Press Room
March 6, 2002
The Road To Fiduciary Responsibility Via Litigation
By
Dr. Donald Moine
BizWatch
In America, class action lawsuits against
big companies are often used as a means of reform.
Tobacco is the perfect example. Judgments handed
down against tobacco companies have led to the
total restructuring of the advertising, sale, and
public use of it in America. In California you
cannot even smoke one cigarette in a bar. It is
simply against the law and is not tolerated.
Now comes a set of lawsuits that may very well
redefine the notion of fiduciary responsibility
in American business. The outcome of these cases
is likely to affect any employee and their families
who own company stock -- around 50 million Americans.
Should the plaintiffs in these cases prevail,
hundreds of billions of dollars in similar litigation
could be filed in the near future.
Unlawful Conduct Against WorldCom Employees
Over the past year, the law firm of Klayman & Toskes
filed numerous lawsuits on behalf of only stock
option participants in the form of arbitration
cases against Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., a unit
of Citigroup, Inc. (Imagine if WorldCom employees
who had WorldCom stock, unmanaged for risk, in
their pension plans or 401(k) had filed suit.)
Allegedly, Salomon Smith Barney did not fulfill
their fiduciary duties and is accused of gross
negligence in violation of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934, the Virginia Securities
Laws, common law fraud, and breach of contractual
and fiduciary duties. In other words, brokers,
among other reasons, did not use a protective
strategy known as cashless collars (also known
as zero cost collars).
According to Klayman and Toskes, the alleged
unlawful conduct perpetrated by Solomon Smith
Barney "reflects what appears to be a complete
failure of supervision and compliance at the
Salomon Smith Barney office" in Atlanta,
Georgia. If a full service brokerage firm isn't
giving advice that protects assets when such
protection is readily available, the courts may
hold that firm and its brokers in breach of their
fiduciary duties.
I have not yet been able to determine the amount
of damages sought by the plaintiffs, but I do
know that in just the past several months WorldCom
employees and shareholders have lost several
billion dollars and that over the past two years,
they have lost tens of billions of dollars.
One can only wonder how Solomon Smith Barney
will defend itself against these serious charges,
given their gravity and the fact that cashless
collars were indeed available to protect the
WorldCom employees. I have many thoughts on what
the defense could do in these landmark cases
and what additional steps the plaintiffs could
engage in to further their cases, but such analysis
is well beyond the scope of this article.
The Power Of Cashless Collars
In March of 2001, I began writing about the necessity
of using protective option strategies to defend
the net worth of American workers. In my first
article for TMC, "Protecting Your Net Worth
From A Stock Options Meltdown," I showed
how by selling calls and using the premiums collected
to buy protective puts, employees and executives
could protect tens of thousands to billions of
dollars of company stock at almost no cost. The
technique of selling calls and using the funds
received to put puts is a "cashless collar," and
it is this technique that is at the center of
the landmark cases filed against Solomon Smith
Barney on behalf of WorldCom employees.
Cashless collars can be used to protect a huge
number and range of employees and investors.
The number of potential users of cashless collars
(and therefore plaintiffs in these cases) is
easily well over 20 million people. Cashless
collars can be used to protect company stock
held in pension plans, individual brokerage accounts,
401(k)s, IRAs, Keoughs, and even vested employee
stock options.
A company whose employees own corporate stock
that is partially or completely protected by
cashless collars has employees who are more loyal,
less worried, and more productive. By teaching
employees how to use cashless collars or by hiring
advisors who know how to use cashless collars,
a company can also save millions of dollars by
avoiding litigation filed by employees who have
suffered huge losses in company stock.
Cashless collars are one of the most powerful
risk management techniques in existence for gaining
upside in company stock while at the same time
limiting downside risk. Best of all, if properly
structured, all of this protection is free or
nearly free. Cashless collars are thus a win-win
strategy for both employees and corporate employers.
Over the past few years, the power of cashless
collars was known primarily within an elite group
of senior corporate executives in different companies.
Had this knowledge been more widely disseminated
to average employees, hundreds of billions of
dollars in the net worth of American workers
could have been preserved.
Defendants To Be Named In Future Lawsuits
One question that many people are now asking
is, "Who will be sued next?" The aforementioned
brokerage firms are certainly high on the list.
I found it interesting that the WorldCom employees
are only suing the Atlanta, GA branch office
of Solomon Smith Barney. Presumably, almost every
branch office of every full service broker in
America could face similar litigation given that
zero cost collars could have been used to protect
stock holdings in thousands of American companies.
As I am finishing this article in early March
2002, I have just learned that several other
brokerage firms have been sued on similar grounds.
Should the plaintiffs in these cases prevail,
similar litigation could create a full employment
act for securities and class action attorneys
across the country.
Perhaps even easier targets are the companies
themselves. Why didn't WorldCom offer its employees
any education in managing the risk of holding
company stock? WorldCom, like most major corporations,
probably spends millions of dollars designing
and offering training programs in dozens of areas.
Their employees have lost hundreds of billions
of dollars in net worth because they did not
possess this knowledge and now they could potentially
be held responsible.
Moreover, if companies did not want to go to
the trouble of educating employees on how to
manage the risk of owning company stock, why
didn't they hire pension fund managers or 401(k)
managers who would perform this risk management?
On these grounds also, thousands of companies
may be held liable for hiring money managers
who did not fulfill their responsibilities and
for not supervising those money managers.
