLaney due to a termination following a change of control also reflect a reduction of $352,492, respectively, pursuant to provisions in the SERP that provide for a reduction in benefits to the extent they are not deductible under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7374


Back to Contents
(4)See “Cash Performance Units” above for a discussion of the CPUs. The amounts shown include payment of awards made in November 2013 and November 2014. For purposes of this disclosure, and as defined in the plan, we have assumed the following levels of performance:
Retirement— Amounts reflect the pro-rated estimated value of awards pursuant to (i) the fiscal 2014-2016 performance cycle and (ii) the fiscal 2015-2017 performance cycle, in each case based on forecasted performance. The awards are pro-rated for the number of fiscal years during which the executive was actively employed, regardless of whether the executive was employed for the entirety of the relevant fiscal year. The pro rata factors used are 66.6% for the fiscal 2014-2016 performance cycle and 33.2% for the fiscal 2015-2017 performance cycle for all executives.
Disability— Amounts reflect the estimated value of awards pursuant to (i) the fiscal 2014-2016 performance cycle and (ii) the fiscal 2015-2017 performance cycle, in each case based on forecasted performance.
Death— Amounts reflect the estimated value of awards pursuant to the fiscal 2014-2016 and 2015-2017 performance cycles based on forecasted performance, pro-rated for the portion of each performance cycle completed at the time of death with respect to the fiscal 2014-2016 performance cycle and pro-rated for the number of fiscal years during which the executive was actively employed, regardless of whether the executive was employed for the entirety of the relevant fiscal year, with respect to the 2015-2017 performance cycle. The pro-rata factors used are 66.6% for the fiscal 2014-2016 performance cycle and 33.2% for the 2015-2017 performance cycle for all executives.
Change in Control— Amounts reflect the target award value of awards pursuant to the fiscal 2014-2016 and fiscal 2015-2017 performance cycles.
(5)The amounts shown include the value of unvested accelerated restricted stock units and restricted stock, valued at the closing price of Sysco common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on June 27, 2015, the last business day of our 2015 fiscal year, plus the difference between the exercise prices of unvested accelerated options and the closing price of Sysco common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on June 27, 2015 multiplied by the number of such options outstanding. See “Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End” for disclosure of the events causing an acceleration of outstanding unvested options and restricted stock. Assumes accelerated vesting of all unvested restricted stock units, restricted stock and stock options.
(6)Includes payments we will make in connection with additional life insurance coverage, long-term disability coverage and long-term care insurance. In the event of death, a lump sum Basic Life Insurance benefit is payable in an amount equal to one-times the executive’s prior year W-2 earnings, capped at $150,000. An additional benefit is paid in an amount equal to two-times the executive’s base salary at the beginning of the year in which the death occurred, capped at $1,050,000. The value of the benefits payable is doubled in the event of an accidental death. In the event of disability, a monthly Long-Term Disability benefit of $25,000 would be payable to age 65, following a 180-day elimination period.
(7)Includes retiree medical benefits and the payment of accrued but unused vacation.
(8)Indicates that the NEO did not qualify for retirement with respect to the applicable compensation component as of June 27, 2015.
(9)As a result of the assumption that the change in control occurred on June 27, 2015, the NEOs would not have received any incremental benefit with respect to their annual incentive awards under the 2015 MIP. See ” – Management Incentive Plan” above for a discussion of the impact of a change in control on the amount and timing of annual incentive awards.

Back to Contents

Name

Disability, Involuntary Termination without Cause,

or Resignation for Good Reason

Termination without Cause following

a Change in Control

# of Monthly

Payments

Monthly

Payment

Amounts

Monthly PIA

Supplement

(Until Age 62)

# of Monthly

Payments

Monthly

Payment

Amounts

Monthly PIA

Supplement

(Until Age 62)

DeLaney

354

$

22,776

$

1,846

354

$

41,346

$

1,846

Kreidler

295

810

Green

261

41,803

Pulliam

346

48,120

1,625

346

76,506

1,625

Change in Control without Termination — Benefit payments are not triggered.

(3)

See “Cash Performance Unit Plans” above for a discussion of the CPUs. The amounts shown include payment of awards made in November 2010 and November 2011. For purposes of this disclosure, and as defined in the plan, we have assumed the following levels of performance:

Retirement — Amounts reflect the pro-rated target award value of awards pursuant to the fiscal 2011-2013 performance cycles and the pro-rated target award value of awards pursuant to the fiscal 2012-2014 performance cycles, pro-rated for the number of fiscal years during which the executive was actively employed, regardless of whether the executive was employed for the entirety of the relevant fiscal year. The pro rata factors used are 66.6% for the fiscal 2011-2013 performance cycle and 33.2% for the 2012-2014 performance cycle for all executives other than Mr. Fernandez, who has not received any CPU grants.

Disability  — Amounts reflect the estimated value of awards pursuant to the fiscal 2011-2013 performance cycle based on forecasted performance and the target value of awards pursuant to the fiscal 2012-2014 performance cycles.

