Insurance Executive

Greenberg Settles Case with New York AG After 12-Year Fight

Starr's CEO and Chairman decries the breadth of New York State's prosecutorial powers.
By: | February 14, 2017 • 3 min read

AIG’s former CEO and CFO settled a civil accounting fraud case last week that spanned 12 years, stretching back to the administration of former New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer.

In settling the case with current NYAG Eric Schneiderman, former AIG Chairman and CEO Hank Greenberg and Howard Smith, AIG’s former CFO, agreed to payments totaling $9.9 million; $9 million on the part of Mr. Greenberg and $900,000 on the part of Mr. Smith.

The case was mediated by noted attorney Kenneth Feinberg, who also mediated between British Petroleum and claimants in BP’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill and who will also be managing the claimants’ fund connected to the Volkswagen emissions scandal.

As part of the settlement, there was no admission of wrongdoing on the part of Greenberg, now the chairman and CEO of the Starr Companies, or Smith.

In a statement released Feb. 9, the New York Attorney General’s office said the $9.9 million represented bonus payments Greenberg and Smith received between 2001 and 2004. Despite the terms of the mediated settlement, the AG’s statement implied that the agreement amounted to an admission of fraud by Greenberg and Smith.

Both men strongly dispute that characterization of the settlement.

At a press conference in New York on February 13, Greenberg’s attorney David Boies, described the payments as nothing more than a “nuisance settlement” given the fact that the NYAG’s office had originally sought some $5 billion in damages.

“The New York Attorney General’s case had totally collapsed at trial,” said Boies.

In all, the civil actions initiated by Spitzer in 2005 amounted to nine separate charges.

One of the last two actions to reach settlement is related to a loss portfolio that AIG received as a reinsurer from Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary Cologne Re Dublin in the fourth quarter of 2000. Unbeknownst to Greenberg and other executives at AIG, a portion of the portfolio had already been reinsured elsewhere.

Thus, AIG’s acceptance of the portfolio resulted in an erroneous increase in its loss reserves, since the transaction involved little or no actual risk. An innocent accounting error that they were not aware of, not fraud, Greenberg, Smith and their attorneys argued.

“Nowhere in the agreed statement by Mr. Greenberg is there any reference to any accounting being fraudulent, let alone that Mr. Greenberg was aware of any fraud,” Boies said on Feb. 13.

“There was nothing in those transactions that we knew were wrong when they were done,” Smith added.

The second case, known as the Capco transaction, involved allegations that AIG attempted to confuse investors by equating underwriting losses with investment losses.

“The New York Attorney General’s case had totally collapsed at trial.” — David Boies, attorney for Hank Greenberg

Greenberg’s conflict with Spitzer is a long and painful one and can reasonably be said to have had a substantial impact on the nation’s and the world’s economy.

Under pressure from Spitzer, Greenberg was forced out as Chairman and CEO of AIG in 2005, having spent 40 years with the company.

At the time of Greenberg’s forced resignation, AIG had a presence in more than 130 countries and $180 billion in market capitalization. Three years after Greenberg’s removal, the company’s insurance of credit default swaps resulted in an almost catastrophic failure.  The rest is, literally, history.

Advertisement




AIG required an $85 billion two-year government loan, which it has since paid back; but it had to sell off key assets to do so.

“AIG is currently a shadow of what it had been,” Greenberg said in a statement released on Feb. 13.

“It was an international asset and no longer is,” Greenberg said.

“It employed over 100,000 people and now it is about half of that.”

Greenberg is pursuing a defamation case against Spitzer for comments Spitzer made about him after leaving the AG’s office in 2006. Spitzer lasted a year as Governor of New York before allegations that he consorted with prostitutes drove him out of that office.

Greenberg also spoke out at the press conference in opposition to New York’s Martin Act, which gives state prosecutors broad powers to prosecute business leaders without having to prove fraudulent intent.

