This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Mercer Pays $500M to Settle Pension Suit

Leo Kolivakis's picture





 

Via Pension Pulse.

A follow-up on Mercer's little Alaska problem posted last December. Becky Bohrer of Bloomberg Businessweek reports, Alaska settles pension suit for $500M (HT: Johnny):

Alaska's attorney general said Friday that the state has settled a breach of contract and professional malpractice lawsuit against its former actuary for $500 million.

Dan Sullivan said the agreement between the Alaska Retirement Management Board and Mercer Inc., may be the largest of its kind. He called it a "great result" for Alaska state workers and retirees.

 

The matter dates to late 2007, when the state sued Mercer for at least $1.8 billion, alleging mistakes by the company had contributed to an $8.4 billion state pension deficit. Mercer had been actuary for the state's Public Employees' Retirement System and Teachers' Retirement System pension plans. It had stood behind its work.

 

Stock market declines and soaring health care costs also contributed to the multibillion-dollar shortfall, the Department of Law said.

 

Under terms of the settlement, the lawsuit would be dropped in exchange for a $500 million payment. Minus court costs and fees for outside attorneys, the department said the state public pension systems will get about $403 million. Payment is due within 60 days, it said.

 

The agreement was announced late in the day Friday. A Mercer spokeswoman did not immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment after hours.

Business Insurance carried another article from Bloomberg, Marsh unit Mercer to pay $500M to settle Alaska pension suit:

Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc.'s Mercer L.L.C. consulting unit agreed to pay $500 million to settle a lawsuit brought by the Alaska Retirement Management Board that blamed the firm for billions in unfunded liabilities.

 

The settlement was in the company's best interests because of the uncertainty of the outcome of a jury trial in Juneau, Alaska, where many plan participants live and because the plaintiffs were seeking at least $2.8 billion in damages, Mercer said in a statement. A spokesman declined to comment further.

 

Alaska Attorney General Dan Sullivan said in a separate statement that the unfunded liabilities were caused by stock market declines, increases in health care costs and Mercer's negligence. The Alaska board accused Mercer of malpractice, breach of contract and unfair trade practices in advising the state on management of two retirement funds.

 

“This is a significant settlement that will benefit the state and our citizens,” Mr. Sullivan said in the statement. “We have been informed that by a large margin it is the largest such settlement in history for this kind of claim.”

 

Mercer denied liability, it said in its statement. Insurance will cover $100 million of the settlement, the company said.

This is a huge settlement, one that may cost Mercer more if other clients also sue for similar damages. What remains unclear here is how did Mercer which is highly regarded for its actuarial pension work, screw up so royally with Alaska's state pension fund? More worrisome, if it happened with Mercer, I shudder to think how many other US public plans have grossly understated their liabilities and probably don't even know it.

And that's now all. Now we're learning that to make up for shortfalls, New Jersey's state pension fund is bulking up on alternative assets and Illinois Teachers' Retirement System's (TRS) investment in over-the-counter derivatives was so extensive that it was more similar to a hedge fund or bank proprietary desk than to a state pension fund.

A government report indicated that TRS has lost so much from the investments that it is now 60.9% underfunded, compared with 20.3% underfunding at the Chicago Teachers' Pension Fund. [Note: Read more on this in an excellent report posted on Zero Hedge.]

From lawsuits to OTC derivative gambles, public pension plans aren't in good shape. It all comes down to unrealistic investment assumptions and a total lack of proper governance. The slow motion smashup which I discussed in my Outlook 2010 is coming at us faster than I thought.

There is little choice for Bernanke and his counterparts: Reflate and inflate at all cost or risk sinking into a deflationary quagmire the likes of which we've never seen before. Welcome to our pensions nightmare.

 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 10/26/2010 - 03:08 | Link to Comment guccichanel
guccichanel's picture

I Love gucci and chanel. Some women do not mind buying replica handbags, while some women just love designer handbags if you can distinguish between good and bed from the replica handbag?you also can use low price get high quality enjoy?today use chanel handbag ?tomorrow carry gucci handbag?the day after tomorrow hermes handbad in your hand? this niceness all give the credit to low price?same argument you also can buy replica watches?buy DVDs louis vuitton...

Tue, 06/15/2010 - 09:31 | Link to Comment Grand Supercycle
Grand Supercycle's picture

 

As suggested earlier,  the EURUSD daily chart is giving bullish signals.

http://stockmarket618.wordpress.com

http://www.zerohedge.com/forum/latest-market-outlook-1

Tue, 06/15/2010 - 08:03 | Link to Comment dcb
dcb's picture

Company pays, people who did the wrong don't go to jail and get to keep their money. tell me how this is a good outcome. transfer of burden from the gulity to the shareholders. Good for the pension fund, but the outcome just ensures more funny business with other people's money.

Tue, 06/15/2010 - 01:39 | Link to Comment GoldmanSux
GoldmanSux's picture

Good God. This is huge. They must have done something amazingly negligent to agree to this settlement. What could it be? There are only 4 or 5 variables to calculate a pension plan, although each of those is extremely important. If they didn't manage the money, it couldn't be return. Perhaps negligence on determining p.v. of future benefits, or most likely, a widely off base discount rate that moved based on the client wishes.

Tue, 06/15/2010 - 07:49 | Link to Comment Commander Cody
Commander Cody's picture

Nobody is at fault, as usual.  Financial "advisors/managers" get paid exorbitant sums to fail their clients who eventually take the hit on losses.  Everybody, Alaska included, is looking for the quick fix to appease the masses, only the masses will get screwed in the end.  Nothing to see here, move along.

Tue, 06/15/2010 - 02:18 | Link to Comment Dicite justitiam
Dicite justitiam's picture

It was nothing so obvious, but it involved trying to cover up mistakes.  Oops.  Better to come clean right away rather than ponzify.  Just ask Bernie.

Tue, 06/15/2010 - 00:03 | Link to Comment StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

It seems to me that the ONLY growth industry in the World right now is STUPIDITY!

Mon, 06/14/2010 - 23:23 | Link to Comment Privatus
Privatus's picture

Trusting your retirement savings to total strangers with every incentive to gamble it and no consequences for losing it? What could go wrong? The whole idea of mandatorily- (as distinct from voluntarily-) funded pensions is, was and always will be (if they survive) a patronistic scam.

Tue, 06/15/2010 - 05:33 | Link to Comment exportbank
exportbank's picture

Privatus - No truer words were ever spoken.

Mon, 06/14/2010 - 20:59 | Link to Comment Mitchman
Mitchman's picture

If the deficit is truly $8.4 billion, then the $500 million is a drop in the bucket.  How do you suggest they make up the rest of the $7.9 billion shortfall with such few residents?  How does this translate into a great "win" for Alaska.  It seems to me to be a great "win" for Mercer.

Mon, 06/14/2010 - 21:43 | Link to Comment QQQBall
QQQBall's picture

Its not $500MM - the attys ate $100MM of the settlement. You gotta feed the beast

Mon, 06/14/2010 - 21:27 | Link to Comment Mactheknife
Mactheknife's picture

And a MONUMENTEL win for the "outside attorneys" - 97 million.

Mon, 06/14/2010 - 20:55 | Link to Comment Augustus
Augustus's picture

Who will pay when the CPB finds out that it has promised more than it can deliver?  Will payments be reduced retroactively to get it back into balance?

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