Death — Amounts reflect the target award value of awards pursuant to the fiscal 2011-2013 and 2012-2014 performance cycles, pro-rated for the portion of each performance cycle completed at the time of death with respect to the fiscal 2011-2013 performance cycle and pro-rated for the number of fiscal years during which the executive was actively employed, regardless of whether the executive was employed for the entirety of the relevant fiscal year, with respect to the 2012-2014 performance cycle. The pro-rata factors used are 66.6% for the fiscal 2011-2013 performance cycle and 33.2% for the 2012-2014 performance cycle for all executives other than Mr. Fernandez, who has not received any CPU grants.

Change in Control — Amounts reflect the target award value of awards pursuant to the fiscal 2011-2013 and fiscal 2012-2014 performance cycles.

(4)

The amounts shown include the value of unvested accelerated restricted stock units and restricted stock, valued at the closing price of Sysco common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on June 29, 2012, the last business day of our 2012 fiscal year, plus the difference between the exercise prices of unvested accelerated options and the closing price of Sysco common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on June 29, 2012 multiplied by the number of such options outstanding. See “Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End” for disclosure of the events causing an acceleration of outstanding unvested options and restricted stock. Assumes accelerated vesting of all unvested restricted stock units, restricted stock and stock options.

(5)

Includes payments we will make in connection with additional life insurance coverage, long-term disability coverage, including disability income coverage, and long-term care insurance. In the event of death, a lump sum Basic Life Insurance benefit is payable in an amount equal to one-times the executive’s prior year W-2 earnings, capped at $150,000. An additional benefit is paid in an amount equal to two-times the executive’s base salary at the beginning of the year in which the death occurred, capped at $1,050,000. The value of the benefits payable is doubled in the event of an accidental death. In the event of disability, a monthly Long-Term Disability benefit of $25,000 would have been payable to age 65, following a 180-day elimination period.

(6)

Includes retiree medical benefits and the payment of accrued but unused vacation.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7475


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

Compensation Risk Analysis

The Compensation Committee oversees the company’s executive compensation program and regularly reviews the program against Sysco’s strategic goals, industry practices and emerging trends in order to ensure alignment with stockholder interests. The Committee believes that Sysco’s performance-based bonus and equity programs provide executives with incentives to create long-term stockholder value.

In 2010, the Committee expanded its review of compensation programs across the Sysco enterprise to monitor whether the program components encourage or otherwise promote the taking of inappropriate or unacceptable risks that could threaten the company’s long-term value. This review was updated in 2011 and 2012.In 2015, the Committee engaged Exequity to assist with the assessment of Sysco’s enterprise-wide compensation programs. The assessment placed particular emphasis on identifying employees who have both significant compensation risk in the variability of their compensation and also the ability to expose the company to significant business risk. The Committee primarily focused on the compensation for the senior executives of Sysco Corporation and its operating companies, as these are the employees whose actions have the greatest potential to expose the company to significant business risk, although the review addressed all forms and levels of variable and other compensation that the Committee believed could reasonably provide employees with incentives to undertake risky behavior on behalf of Sysco. Having completed this review, the Committee continues to believe that many of Sysco’s long-standing practices are designed to effectively promote the creation of long-term value, discourage behavior that leads to excessive risk, and mitigate the material risks associated with executive and other compensation programs.

These practices include the following:

Sysco’s executive compensation programs are designed to include a mix of elements so that the compensation mix is not overly focused on either short-term or long-term incentives.
Sysco’s executive annual incentive award programs (both the annual incentive award and the three-year cash performance units) are based on financial metrics that are objective and drive long-term stockholder value (including diluted earnings, return on invested capital and increase in sales, gross profit, and total shareholder return). Moreover, the Committee attempts to set ranges for these measures that encourage success without encouraging excessive risk taking to achieve short-term results. The Committee has the absolute discretion to remove any and all participants from the annual incentive award program prior to the end of the fiscal year to which the annual incentive award relates and may reduce the amount of the annual incentive award payment, in its discretion, at any time prior to the fiscal year end.
Sysco’s incentive programs do not allow for unlimited payments, and annual incentive award caps limit the extent that employees could potentially profit by taking on excessive risk.
Selection of three different types of long-term incentives (stock options, restricted stock units and cash performance units) for executives helps to minimize the risk that they will take actions that could cause harm to the Company and its stockholders. The value of stock options and restricted stock units are primarily based on stock price appreciation, which is determined by how the market values our common stock.
Longer performance periods encourage executives to attain sustained performance over several periods, rather than performance in a single period. CPUs are based on a three-year performance period. Stock options become exercisable over a five year period and remain exercisable for up to seven years to ten years from the date of grant (depending on the grant), encouraging executives to look to long-term appreciation in equity values.
The stock ownership guidelines described under “Stock Ownership—Stock Ownership Guidelines” above align the interests of our executive officers with the long-term interests of all stockholders and encourage our executives to execute our strategies for growth in a prudent manner.
In 2009, the Committee adopted a clawback policy, which is described under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Executive Compensation Governance and Other Information—Executive Compensation Clawback Policy” above. In the event we are required to restate our financial statements, other than as a result of an accounting change, we will recover annual incentive award payments and CPU three-year incentive-based compensation from all participants.

