I can read the Globe article too, without subscription.
Edit - weird... I read the entire article, clicked a link to Loblaw's financials and then went back to a restricted content message.
Anyways, Loblaws conducted a review, as they do every two years, of their executive compensation pack... which is pretty standard across the entire corporate world. A third-party consultant advised an adjustment to the comp package based on industry and sector equivalencies and standards. GW's total comp increased $1.2mm, or ~10%... Loblaw's stock is up ~20% in the last 12 months, because they hit a number of (relatively modest) sales and growth targets, which not coincidentally is also what the executive comp calculations are based on.
Basically, the company made more money, so GW made more money, which is pretty standard.
That said, it's pretty dense to not see how the optics would play and would have been a super easy PR win for GW to donate the bonus to a foodbank or other similar organization.
I'm not sure if we're supposed to eat the rich because, well, they're rich. Or because they're
too rich. Or because you disagree with a standard and meritocratic compensation model. Or because you think they're making money due to some market collusion.
I can definitely get behind the last point and if it's ever proven true, there should be severe penalties and clawbacks of compensation. However, I'm not sure a worldwide inflationary event can fall on the shoulders of GW.