You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.

How the Teamsters Beat Goldman Sachs?

Leo Kolivakis's picture




Submitted by Leo Kolivakis, publisher of Pension Pulse.

Andrew Cockburn wrote an excellent article in counterpunch, How the Teamsters Beat Goldman Sachs (hat tip, Tom Naylor):

Among
the causes of the ongoing financial meltdown, many experts cite the
Commodity Futures Modernization Act, smuggled through Congress late on
a December evening in 2000. The law exempted Credit Default Swaps.

(CDS)
which are essentially bets on the value of securities from all
regulation, including state gambling laws. This allowed Wall Street to
conclude that any risk could be hedged with a bet. The result, of
course, was disaster, with economic consequences that we will be
feeling for a very long time.

“When I wrote part of that
legislation with these hands on my little keyboard,” a former financial
industry lobbyist who helped craft the law recently told me, “I didn’t
realize that this was going to make people lose their jobs, pension
funds their reserves, universities their endowments. But that’s what
happened”

There are now shelves full of books describing the
disaster caused by the enabling of Wall Street as a wide open casino.
But amidst the wreckage and plaintive cries for “reform,” Wall Street
is full tilt in the business of destroying companies and throwing
thousands of men and women out of work in order to turn a quick profit
on a CDS trade.

In recent weeks the 30,000 employees of YRC
Worldwide, one of the nation’s largest trucking companies, discovered
that they had unwittingly been drafted as chips in the casino. The
company, built up through a series of misguidedly overpriced takeovers
in the years of the credit bubble, had hit a financial wall thanks to
the fall off of business in the recession. Unless investors holding the
company’s bonds could be persuaded to swap their debt for equity, the
company would go bankrupt and its employees thrown out of work.

In
a sane world the bondholders would have had little trouble in seeing
the wisdom of the plan and signing on. But the world we live in does
things differently. We have, for example, the practice known as “basis
packaging” in which a company such as YRCW, while attempting to
restructure its debt, discovers that some of the bondholders have
simultaneously bet, through the use of credit default swaps, on the
company going bankrupt. As bondholders, they can sabotage any rescue
operation by refusing to cooperate and thus collect on their winning
bets even as the truck drivers begin collecting unemployment.

This
was exactly what was happening in the case of YRCW. According to
Michael Greenberger, the University of Maryland law professor who
headed Trading and Markets at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
in the Clinton Administration, this was a case of “Goldman (Sachs) et
al seemingly forcing the country’s biggest truck company into
bankruptcy in order to get pay-offs under CDS, with 50,000 jobs at
stake.

Hedge fund entrepreneur David Einhorn, who denounced the
malign practice at an investors’ conference earlier this year, claims
that “basis packaging” has already been a major contributor to the
bankruptcy of companies such as Abitibi-Bowater, General Growth
Properties, Six Flags and even General Motors. Deriding calls for
regulation of the CDS business, he declared that “trying to make safer
CDS is like trying to make safer asbestos. How many real businesses
have to fail before policy makers decide to simply ban them?”

Waiting
for policy-makers to do the right thing will take a while. Credible
reports indicate that Rahm Emanuel is counting on Wall Street cash to
get the Democrats through the 2010 election. But fortunately the YRCW
workers had the backing of their union, the Teamsters.

With
strategic input from Greenberger, the Teamsters were able to identify
whom they were up against. “We picked up intelligence that Goldman
(Sachs) was making markets (in CDS) and then we got some direct
evidence,” Teamster spokesman Ian Gold tells me. But Goldman was not
alone. “All of Wall Street” was trying to bring the company down.

In
response, the union made it clear that they were prepared to name
names. “We would make it our mission to hold people accountable,” says
Gold. Following advice from Greenberger on strategy, Teamster President
James Hoffa wrote to relevant Senators, Congressmen, State Attorneys
General and regulators detailing how “Certain financial firms, have
been or are marketing and/or underwriting a strategy where bonds in
YRCW would be bought by investors with the intent of voting against the
exchange, thereby triggering a bankruptcy that would pay the investors
and possible other financial firms huge profits from the high CDS
payments which would be triggered by a YRCW bankruptcy or liquidation.
The profit from the YRCW CDSs would far outweigh losses from the failed
YRCW bonds.”

Widely reviled as “the vampire squid” of the
financial world, Goldman proved unwilling to be charged with throwing
30,000 truckers out of work. The bank not only caved, but offered its
help. “As well it should have,” notes Greenberger. In a sudden
turnabout, the company began cooperating in an effort to recruit
bondholders who would do the right thing and vote for the
restructuring. Even so, time was running out.

