Ask Questions About Your D&O Coverage

New NCUA rules shine a light on directors’ duties and risk exposure.

January 31, 2011
/ PRINT / ShareShare / Text Size +

The National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) in December finalized sections from its rules and regulations concerning federal credit union directors’ fiduciary duties and indemnification.

As a result, many directors now are facing additional indemnification limitations, redefined fiduciary duties, financial literacy requirements, and many other changes that will increase their exposure as board members. Not only does adoption of these rules expand risk for credit union directors, but there are additional risks on the horizon.

That’s because NCUA hasn’t issued a final ruling yet on Part 750 related to golden parachutes and indemnification payments. If adopted, this rule would further restrict potential indemnification for board members.

Directors NewsletterRecent actions by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) provide some context and might be a potential precursor for what credit union directors could face. During the savings and loan (S&L) crisis of

the 1980s and 1990s, bank regulators pursued claims against directors and officers of failed institutions in 25% of the cases. The FDIC subsequently recovered $1.3 billion from directors and officers.

In October, the FDIC announced it authorized lawsuits against more than 50 directors and officers of failed banks in an attempt to recoup at least $1 billion, according to Bloomberg.com.

And while banks have been strained for some time, actions by the FDIC are just ramping up. This lag is typical and occurred during the S&L crisis as well. With all that’s looming, it’s important credit union directors have as much protection as possible.

In the January issue of Credit Union Directors Newsletter [pdf], John Wallace, product executive for CUNA Mutual Group’s bond and management and professional liability insurance products, suggests boards ask several questions about the credit union's directors’ and officers’ (D&O) liability policy provider, including:

What does it mean to have an “insured vs. insured” exclusion in my policy?

A An “insured vs. insured” exclusion basically excludes coverage for claims where one insured brings suit against another insured. An example would be if a director sues another director or an officer sues an employee for breach of fiduciary duty.

This exclusion surfaced in the mid-1980s when Bank of America executives sued their own loan officers for making bad loans. The result was that they could access D&O policies that covered the loan officers.

Because this type of action presents a significant moral hazard, the industry responded by adding an “insured vs. insured” exclusion.

If your policy has such an exclusion, find out if you have a “carve-back” for it that precludes the “insured vs. insured” exclusion from applying when a bankruptcy trustee or examiner brings a suit against your board. The “insured vs. insured” exclusion is found in almost all D&O policies.

Without having a carve-back for bankruptcy trustees, the policy is almost as restrictive as having a regulator exclusion.

Read more questions here [pdf].

Post a comment to this story


What's Popular

Popular Stories

Recent Discussion

Great article! Unfortunately, most employees don’t feel valued or appreciated by their supervisors or employers. In fact, research has shown that the predominant reason team members quit their jobs is because they don’t feel valued. This is in spite of the fact that employee recognition programs have proliferated in the workplace – over 90% of all organizations in the U.S. has some form of employee recognition activities in place. But most employee recognition programs are viewed with skepticism and cynicism – because they aren’t viewed as being genuine in their communication of appreciation. Getting the “employee of the month” award, receiving a certificate of recognition, or a “Way to go, team!” email just don’t get the job done. How do you communicate authentic appreciation? We have found people have different ways that they want to be shown appreciation, and if you don’t communicate in the language of appreciation important to them, you essentially “miss the mark”. Additionally, employees need to receive recognition more than once a year at their performance review. Otherwise, they view the praise as “going through the motions”. A third component of authentic appreciation is that the communication has to be about them personally – not the department, not their group, but something they did. Finally, they have to believe that you mean what you say. How you treat them has to match the words you use. If you are not sure how your team members want to be shown appreciation, the Motivating By Appreciation Inventory (www.appreciationatwork.com/assess) will identify the language of appreciation and specific actions preferred by each employee. You then can create a group profile for your team, so everyone knows how to encourage one another. Remember, employees want to know that they are valued for what they contribute to the success of the organization. And communicating authentic appreciation in the ways they desire it can make the difference between keeping your quality team members or having a negative work environment that everyone wants to leave. Paul White, Ph.D., is the co-author of The 5 Languages of Appreciation in the Workplace with Dr. Gary Chapman.

Your Say: Who should be Credit Union Magazine's 2014 CU Hero of the Year?

View Results Poll Archive