Pension and 401(k) Managers: Managing hundreds
of billions of dollars in assets, pension, and
401(k)s, managers cannot feign ignorance of zero
cost collars and other risk management techniques.
Why did they not actively use these powerful
forms of portfolio insurance? Juries across America
may soon be seeking answers to this question.
Money managers are some of the most highly paid
people in our society. While their clients lost
billions of dollars in unprotected positions
in company stock, many money managers themselves
took home paychecks of from $250,000 to well
over $1 million per year. If held even partially
responsible for not managing the company stock
risk in their clients' portfolios, they may be
giving some of this money back.
Compensation Consultants: Having done some work
in compensation consulting and compensation research
myself, I have to admit compensation consultants
may bear some of the blame for not helping their
clients manage the risk of concentrated positions
in company stock. After all, compensation consultants
are the ones who design the programs that place
so much company stock in retirement plans and
employee stock ownership plans. They also design
pay packages that can top $10 million per year
for senior executives and pay plans, stock option
plans, and retirement plans for all other levels
of the organization.
Some compensation consultants have played an
active role in helping senior executives use
zero cost collars to protect millions of dollars
of their net worth. Why didn't they share these
powerful asset protection techniques with lower
level employees? All major companies and many
smaller ones use compensation consultants. Due
to their perceived expertise in all areas of
pay, benefits, and retirement plans, it is likely
that compensation consultants may be targeted
in some litigation.
A Look Into The Future
When I began researching and writing about the
importance of protecting employee investments
in company stock, it was sometimes difficult
to convince people of the need for education,
guidance, and reform in this area. One of my
associates contacted more than 100 major companies
to interest them in educating their employees
on risk management of company stock positions.
Despite the oft-repeated cliché that "people
are our most valuable asset," not one company
wanted to share this knowledge with average employees.
However, with the meltdown of Enron, Global Crossing,
Kmart, and multi-billion dollars losses in the
stock values of AT&T, Lucent, Cisco, Halliburton,
and hundreds of other companies, interest in
these techniques is finally developing. In a
February 22, 2002 article in the Los Angeles
Times, an executive at Gannett is quoted as saying, "The
fact that employees were hurt so badly at Enron
caused everyone to look up and say, 'Gee, maybe
we'd better fix this,' Nobody really thought
about it before. All of a sudden, it was just
there."
No one can predict the future price of a company's
stock and no one knows what will happen in these
landmark cases of WorldCom employees suing Solomon
Smith Barney for breach of fiduciary duty. There
is no guarantee that WorldCom employees will
even prevail. Much of the outcome of these cases
will depend on how this lawsuit was drafted,
the specific charges leveled against Solomon
Smith Barney employees and their supervisors,
what affirmative defenses Solomon Smith Barney
uses, and the background and quality of the expert
witnesses each side employs. The outcome will
also depend on what evidence is deemed admissible,
the depositions of the Solomon Smith Barney employees
involved, and the staying power and resources
of the law firms involved.
Given that these are individual arbitration cases
brought by WorldCom employees and the facts of
each individual case are different, I can see
some individual cases being won, some being lost
and some being settled.
No matter what the outcome of these first trailblazing
cases, three things are certain: 1.) Many more
cases of this type will be filed by employees
who have lost billions of dollars of net worth
held in company stock; 2.) A much wider net will
be cast that could potentially make defendants
out of senior corporate executives, pension and
401(k) managers, compensation consultants, and
many different brokerage firms, and 3.) The outcome
of these cases and similar cases is likely to
affect more than 30 million Americans who own
company stock
It is unfortunate that it sometimes takes massive
amounts of litigation to spur reform in our society.
In the end, I believe we will end up with some
of the best retirement and company stock ownership
plans in the world. These new risk managed plans
will help millions of Americans to enjoy upside
gain in the value of their company stock while
at the same time avoiding or minimizing downside
risk. These new risk managed plans will strengthen
our nation and will help America preserve the
strongest economy the world has ever seen.
Dr. Donald Moine is an industrial psychologist
who has specialized in pension, 401(k) and stock
option reform and the protection of company stock.
Dr. Moine is one of the founders of the Association
for Human Achievement, Inc. in Palos Verdes,
California, and has served as an advisor to dozens
of major corporations on four continents. Dr.
Moine has served as an expert witness in a major
$140 million stock options lawsuit. For information
on his seminars, corporate training, consulting,
and expert witness work, contact him at DrMoine@aol.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post Script:
Several hours after I submitted this article
to TMCnet.com, I learned that some of the cases
brought by WorldCom employees had already been
settled. It is incredible that the brokerage
firms involved apparently did not even mount
a defense, but instead opted to relatively quickly
settle some of these cases. With such relatively
easy victories in some of these first landmark
cases, many more cases will undoubtedly follow.
Even more fascinating is the fact that two of
the Solomon Smith Barney brokers, Phillip Spartis
and Amy Elias, have just sued their previous
employer, Solomon Smith Barney for settling some
of these cases instead of defending them. Spartis
and Elias claim that Solomon Smith Barney has
destroyed their $2 billion book of business.
If you have lost a significant amount of money
in unprotected company stock, you may wish to
contact a good securities lawyer to learn about
your rights for recovery. If you are an executive
at a publicly traded company, you should consider
offering an educational course on how to protect
company stock and you should consider hiring
experts to help your employees manage the company
stock they own.