Sysco’s executive compensation programs are designed to include a mix of elements so that the compensation mix is not overly focused on either short-term or long-term incentives.

Sysco’s executive annual incentive award programs (both the MIP annual incentive award and the three-year cash performance units) are based on financial metrics which are objective and drive long-term stockholder value (including diluted earnings, return on invested capital and increase in sales and total shareholder return). Moreover, the Committee attempts to set ranges for these measures that encourage success without encouraging excessive risk taking to achieve short-term results. The Committee has the absolute discretion to remove any and all participants from the annual MIP annual incentive award program prior to the end of the fiscal year to which the annual incentive award relates and may reduce the amount of the annual incentive award pay out, in its discretion, at any time prior to the fiscal year end.

Sysco’s incentive programs do not allow for unlimited payouts, and annual incentive award caps limit the extent that employees could potentially profit by taking on excessive risk.

Selection of three different types of long-term incentives (stock options, restricted stock units and cash performance units) for executives helps to minimize the risk that they will take actions that could cause harm to the Corporation and its stockholders. The value of stock options and restricted stock units are primarily based on stock price appreciation, which is determined by how the market values our common stock.

Longer performance periods encourage executives to attain sustained performance over several periods, rather than performance in a single period. CPUs are based on a three-year performance period. Stock options become exercisable over a five year period (three years for Mr. Fernandez) and remain exercisable for up to seven years (ten years for options issued from 2001 through 2003) from the date of grant, encouraging executives to look to long-term appreciation in equity values.

The stock ownership guidelines described under “Stock Ownership — Stock Ownership Guidelines” above align the interests of our executive officers with the long-term interests of all stockholders and encourage our executives to execute our strategies for growth in a prudent manner.

In 2009, the Committee adopted a clawback policy, which is described under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Executive Compensation Governance and Other Information — Executive Compensation Recoupment Policy” above. In the event we are required to restate our financial statements, other than as a result of an accounting change, we will recover MIP annual incentive award payments and CPU three-year incentive-based compensation from all MIP participants.

Based on its most recent review, management and the Committee do not believe that the compensation policies and practices of Sysco create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7576


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION (ITEM 2)

Sysco seeks a non-binding vote from its stockholders to approve the compensation paid to our named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables and narrative discussion. This vote is commonly referred to as a “Say on Pay” vote because it gives stockholders a direct opportunity to express their approval or disapproval to the company regarding its pay practices.

As discussed in detail in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, our executive compensation programs are designed to attract, retain and motivate highly talented individuals who are committed to driving Sysco’s vision and strategy. We strive to link executives’ pay to their performance and their advancement of Sysco’s overall performance and business strategies, while also aligning the executives’ interests with those of stockholders and encouragingstockholders. We also aim to encourage high-performing executives to drive long-term results and to remain with Sysco over the course of their careers. We believe that the amount of compensation for each named executive officer reflects their extensive management experience, continued high performance and exceptional service to Sysco and our stockholders.

We invite you to consider the details of our executive compensation as disclosed more fully throughout this proxy statement.

Regardless of the outcome of this “Say on Pay” vote, Sysco welcomes input from its stockholders regarding executive compensation and other matters related to the company’s success generally. We believe in a corporate governance structure that is responsive to stockholder concerns, and we view this vote as a meaningful opportunity to gauge stockholder approval of our executive compensation policies. Given the information provided above and elsewhere in this proxy statement, the Board of Directors asks you to approve the following advisory resolution:

“Resolved, that Sysco’s stockholders approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation paid to Sysco’s named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement.”

Required Vote -

The votes cast for this proposal must exceed the votes cast against it in order for it to be approved. Accordingly, abstentions and broker non-votes will not be relevant to the outcome.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the approval of the compensation paid to Sysco’s Named Executive Officers.

SYSCO CORPORATION2012 Proxy Statement   76


Back to Contents

REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE

The

Sysco’s Audit Committee reports to, and acts on behalf of, the Board of Directors, and is composed of four directors who each satisfy the independence, financial literacy and other requirements of the New York Stock Exchange listing standards and the U.S. federal securities laws. The role of the Audit Committee is to assist the Board in its oversight of:

Compliance with legal and regulatory requirements;
Corporate accounting;
Reporting practices;
The integrity of the company’s financial statements;
The qualifications, independence and performance of the Ernst & Young LLP, Sysco’s independent registered public accounting firm (“Ernst & Young”);
The performance of Sysco’s internal audit function; and
Risk assessment and risk management.

