Shareholders rose up against the pay of Britain’s bosses on Thursday in the most dramatic day of protests against chief executive rewards in four years.

From London to Glasgow and Dublin, investors rebelled against remuneration packages at some of the UK’s largest listed companies.

Engineering group Weir, pharmaceutical company Shire and building materials business CRH all suffered large protests.

FTSE 250 company Weir experienced the biggest setback at its annual meeting in Glasgow as 72 per cent of voting investors rejected its pay policy — the biggest reverse on a binding vote on executive pay since they were introduced in 2013.

The decision means the group will have to keep its existing pay structure and offer investors another vote on its pay policy at its annual meeting next year.

Charles Berry, Weir chairman, said: “It is obviously disappointing. It is a big no vote. We consulted extensively but our pay proposals were rejected because they do not follow UK guidelines.”

Melanie Gee, chair of the company’s remuneration committee, said: “We will have to go back to our shareholders to discuss this to assess what is the correct next step.”

Investors voted against Weir’s plans because they offered restricted share awards, which are not subject to performance targets. This deviates from market guidelines, say some investors and advisory groups.

With FTSE 100 drugmaker Shire suffering a 49 per cent vote against its pay plans at its meeting in Dublin and CRH a 40 per cent protest, also in Dublin, some investors warned that growing resentment could spark protests in the US and continental Europe.

Paul Lee, head of corporate governance at Aberdeen Asset Management, said: “It is a year when people have toughened their views in the UK and against UK-listed companies. It is getting noticed overseas. We have had some big protests here and we might see more overseas too.”

In the case of Weir, investor anger was soothed to a degree as the group had offered a restricted shares scheme that has been floated as a possible alternative to long-term incentive plans by a working group of the Investment Association, which represents UK shareholders.

Shire said it was pleased to have won backing for its remuneration report, albeit by the slenderest of margins with 50.55 per cent in favour.

Responding to the vote, Shire said: “We remain firmly committed to a constructive and appropriate dialogue to fully understand shareholder views as we compete in a global market place.”

Shareholder dissent at Shire was focused on the 25 per cent pay increase granted last year to Flemming Ornskov, chief executive, taking his fixed salary to $1.69m. His overall pay rose fivefold to $21.6m in 2015.

This led two big shareholder advisory groups, Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis, representing 25 per cent of investors, to recommend a vote against the remuneration report.

Hans Hirt, a director at Hermes Investment Management, said: “We do not support the increase in salary of 25 per cent for the CEO, particularly given that his overall bonus potential is more than 10 times his basic salary and his total remuneration was over $21m (£14m) last year.

“We believe that an incremental approach to salary rises is more appropriate and should reflect shareholder value creation over the longer term.”

CRH also narrowly secured shareholder approval for its remuneration package for its top executives. Just over 40 per cent of the votes cast by shareholders at the company’s annual meeting opposed the new pay package, which included a big rise in the bonus being paid to chief executive Albert Manifold.

In London, FTSE 100 groups Barclays and Schroders saw small protests with the bank registering 6.4 per cent of votes cast against its remuneration report, while Schroders saw 4.3 per cent oppose its plans.

In the case of Schroders, the bigger rebellion was against the elevation of Michael Dobson to chairman from chief executive with 14.9 per cent of voting investors opposing his appointment.

Schroders has a big family investor base that controls 47 per cent of its shares and was supportive of Mr Dobson’s appointment as chairman.

Additional reporting by Vincent Boland, Madison Marriage and Martin Arnold