Posted on 05/25/2004 8:28:17 AM PDT by tdadams
NEW YORK - Gearing up for a fight, former New York Stock Exchange chairman and chief executive Richard A. Grasso said Tuesday he would not only fight the state attorney general's lawsuit over his $187.5 million compensation package, but would countersue the exchange for $48 million of that money that he never received.
In an op-ed piece published Tuesday in The Wall Street Journal, Grasso said any damages awarded in his countersuit would be donated to charity. Grasso will also seek damages from the NYSE and interim chairman John Reed for "the (media) leaks orchestrated by Mr. Reed."
"I will derive considerable pleasure knowing that some public good ultimately resulted because of the immoral and dishonest behavior of those who forced my departure and besmirched my name," Grasso wrote in the Journal. "Those who thought they could break me with their repeated media leaks badly underestimated my character and resolve. I look forward to addressing them in court where they can no longer hide behind (attorney general Eliot) Spitzer's cloak."
Spitzer's suit, filed Monday, accuses Grasso of intentionally misleading the NYSE board of directors and compensation committee in order to cash in on an inflated compensation package. The suit also named the exchange and a former NYSE board member as defendants following a four-month investigation into Grasso's compensation. Spitzer said he expects to ask for the return of well over $100 million from Grasso; the money would go to the exchange.
Grasso resigned as chairman and CEO last September amid intense criticism of his pay.
"Reasonable people can disagree about what an executive should be paid, but the directors who evaluated my performance were well aware of the market for executive compensation on Wall Street, because that is where many of them worked and earned their own substantial income," Grasso wrote. "For all the charts and handouts at his press conference, Mr. Spitzer cited no evidence that I misled the board or hurt the NYSE. It didn't happen."
The suit asked that a State Supreme Court judge rescind the pay package and determine a reasonable level of compensation for Grasso. It names Grasso, the NYSE and Kenneth G. Langone, a former NYSE board member and ex-chairman of the exchange's compensation committee.
"This case demonstrates everything that can go wrong in setting executive compensation," Spitzer said. "The lack of proper information, the stifling of internal debate, the failure of board members to conduct proper inquiry and the unabashed pursuit of personal gain resulted in a wholly inappropriate and illegal compensation package."
Spitzer maintained that Grasso, Langone and former NYSE human resources executive Frank Ashen misled compensation committee members by omitting retirement accounts and other aspects of Grasso's pay package. The attorney general said he singled out Grasso and Langone because they allegedly actively misled the other board members, although the entire board could have been held responsible for approving the compensation.
"I think certainly that the other board members regret their behavior and wish they had been more diligent after allowing themselves to be misled," Spitzer said. "I drew the line based on those who misled and those who were misled."
Spitzer claimed the exchange's directors were given inaccurate and misleading information before approving Grasso's contract, and that certain deferred compensation plans and benefits were entirely left out of documents given board members.
He also cited testimony from an unidentified director and compensation committee member, whose firm answered to Grasso in exchange business, and who said he was asked to meet with Grasso in 2001 after privately expressing concern over the extent of his 2000 pay. Spitzer claimed Grasso cowed the director into approving the compensation package.
The attorney general also claimed Grasso's payment formula was "inappropriately driven by a comparison with the salaries of top executives in the world's largest corporations." Spitzer noted that after Grasso allegedly failed to address the issue of analysts' research integrity in 2001, he had to rate his own performance on regulatory issues, on a scale of 1 to 10, for his annual compensation package.
"He gave himself a 13," the attorney general said.
Langone defended Grasso and the board's actions in a statement. "These were honest, diligent and sound compensation decisions that were thoroughly researched and, most importantly, supported by 100 percent of the board," Langone said. "We all had access to that same information, beginning, middle and end and that's why singling people out in this case is so obviously misguided."
Langone, who headed the board's compensation committee from 2000 to 2003, is considered a close friend and confidante of Grasso, and was instrumental in getting board approval for his compensation package. Spitzer was seeking $18 million from Langone, the amount of money the attorney general said Langone misled the board about.
Both men are directors of The Home Depot Inc., and Langone is a co-founder of the home improvement retailer. Grasso has opted not to run again for the company's board at its annual meeting on Thursday.
Ray Pellecchia, an NYSE spokesman, said, "We are supportive of Attorney General Spitzer's efforts in this matter. As a named party it would be inappropriate to comment further."
Spitzer said he might seek injunctive relief against the exchange, which would effectively prohibit the NYSE from excessive compensation of its executives in the future. Any portion of Grasso's compensation that Spitzer recovers, along with damages won from Langone, would be returned to the NYSE.
Spitzer also announced he had reached a settlement with Ashen and Mercer Human Resource Consulting, Inc., a consultancy that prepared a financial analysis of the pay package. Spitzer said Ashen and Mercer "admitted providing information to the board that was inaccurate and incomplete."
Under the settlement, Ashen, a top aide to Grasso, will return $1.3 million to the exchange, and Mercer will return the fees it charged the NYSE in 2003, totaling $440,275, Spitzer said.
Ashen and Mercer have already given Spitzer testimony about Grasso's compensation and their role in providing misleading information to the board. Mercer had no immediate comment.
Bruce Yannett, Ashen's attorney, said the former executive, who retired from the NYSE last year, was happy to put the matter behind him.
"Mr. Ashen recognizes in hindsight that certain mistakes were made, but at no time did he intentionally provide inaccurate or incomplete information to the Board of Directors," Yannett said in a statement.
Mercer said in a statement it settled the case "solely to put this matter behind us and to avoid the cost and distraction of protracted negotiation." The company said it did not make recommendations regarding the structure or amount of payment of Grasso's compensation package, and that it reported solely to Ashen.
Grasso resigned as chairman and CEO as the controversy surrounding his pay reached its peak. He has received $139 million of his compensation package, and recently told Newsweek he would forgo the rest if the exchange would apologize for tarnishing his name.
The NYSE, for its part, has already asserted that Grasso should return the bulk of his compensation. In February, interim NYSE chairman John Reed wrote to Grasso's lawyer, demanding the return of $120 million; Grasso refused.
Spitzer filed his suit under New York's Not-for-Profit Corporation Law. His investigation is separate from a probe of Grasso's compensation by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is considering whether there was a violation of federal securities laws or the NYSE's bylaws.
Matt Well, an SEC spokesman, said Monday, "At this point we don't have a timeline" for the commission's investigation.
Elliot Spitzer is a hyper-ambitious attorney general who keeps cranking out controversial anti-business actions to keep his name in the news and further his political prospects. He's a mob boss with a statehouse office.
Government control over prices (in this case compensation) is the goal.
I'm no fan of Spitzer, but in this case the state has a legitimate authority to make such a determination. An organization like the NYSE that exists as a not-for-profit corporation is exposed to a level of government oversight of their compensation packages that a normal private company is not.
The biggest flaw in Spitzer's case is that the members of the NYSE board of directors are conspicuously absent as targets of his investigation. There is a reason for this . . . one of them -- former New York State comptroller Carl McCall -- is a key Democratic figure in New York and will likely play a major role in the 2006 governor's race.
Government has EVERY right to control a NOT FOR PROFIT organization.....now, the FOR PROFIT ones, I'd agree....get the government outta them.
Help me out on this analogy. Hank Rearden was the brains behind Rearden Metal, which was lighter than steel, yet stronger, and could be produced for less cost than steel.
AFAIK, Dick Grasso never produced anything. So how can he be compared to Hank?
Your analysis of Spitzer is spot on, though.
Which BTW, doesn't change anything I said.
PS, governments do not have rights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.