During fiscal year 2015, the Audit Committee held nine meetings and fulfilled all of its responsibilities as set forth in the committee’s charter, including:

Reviewing with Ernst & Young and the internal auditors the overall scope and plans for their respective audits for the fiscal year;
Approving all audit engagement fees and terms, as well as permissible non-audit engagements with Ernst & Young (please refer to “Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” below for a detailed discussion of such fees and related approvals);
Reviewing the experience and qualifications of the senior members of Ernst & Young’s audit team;
Assuring the regular rotation of Ernst & Young’s lead audit partner as required by law, and considering whether there should be rotation of the independent registered public accounting firm itself;
Reviewing and discussing with management the earnings press releases prior to release to the public;
Meeting with Ernst & Young and the internal auditors, with and without management present, to discuss the adequacy and effectiveness of Sysco’s internal control over financial reporting and the overall quality of the company’s financial reporting; and
Meeting independently with each of Sysco’s Chief Executive Officer and Sysco’s Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement77

Back to Contents

As required by its charter, the Audit Committee has also met and held discussions with management and the independent public accountantsErnst & Young regarding Sysco’s audited consolidated financial statements for the year ending June 30, 2012.27, 2015. Management represented to the Audit Committee that Sysco’s consolidated financial statements were prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and the Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed the audited consolidated financial statements with management and the independent public accountants.Ernst & Young. The Audit Committee also discussed with the independent public accountantsErnst & Young the matters required to be discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 61(Codification61 (Codification of Statements on Auditing Standards, AU Sec. 380), as modified or supplemented. Sysco’s independent public accountantsErnst & Young provided to the Audit Committee the written disclosures and the letter required by Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Rule 3526, “Communication with Audit Committees Concerning Independence”, as modified or supplemented, and the Audit Committee discussed with the independent public accountantsErnst & Young that firm’s independence.

Based on the Audit Committee’s discussion with management and the independent public accountantsErnst & Young and the Audit Committee’s review of the representations of management and theErnst & Young’s report, of the independent public accountants, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited consolidated financial statements be included in Sysco’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 201227, 2015 for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

AUDIT COMMITTEE

Joseph A. Hafner, Jr.

Hans-Joachim Koerber

Nancy S. Newcomb

Richard G. Tilghman,Chairman

FEES PAID TO INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The following table presents fees billed for professional audit services rendered by Ernst & Young LLP for the audit of Sysco’s annual financial statements for fiscal 20122015 and 2011,2014, as well as other services rendered by Ernst & Young LLP during those periods:

 

Fiscal 2012

Fiscal 2011

Audit Fees(1)

$

4,085,588

$

3,817,150

Audit-Related Fees(2)

661,160

552,211

Tax Fees(3)

2,885,926

3,583,000

All Other Fees

(1)

Audit fees in fiscal 2012 included $3,757,794 related to the audit and quarterly reviews of the consolidated financial statements (including an audit of the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting), $251,500 related to assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC and $76,294 related to a statutory audit. Audit fees for fiscal 2011 included $3,645,000 related to the audit and quarterly reviews of the consolidated financial statements (including an audit of the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting), $92,150 related to assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC and $80,000 related to a statutory audit.

(2)

Audit-related fees in fiscal 2012 included $119,000 related to the audit of the company’s benefit plans and $542,160 for other audit-related services. Audit-related fees for fiscal 2011 included $113,800 related to the audit of the company’s benefit plans and $438,411 for other audit-related services.

(3)

Tax fees in fiscal 2012 included $2,368,211 related to local, state, provincial and federal income tax return preparation, $163,411 related to various tax examinations, $194,181 related to assistance with transfer pricing agreements, $15,556 related to various state tax matters, $129,446 related to assistance with tax planning transactions and $15,121 for other tax related services.Tax fees for fiscal 2011 included $2,266,500 related to local, state, provincial and federal income tax return preparation, $253,000 related to various tax examinations, $542,000 related to assistance with transfer pricing agreements, $185,000 related to various state tax matters, $175,000 related to assistance with tax planning transactions and $161,500 for other tax related services.

  Fiscal 2015  Fiscal 2014 
Audit Fees(1) $5,485,000  $5,337,885 
Audit-Related Fees(2)  178,995   1,024,363 
Tax Fees(3)  1,700,244   2,549,861 
All Other Fees      
(1)Audit fees in fiscal 2015 included $5,050,000 related to the audit and quarterly reviews of the consolidated financial statements (including an audit of the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting), $235,000 related to assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC and $200,000 related to statutory audits. Audit fees in fiscal 2014 included $4,877,000 related to the audit and quarterly reviews of the consolidated financial statements (including an audit of the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting), $266,885 related to assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC and $194,000 related to statutory audits.
(2)Audit-related fees in fiscal 2015 included $45,000 related to an agreed upon procedures report, $132,000 related to the audit of the company’s benefit plans, and $1,995 for other audit-related services. Audit-related fees in fiscal 2014 included $871,863 related to due diligence related to mergers and acquisitions and $152,500 related to the audit of the company’s benefit plans.
(3)Tax fees in fiscal 2015 included $1,527,592 related to local, state, provincial and federal income tax return preparation, $170,019 related to assistance with transfer pricing agreements, and $2,633 related to various tax examinations. Tax fees in fiscal 2014 included $1,961,496 related to local, state, provincial and federal income tax return preparation, $1,200 related to various tax examinations, $251,169 related to assistance with transfer pricing agreements, $116,593 related to various state tax matters, and $219,403 related to assistance with tax planning transactions.