“That law should be changed, it should be knocked out,” Greenberg said.

Dan Reynolds is editor-in-chief of Risk & Insurance. He can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

4 Companies That Rocked It by Treating Injured Workers as Equals; Not Adversaries

The 2018 Teddy Award winners built their programs around people, not claims, and offer proof that a worker-centric approach is a smarter way to operate.
By: | October 30, 2018 • 3 min read

Across the workers’ compensation industry, the concept of a worker advocacy model has been around for a while, but has only seen notable adoption in recent years.

Even among those not adopting a formal advocacy approach, mindsets are shifting. Formerly claims-centric programs are becoming worker-centric and it’s a win all around: better outcomes; greater productivity; safer, healthier employees and a stronger bottom line.

Advertisement




That’s what you’ll see in this month’s issue of Risk & Insurance® when you read the profiles of the four recipients of the 2018 Theodore Roosevelt Workers’ Compensation and Disability Management Award, sponsored by PMA Companies. These four programs put workers front and center in everything they do.

“We were focused on building up a program with an eye on our partner experience. Cost was at the bottom of the list. Doing a better job by our partners was at the top,” said Steve Legg, director of risk management for Starbucks.

Starbucks put claims reporting in the hands of its partners, an exemplary act of trust. The coffee company also put itself in workers’ shoes to identify and remove points of friction.

That led to a call center run by Starbucks’ TPA and a dedicated telephonic case management team so that partners can speak to a live person without the frustration of ‘phone tag’ and unanswered questions.

“We were focused on building up a program with an eye on our partner experience. Cost was at the bottom of the list. Doing a better job by our partners was at the top.” — Steve Legg, director of risk management, Starbucks

Starbucks also implemented direct deposit for lost-time pay, eliminating stressful wait times for injured partners, and allowing them to focus on healing.

For Starbucks, as for all of the 2018 Teddy Award winners, the approach is netting measurable results. With higher partner satisfaction, it has seen a 50 percent decrease in litigation.

Teddy winner Main Line Health (MLH) adopted worker advocacy in a way that goes far beyond claims.

Employees who identify and report safety hazards can take credit for their actions by sending out a formal “Employee Safety Message” to nearly 11,000 mailboxes across the organization.

“The recognition is pretty cool,” said Steve Besack, system director, claims management and workers’ compensation for the health system.

MLH also takes a non-adversarial approach to workers with repeat injuries, seeing them as a resource for identifying areas of improvement.

“When you look at ‘repeat offenders’ in an unconventional way, they’re a great asset to the program, not a liability,” said Mike Miller, manager, workers’ compensation and employee safety for MLH.

Teddy winner Monmouth County, N.J. utilizes high-tech motion capture technology to reduce the chance of placing new hires in jobs that are likely to hurt them.

Monmouth County also adopted numerous wellness initiatives that help workers manage their weight and improve their wellbeing overall.

“You should see the looks on their faces when their cholesterol is down, they’ve lost weight and their blood sugar is better. We’ve had people lose 30 and 40 pounds,” said William McGuane, the county’s manager of benefits and workers’ compensation.

Advertisement




Do these sound like minor program elements? The math says otherwise: Claims severity has plunged from $5.5 million in 2009 to $1.3 million in 2017.

At the University of Pennsylvania, putting workers first means getting out from behind the desk and finding out what each one of them is tasked with, day in, day out — and looking for ways to make each of those tasks safer.

Regular observations across the sprawling campus have resulted in a phenomenal number of process and equipment changes that seem simple on their own, but in combination have created a substantially safer, healthier campus and improved employee morale.

UPenn’s workers’ comp costs, in the seven-digit figures in 2009, have been virtually cut in half.

Risk & Insurance® is proud to honor the work of these four organizations. We hope their stories inspire other organizations to be true partners with the employees they depend on. &

Michelle Kerr is associate editor of Risk & Insurance. She can be reached at [email protected]