YRCW was forced to
postpone the crucial vote on the structuring no less than six times. By
December 30, Brigade Capital, a $5 billion New York hedge fund, was the
last major holdout. Only when the Teamsters prepared to picket
Brigade’s Park Avenue offices did the fund fold.

Just this once,
a powerful union stopped the casino operators in their tracks.
Meanwhile, too many other workers are left simply to fulfill their role
as chips on the tables.

Andrew Cockburn is the co-producer of the feature documentary on the financial catastrophe American Casino. You can watch the trailer below.

Here in Canada, Diane Urquhart who noted that CDS were being sold at a large public pension fund, has just finished updating a detailed study on bankruptcies and employee claims pertaining to the Nortel case.
Unlike YRCW, Nortel employees do not have the backing of a powerful
union. Their fate lies in the hands of politicians who will hopefully
see that abuses of CDS can lead to severe economic fallout.

American Casino movie trailer from Leslie and Andrew Cockburn on Vimeo.




Similar Articles You Might Enjoy:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 09:47 | Link to Comment d_7878
d_7878's picture

The United States government along with Goldman Sachs et al, need to be sued for insider trading and collusion.  First the Government allows these  various investment bankers to rob the public blind thru abandoning prudent banking securities  law at the request of these bankers (along with the usual well placed contributions to Republicans and Democrats alike). Then when these bankers bring the world to the brink, robbing people of their 401’ks, retirement plans and hard earned savings, the Government uses our tax funds purported for Social Security, ect to bail the same investment bankers out, AND THEN, as the Government gives these investment bankers the market play book, allows them to again rob the public blind thru bonuses and stock market manipulation.  Everyone had the right to this insider information.  Is this the United States of America or the Mob (or just God’s work)? They are hell bent on destroying our system with their brand of crony capitalism, and the American Public has been left holding the bag again.

Sun, 01/10/2010 - 08:43 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 04:34 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 02:44 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 02:42 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 10:06 | Link to Comment Leo Kolivakis
Leo Kolivakis's picture

The author, Andrew Cockburn, might have his own agenda (don't know, seems sensible to me). I am not against CDS but will remind you that for years we lived fine without them. As long as nobody abuses them, they can serve as important hedging instruments. The problem is that EVERYONE abused them, including pensions, and the whole system went crazy drunk on credit derivatives. As for unions making their share of mistakes, totally in agreement with you. One big mistake is that while they go after GS, they dropped the ball on pension governance and it will come back to haunt them. Much, much bigger fish or squid to fry than Goldman.

Sun, 01/10/2010 - 02:23 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 01:29 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 00:04 | Link to Comment Grand Supercycle
Grand Supercycle's picture

 

The charts were warning of a major sell off in early 2007 and so was I.

http://www.zerohedge.com/forum/market-outlook-0

 

 

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 22:14 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 21:56 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 21:56 | Link to Comment zhandax
zhandax's picture

Its pretty much a given that the players using CDS have far more talent and imagination at their disposal than the people writing regulations. Factor in the motivations of the two sides and its game, set, match.

Given the potentially devastating ends to which CDS may be abused, and the difficulty in uncovering such abuse, is it realistic to expect that their use may be effectively regulated without an impossible burden of ongoing oversight?

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 21:38 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 21:35 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 21:33 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 21:09 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 20:39 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 21:51 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/10/2010 - 08:36 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 18:28 | Link to Comment waterdog
waterdog's picture

You guys are funny as hell. Try this, make us good GS et al, and we will not cave in your face and grind your wives and children up into dog food.

 

 

 

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 16:54 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 16:36 | Link to Comment Rick64
Rick64's picture

 The whole system would be a lot more transparent and simple without Derivatives. The negatives far outweigh the positives. I have to agree with Warren Buffet "Derivatives are financial weapons of mass destruction"

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 16:54 | Link to Comment Leo Kolivakis
Leo Kolivakis's picture

Hedging risk is important. No matter what they trade, every serious portfolio manager hedges risks. I am not against CDS or derivatives; in fact, when used wisely, they can mitigate downside risk, which is crucial. Nonetheless, we need more transparency in OTC derivatives and we need to put a stop to abuses that routinely take place in the stock market, like naked short-selling to profit off CDS positions. Don't shoot the instruments; shoot the abusers.

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 19:44 | Link to Comment sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Here's where I disagree with you, Mr. K.

Fundamentally, the entire securitization/credit derivatives process has been the fundmanetal price driver, which only a handful of economists truly grasp (Michael Hudson, Steve Keen, and several others).  House, autos, and numerous other items have been priced out of the market at one time or the other due to the establishment of articifial markets, and the entity who sets the prices on these artificial markets (not the "market" itself) is the one who drives the prices...onwards and upwards.