Pre-Approval Policy

In February 2003, the Audit Committee adopted a formal policy concerning approval of audit and non-audit services to be provided by the independent auditor to the company. The policy requires that all services, including audit services and permissible audit related, tax and non-audit services, to be provided by Ernst & Young LLP to the company, be pre-approved by the Audit Committee. All of the services performed by Ernst & Young in or with respect to fiscal 20122015 and fiscal 20112014 were approved in advance by the Audit Committee pursuant to the foregoing pre-approval policy and procedures. During fiscal 2012,2015, Ernst & Young did not provide any services prohibited under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7778


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP AS INDEPENDENT AUDITORSREGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM (ITEM 3)

The Audit Committee of the Board has appointed Ernst & Young LLP as Sysco’s independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal 2013.2016. Ernst & Young LLP has served as the company’s independent public registered public accounting firm providing auditing, financial and tax services since their engagement in fiscal 2002. In determining to appoint Ernst & Young, the Audit Committee carefully considered Ernst & Young’s past performance for the company, its independence with respect to the services to be performed and its general reputation for adherence to professional auditing standards.

Although the company is not required to seek ratification, the Audit Committee and the Board believe it is sound corporate governance to do so. If stockholders do not ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young, the current appointment will stand, but the Audit Committee will consider the stockholders’ action in determining whether to appoint Ernst & Young as the company’s independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal 2014.2017.

Representatives of Ernst & Young LLP will be present at the Annual Meeting and will have the opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so. They will also be available to respond to appropriate questions.

Required Vote

The votes cast for this proposal must exceed the vote cast against in order for it to be approved. Accordingly abstentions and broker non-votes will not be relevant to the outcome.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the ratification of the appointment of the independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal 2013.2016.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement79

Back to Contents

STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS

Presenting Business

If you would like to present a proposal under Rule 14a-8 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 at our 20132016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, send the proposal in time for us to receive it no later than June 5, 2013.9, 2016. If the date of our 20132016 Annual Meeting is subsequently changed by more than 30 days from the date of this year’s Annual Meeting, we will inform you of the change and the date by which we must receive proposals. If you want to present business at our 20132016 Annual Meeting outside of the stockholder proposal rules of Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act and instead pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the company’s Bylaws, the Corporate Secretary must receive notice of your proposal by August 16, 2013,20, 2016, but not before July 7, 2013,11, 2016, and you must be a stockholder of record on the date you provide notice of your proposal to the company and on the record date for determining stockholders entitled to notice of the meeting and to vote.

Nominating Directors for Election

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee will consider any director nominees you recommend in writing for the 20132016 Annual Meeting if you submit such written recommendation in conformity with the procedural and informational requirements set forth at “Board Of Directors Matters — Election of Directors at 20122015 Annual Meeting (Item 1) – Nomination Process” no later than May 1, 2013.2016. You may also nominate someone yourself at the 20132016 Annual Meeting, as long as the Corporate Secretary receives notice of such nomination between July 7, 201311, 2016 and August 16, 2013,20, 2016, and you follow the procedures outlined in Article I, Section 7 of the company’s Bylaws.bylaws.

Meeting Date Changes

If the date of next year’s Annual Meeting is advanced by more than 30 days prior to or delayed by more than 60 days after the date of this year’s Annual Meeting, we will inform you of the change, and we must receive your director nominee notices or your stockholder proposals outside of Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act by the latest of 90 days before the Annual Meeting, 10 days after we mail the notice of the changed date of the Annual Meeting or 10 days after we publicly disclose the changed date of the Annual Meeting.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7880


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

ANNEX I – NON-GAAP RECONCILIATIONS

Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Share Non-GAAP Reconciliation

More information on the rationale for the use of these measures can be found in our Annual Report on Form 10-K.

