ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½

American International Group said its property/casualty carrier Chartis will eliminate some jobs, with the reduction affecting less than 1 percent of its workforce, or roughly 400 or fewer positions.

“As part of Chartis’ review of its personnel needs, we have re-sized our staffing levels to reflect our business objectives,” ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½ spokesman Mark Herr told Insurance Journal. “We continue to hire where we see the best potential for growth. Overall, the reductions amount to less than 1 percent of Chartis’ employees.”

Chartis currently has 40,000 employees who serve more than 70 million clients around the world.

Since the 2008 fnancial crisis, ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½ has been selling off business assets and almost halved its workforce. ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½ had roughly 63,000 employees in 2010, down from 116,000 in 2008 according to its annual reports.

In other ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½ news, New York federal court gave a preliminary approval to ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½’s $725 settlement deal with Ohio public pension funds. It’s another forward step in ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½’s effort to resolve ongoing legal dispute with investors in the consolidated 2004 securities litigation.

ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½ and the parties involved in the lawsuit reached the settlement in July 2010. The next step is a “fairness hearing,” scheduled for Jan. 31, 2012. It will determine whether the settlement is fair and reasonable.

The settlement involves the consolidated 2004 securities litigation. ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½’s 2010 Form 10-K regulatory filing explains that beginning in Oct. 2004, a number of putative securities fraud class action suits were filed in the Southern District of New York against ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½. These became the consolidated 2004 securities litigation.

The lead plaintiff in the litigation is a group of public retirement systems and pension funds benefiting Ohio state employees, suing on behalf of themselves and all purchasers of ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½’s publicly traded securities between Oct. 28, 1999 and April 1, 2005.

The lead plaintiff alleged that from 1999 and 2005, ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½: concealed that it engaged in anti-competitive conduct through alleged payment of contingent commissions to brokers and participation in illegal bid-rigging; and concealed that it used “income smoothing” products and other techniques to inflate its earnings.

Topics Lawsuits ÌìÃÀÍøÕ¾´«Ã½´«Ã½