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 20:01 | Link to Comment Leo Kolivakis
Leo Kolivakis's picture

You can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Michael Hudson is right but I think it's wrong to say credit default swaps or securitization per se were the main problem of the financial system imploding. It became a huge Ponzi scheme, but the problem wasn't the concept of securitization or credit derivatives, the problem was the lax regulations, the mypopic pursuit of profits by unscrupulous sharks and pushing leverage to the nth degree (what the fuck did we need CDO cubed for???).

I know how these investment bankers think. All they care about is their big fat bonus; they couldn't care less about the banks they work for, the financial system, or the collateral damage they cause on the economy. Not a care in the world.

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 16:16 | Link to Comment AN0NYM0US
AN0NYM0US's picture

Leo, you reference Nortel, are you suggesting that bondholders take a place behind employees' claims? 

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 16:37 | Link to Comment Leo Kolivakis
Leo Kolivakis's picture

Nortel was a monumental fraud. If it were up to me, I'd haul every single CEO, including John Roth, up to testify at the Standing Committee of Finance and answer some very tough questions. Pensioners and disabled workers shouldn't take a backseat to bondholders. That is simply wrong. I am aware of a few Canadian pension that directly bought CDS on Nortel bonds and indirectly owned them through their hedge fund holdings. This really stinks, and I wonder what would have happened if Nortel employees had a powerful union like the Teamsters backing them up on their pension and disability claims. I'm also wondering if the big hedgies didn't deliberately attack Nortel's stock to profit of their CDS positions. We will never know.

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 19:01 | Link to Comment AN0NYM0US
AN0NYM0US's picture

CDS, hedged positions etc are a red herring

It would seem that you are suggesting that a bondholder effectively has an obligation to the employees of the company. The car bailouts certainly put the bondholders along with the taxpayers behind the employees. Of course those who depended on those bonds as a source of income and the taxpayer that does not enjoy pension benefits are SOL.  

 

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 16:11 | Link to Comment Hammer59
Hammer59's picture

   Only when the Teamsters prepared to picket Brigade's Park Avenue offices did the fund fold.

Guess they were reluctant to have their heads bashed in.

Unions rock!

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 16:03 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 19:40 | Link to Comment sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Kindly name all the types of CDSes, halfwit?

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 15:08 | Link to Comment robnume
robnume's picture

DOJ should be charging the bondholders and Goldman Sachs venomous traitors to their country, under RICO, 18 USC. These folks could also be charged with "Treason".

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 14:03 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 15:29 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 17:46 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 13:59 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 13:45 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 19:49 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 19:04 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 18:33 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 01/09/2010 - 14:27 | Link to Comment Leo Kolivakis
Leo Kolivakis's picture

Do you think I'm an idiot? I know what CDS are and how they can be properly used to hedge a bond portfolio. I also know how hedge funds can manipulate stocks, short-sell them to profit off their CDS holdings. Read Diane Urquhart's paper very carefully and tell me what she's missing.

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 19:38 | Link to Comment sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Please, Mr. K, don't humor these Anon. idiots.  This poster obviously doesn't even understand the basic principles of securitization.

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 12:05 | Link to Comment You Cant Handle...
You Cant Handle the Truth's picture

Wall Street was *not* a casino.  In a casino, if you scam the house, you get the shit beat out of you.  In a casino, if you go broke, you are done.  In a casino, you can't bet -- for pennies on the dolllar -- that you are wrong, thus winning whether you were right or wrong.

Wall Street was a RACKET.  A Scam.  A grift.  Calling it a casino implies that there was real risk, and as we've seen, the only risk was for anyone who expected the casino to act like a fucking casino.

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 17:55 | Link to Comment Harbourcity
Harbourcity's picture

Wall Street is a casino, and we're the patrons.  Fortunately, we can keep on playing thanks to the debt they're willing to give us so we can stay in the game.

 

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 17:25 | Link to Comment sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Major props and kudos.  The term risk and bets simply don't apply, as anyone familiar (that is, has actually read Keynes) with Keynes realizes, uncertainty should always be differentiated from risk.

They were betting on uncertainty, never on risk.....

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 23:03 | Link to Comment You Cant Handle...
You Cant Handle the Truth's picture

Correct.  There were no catastrophic outcomes in the cards for the big banks*, which they damn well knew was the case when they strapped hundreds of trillions of dollars worth of financial explosives around the world's economy.  They may have had uncertainty, but no fucking risk.  Risk is for suckers on main street.

(* Well, except for one big bank.  But the banksters had to light the fuse somehow.  Sorry Lehman.)

Sat, 01/09/2010 - 12:15 | Link to Comment You Cant Handle...
You Cant Handle the Truth's picture

I did enjoy this article tho... :-D

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!