(In thousands, except for share and per share data)

 

2012

 

 

2011

 

 

Change

in Dollars

 

%

Change

 

Net earnings (GAAP)

$

1,121,585

 

$

1,152,030

 

$

(30,445

)

(2.6

)%

Impact of BTP costs (net of tax)(1)

 

121,416

 

 

64,694

 

 

56,722

 

87.7

 

Impact of MEPP charge (net of tax)(1)

 

13,768

 

 

26,189

 

 

(12,421

)

(47.4

)

Impact of restructuring charge (net of tax)(1)

 

4,033

 

 

 

 

4,033

 

 

 

Impact of COLI

 

(3,721

)

 

(28,197

)

 

24,476

 

(86.8

)

Impact of tax benefits

 

 

 

(14,032

)

 

14,032

 

0.0

 

ADJUSTED NET EARNINGS (NON-GAAP)

$

1,257,081

 

$

1,200,684

 

$

56,397

 

4.7

%

Diluted earnings per share (GAAP)

$

1.90

 

$

1.96

 

$

(0.06

)

-3.1

%

Impact of BTP costs(2)

 

0.21

 

 

0.11

 

 

0.10

 

90.9

 

Impact of MEPP charge(2)

 

0.02

 

 

0.04

 

 

(0.02

)

-50.0

 

Impact of restructuring charge(2)

 

0.01

 

 

-

 

 

0.01

 

 

 

Impact of COLI(2)

 

(0.00

)

 

(0.05

)

 

0.05

 

 

 

Impact of tax benefits(2)

 

 

 

(0.02

)

 

0.02

 

 

 

ADJUSTED DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE (NON-GAAP)

$

2.13

 

$

2.04

 

$

0.09

 

4.4

%

Diluted shares outstanding

 

588,991,441

 

 

588,691,546

 

 

 

 

 

 

(1)

Tax impact of adjustments for Business Transformation Project, multiemployer pension plan expenses, restructuring charges was $82.2 million and $53.3 million for fiscal 2012 and 2011, respectively.

(2)

Individual components of diluted earnings per share may not sum to the total adjusted diluted earnings due to rounding.

Adjusted Operating Income Non-GAAP Reconciliation:

(in thousands) 2015 
Operating income (GAAP) $1,229,362 
Impact of severance charges  5,598 
Impact of US Foods merger and integration costs  554,667 
Impact of facility closure charges  2,203 
ADJUSTED OPERATING INCOME (NON-GAAP) $1,791,830 

Adjusted Net Earnings Non-GAAP Reconciliation:

(in thousands) 2015 
Net earnings (GAAP)(1) $686,773 
Impact of severance charges  3,302 
Impact of US Foods merger and integration costs  327,149 
Impact of facility closure charges  1,299 
Impact of US Foods financing costs  81,643 
ADJUSTED NET EARNINGS (NON-GAAP)(1) $1,100,166 
(1)The net earnings impacts are shown net of tax. The aggregate tax impact of adjustments for Certain Items was $287.5 million for fiscal 2015. The amount is calculated by multiplying the pretax impact of each Certain Item by the statutory tax rate in effect for each jurisdiction.

Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Share Non-GAAP Reconciliation:

(in thousands, except for share and per share data) 2015 
Diluted earnings per share (GAAP)(1) $1.15 
Impact of severance charges  0.01 
Impact of US Foods merger and integration costs  0.55 
Impact of US Foods financing costs  0.14 
ADJUSTED DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE (NON-GAAP)(1), (2) $1.84 
Diluted shares outstanding  596,849,034 
(1)The diluted earnings per share impacts are shown net of tax. The aggregate tax impact of adjustments for Certain Items was $287.5 million for fiscal 2015. The amount is calculated by multiplying the pretax impact of each Certain Item by the statutory tax rate in effect for each jurisdiction.
(2)Individual components of diluted earnings per share may not add to the total presented due to rounding. Total diluted earnings per share is calculated using adjusted net earnings for Certain Items dividued by diluted shares outstanding.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement81

Back to Contents

Free Cash Flow Non-GAAP Reconciliation:

(in thousands) 2015 
Net cash provided by operating activities (GAAP) $1,555,484 
Additions to plant and equipment  (542,830)
Proceeds from sales of plant and equipment  24,472 
FREE CASH FLOW (NON-GAAP) $1,037,126 

Non-GAAP reconciliationsReconciliation for adjustedAdjusted Sales Growth and Gross Profit Growth Used in Management Incentive Plan Measurement:

Sysco’s management incentive plan requires adjustments to sales and earnings per sharegross profit growth used in cash performance units measurement

Sysco’s fiscal year ends onmetrics to exclude the Saturday nearest to June 30th. This resulted in a 52-week year for fiscal 2012, fiscal 2011 and fiscal 2009 and a 53-week year for fiscal 2010. Because the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010 contained an additional week as compared to fiscal 2011, our results of operations for fiscal 2010 are not directly comparable to fiscal 2011. Management’s cash performance unit plan requires an adjustment to fiscal 2010 sales and diluted earnings per share for the estimated impact of the additional week which management believes provides a more comparable measurementresults of salesjoint ventures in the first year of operations and diluted earnings per share on a year-over-year basis.to remove the impact of changes in foreign exchange rates. As a result, in the non-GAAP reconciliationsreconciliation below for fiscal 2010,2015, sales and diluted earnings per sharegross profits have been adjusted by one-fourteenth of the total metric for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2010 and theto remove these adjustments. The resulting adjusted sales and earnings per share increase on a 52-week basisadjusted gross profit increases were used in the measurement of the results of the cash performance units.mangement incentive plan.

(In thousands)

2012

 

2011

 

2010

(53 Weeks)

 

2009

Sales (GAAP)

$

42,380,939

 

$

39,323,489

 

$

37,243,495

 

$

36,853,330

Impact of 53rd week

 

 

 

 

 

739,177

 

 

ADJUSTED SALES (NON-GAAP)

$

42,380,939

 

$

39,323,489

 

$

36,504,318

 

$

36,853,330

Sales growth (GAAP)

 

7.8

%

 

5.6

%

 

1.1

%

 

 

Sales growth (Non-GAAP)

 

7.8

%

 

7.7

%

 

-0.9

%

 

 

Cash performance unit measurement:

Three year average sales growth (Non-GAAP)

 

 4.85

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2012

 

2011

 

2010

(53 Weeks)

 

2009

Diluted earnings per share (GAAP)

$

1.90

 

$

1.96

 

$

1.99

 

$

1.77

Impact of 53rd week

 

 

 

 

 

0.04

 

 

ADJUSTED DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE (NON-GAAP)

$

1.90

 

$

1.96

 

$

1.95

 

$

1.77

Diluted earnings per share (GAAP)

 

-3.1

%

 

-1.5

%

 

12.4

%

 

 

Diluted earnings per share (Non-GAAP)

 

-3.1

%

 

0.5

%

 

10.2

%

 

 

Cash performance unit measurement:

Three year average diluted earnings per share growth (Non-GAAP)

 

2.54

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(In thousands) 2015  2014 
Sales (GAAP) $48,680,752  $46,516,712 
Impact of consolidated joint ventures in the first year of operations  (208,779)    
Impact of changes in foreign exchange rates  473,399     
ADJUSTED SALES (NON-GAAP) $48,945,372  $46,516,712 
Sales growth (GAAP)  4.7%    
Sales growth (Non-GAAP)  5.2%    
         
(In thousands) 2015  2014 
Gross profit (GAAP) $8,551,516  $8,181,035 
Impact of consolidated joint ventures in the first year of operations  (28,463)    
Impact of changes in foreign exchange rates  81,228     
ADJUSTED GROSS PROFIT (NON-GAAP) $8,604,281  $8,181,035 
Gross profit growth (GAAP)  4.5%    
Gross profit growth (Non-GAAP)  5.2%    

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    7982


Back to Contents

Back to Contents

Non-GAAP reconciliationReconciliation for adjusted sales growth usedAdjusted Diluted Earnings per Share Used in management incentive bonus measurementManagement Incentive Plan Measurement:

Sysco’s management incentive bonus plan requires adjustments to diluted earnings per share to exclude Certain Items, the removalimpact of sales from acquired companies where the purchase price exceeds $40 million. One acquisition exceeded this thresholdresults of joint ventures in fiscal 2012.the first year of operations and to remove the impact of changes in foreign exchange rates. As a result, in the non-GAAP reconciliation below for fiscal 2012, sales2015, net earnings have been adjusted to remove the sales achieved by this acquired company in fiscal 2012.these adjustments. The resulting sales increase excluding this acquired company wasadjusted diluted earnings per share were used in the measurement of the results of the managementmangement incentive bonus plan.

(In thousands)

2012

 

2011

Sales (GAAP)

$

42,380,939

 

$

39,323,489

Sales of acquired company

 

38,731

 

 

ADJUSTED SALES (NON-GAAP)

$

42,342,208

 

$

39,323,489

Sales growth (GAAP)

 

7.8

%

 

 

Sales growth (Non-GAAP)

 

7.7

%

 

 

(In thousands, except for share and per share data) 2015 
Net earnings (GAAP)(1) $686,773 
Impact of severance charges  3,302 
Impact of US Foods merger and integration costs  327,149 
Impact of facility closure charges  1,299 
Impact of US Foods financing costs  81,643 
Impact of consolidated joint ventures in the first year of operations  244 
Impact of changes in foreign exchange rates  8,403 
ADJUSTED NET EARNINGS (NON-GAAP)(1) $1,108,813 
Diluted earnings per share (GAAP)(1) $1.15 
Impact of severance charges  0.01 
Impact of US Foods merger and integration costs  0.55 
Impact of US Foods financing costs  0.14 
Impact of consolidated joint ventures in the first year of operations   
Impact of changes in foreign exchange rates  0.01 
ADJUSTED DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE (NON-GAAP)(1), (2) $1.86 
Diluted shares outstanding  596,849,034 
(1)The net earnings and diluted earnings per share impacts are shown net of tax. The aggregate tax impact of adjustments for Certain Items was $292.5 million for fiscal 2015. The amount is calculated by multiplying the pretax impact of each Certain Item by the statutory tax rate in effect for each jurisidication.
(2)Individual components of diluted earnings per share may not add to the total presented due to rounding. Total diluted earnings per share is calculated using adjusted net earnings for Certain Items dividued by diluted shares outstanding.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 20122015 Proxy Statement    8083


Back to Contents

Non-GAAP Reconciliation for Adjusted Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) Used in Management Incentive Plan Measurement - Fiscal 2015:

Sysco’s management incentive bonus plan requires the use of adjusted ROIC. We calculate ROIC as net earnings divided by (i) stockholder equity, computed as the average of adjusted stockholders’ equity at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year; and (ii) long-term debt, computed as the average of the long-term debt at the beginning of the year and at the end each fiscal quarter during the year. All components of our ROIC calculation are impacted by Certain Items. As a result, in the non-GAAP reconciliation below for fiscal 2015, adjusted total invested capital is computed as the sum of (i) adjusted stockholder’s equity, computed as the average of the adjusted stockholders’ equity at the beginnng of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year; and (ii) adjusted long-term debt, computed as the average of the adjusted long-term debt at the beginning of the year and at the end of each fiscal quarter during the year. Sysco considers adjusted ROIC to Contentsbe a measure that provides useful information to management and investors in evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of the company’s long-term capital investments, and we currently use ROIC as a performance criteria in our management incentive programs. It is possible that a different definition of ROIC may be used by other companies, since it can be defined differently. An analysis of any non-gaap financial measure should be used in conjunction with results presented in accordance with GAAP. In the table that follows, adjusted ROIC for each period presented is reconciled to a GAAP based calculation of ROIC.

Good Things Come From

(In thousands) 2015 
Net earnings (GAAP)(1) $686,773 
Impact of severance charges  3,302 
Impact of US Foods merger and integration costs  327,149 
Impact of facility closure charges  1,299 
Impact of US Foods financing costs  81,643 
ADJUSTED NET EARNINGS (NON-GAAP)(1) $1,100,166 
Invested Capital (GAAP) $10,985,527 
Adjustments to invested capital  (2,565,346)
ADJUSTED INVESTED CAPITAL (GAAP) $8,420,181 
Return on investment capital (GAAP)  6.3%
Return on investment capital (Non-GAAP)  13.1%
(1)The net earnings impacts are shown net of tax. The aggregate tax impact of adjustments for Certain Items was $287.5 million for fiscal 2015. The amount is calculated by multiplying the pretax impact of each Certain Item by the statutory tax rate in effect for each jurisidication.

SYSCO CORPORATION - 2015 Proxy Statement84

Back to Contents

Food isn’t the only thing that comes off the back of a Sysco truck.

We deliver ingredients for success.

At Sysco, we offer our customers more good things than they expect. We go beyond our basic commitment to get customers the foodservice products they want, when they want them, at the right price and as promised. We do more because we know that when our customers are successful, we’re successful.

Explore Sysco

Scan these QR codes with a smart device or use the URLs to learn more about Sysco:

 

 

Read our online Annual Report


http://www.sysco.com/investor/OnlineAnnual2012/index.html


OnlineAnnual2015

Sustainability Report


 

http://www.sysco.com/investor/OnlineSustainability2012/index.html


 

Visit our Investor Relations website


http://www.sysco.com/investors.html


 

 
IR App


on the Apple store

http:https://itunes.apple.com/app/sysco-ir/id547105089?mt=8


The Sysco Story

Our story began with a promise to assist foodservice operators in providing consumers with solutions for meals consumed away from home. Since the initial public offering in 1970, when sales were $115 million, Sysco has grown to $42.4 billion in sales for fiscal year 2012.

Today, Sysco has sales and service relationships with approximately 400,000 customers and remains committed to helping them succeed in the foodservice industry and satisfy consumers’ appetites. Operating from more than 180 locations throughout the United States, Canada and Ireland, Sysco’s product lines are as diverse as the 45,000 employees who support its daily operations. They include not only the ingredients needed to prepare meals, but also numerous ancillary preparation and serving items. As a result, Sysco can make a difference in its customers’ lives and the success of their businesses.

  
IR App on Google Playhttps://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.theirapp.sysco

The Sysco Story


BackOur story began with a promise to Contentsassist foodservice operators in providing consumers with solutions for meals consumed away from home. Since the initial public offering in 1970, when sales were $115 million, Sysco has grown to $48.7 billion in sales for fiscal year 2015.

Today, Sysco has sales and service relationships with approximately 425,000 customers and remains committed to helping them succeed in the foodservice industry and satisfy consumers’ appetites. Operating from more than 190 locations throughout the United States, Canada, the Bahamas, Costa Rica, Ireland, Mexico and Puerto Rico, Sysco’s product lines are as diverse as the over 51,000 employees who support its daily operations. They include not only the ingredients needed to prepare meals, but also numerous ancillary preparation and serving items. As a result, Sysco can make a difference in its customers’ lives and the success of their businesses.

Back to Contents

 

1390 Enclave Parkway

Houston, Texas 77077-2099

281.584.1390

www.sysco.com

Back to Contents

Good things

Back to Contents




Back to Contents




Back to Contents