Top bar
About POGO's Federal Contractor Misconduct Database (FCMD)
The government awards contracts to companies with histories of misconduct such as contract fraud and environmental, ethics, and labor violations. In the absence of a centralized federal database listing instances of misconduct, the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) is providing such data. We believe that it will lead to improved contracting decisions and public access to information about how the government spends hundreds of billions of taxpayer money each year on goods and services. Report an instance of misconduct »
Ranking: 128
General Motors Corp.
General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM), the world’s largest automaker, has been the global industry sales leader since 1931. Founded in 1908, GM today employs about 324,000 people around the world. It has manufacturing operations in 32 countries and its vehicles are sold in 200 countries. In 2004, GM sold nearly 9 million cars and trucks globally, up 4 percent and the second-highest total in the company’s history. GM’s global headquarters are at the GM Renaissance Center in Detroit.
Federal Contract $: $ 11.0m
Total Number of Instances: 16
Total Misconduct dollar amount: $1387.5m
- Annual Report
- Ethics Page
- Hoovers Profile
- Lobbying Information
- Political Activity
- Press Page
- SEC 10-K
- Website
- Contracting Information
Instances of Misconduct
1. Old GM Environmental Liabilities Settlement
The United States, 14 states and the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe entered into a settlement agreement with Chapter 11 debtor Motors Liquidation Company (“Old GM”), formerly known as General Motors Corporation, to settle certain environmental liabilities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and state environmental laws. Under the agreement, Old GM will pay approximately $641.4 million and will contribute additional non-cash assets (with an estimated value of $120 million) for the cleanup and administration of 89 properties and sites around the country, 59 of which are known to have been contaminated with hazardous substances or waste. Old GM also spent approximately $11.5 million towards the cleanup of the properties during the pendency of the bankruptcy proceeding.... more»
2. U.S. v. Bealko (Metals Fraud and Kickback Scheme)
Daniel J. Bealko, General Motors’s former global commodity manager for lightweight metals, pleaded guilty to federal charges relating to a kickback and fraud scheme involving GM’s sale of bulk aluminum to third parties. Bealko also pleaded guilty to federal income tax evasion, admitting that he concealed from the IRS approximately $6.5 million in kickbacks. Bealko was GM’s Global Commodity manager between 1996 and December 2003, when he was entrusted with the discretionary authority to devise and implement a plan for GM to divest its extensive bulk aluminum holdings. Between mid-1998 and December 2003, Bealko received approximately $6.5 million in kickbacks for steering GM bulk aluminum sales to a Chicago area businessman who previously pleaded guilty in the case.... more»
3. UAW, et. al. v. General Motors Corporation (Health Care Benefits)
“On October 18, 2005, the UAW and two hourly retirees filed a putative class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of hourly retirees, spouses and dependants, seeking to enjoin unilateral modifications by GM to hourly retiree health-care benefits… The lawsuit followed months of negotiations between GM and the UAW regarding changes to retiree health-care benefits and is the initial step in implementing this agreement. On December 16, 2005, GM, the UAW and the putative class representatives finalized a settlement agreement and submitted motions to the court for certification of the class, preliminary approval of the final settlement and approval of the proposed notice to class members… A final hearing to determine whether the settlement agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate with respect to the class was held on March 6, 2006.”... more»
4. In re General Motors Securities Litigation
On September 19, 2005, GM was named as a defendant in a case brought “on behalf of purchasers of GM debt and/or equity securities during the period February 25, 2002 through March 16, 2005.” The case alleges violations of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 USC § 77, et. al.). “In particular, the complaint alleges that GM’s cash flows during the class period were overstated based on the ‘reclassification’ of certain cash items described in the Corporation’s 2004 Form 10-K…. The complaint also alleges misrepresentations relating to forward-looking statements of the Corporation’s 2005 earnings forecast that were later revised significantly downward… On January 17, 2006, the court made provisional designations of lead plaintiff and lead counsel, which designations were made final on February 6, 2006.” In July 2008, GM settled the lawsuit for $277 million.... more»
5. In re General Motors ERISA Litigation
In May 2005, a class action suit named GM as a defendant, alleging “that the GM defendants breached their fiduciary duties to plan participants by, among other things, investing their assets, or offering them the option of investing, in GM stock on the ground that it was not a prudent investment.” In January 2008, the parties filed a motion for preliminary approval of a proposed settlement. If approved, the settlement will provide a cash fund of $37.5 million.... more»
6. Breach of Contract and Negligence
“Thirty-nine class actions have been filed in state, federal and Canadian courts against [GM], claiming that 1973-1987 model Chevrolet and GMC full-size pickup trucks are defective because their fuel tanks are mounted below the cab and outside the frame rails… In these actions, plaintiffs claimed that the fuel tank locations make the vehicles unreasonably susceptible to fuel-fed fires following side-impact collisions… An agreement for a nationwide settlement of the class actions pending in federal and state courts received final court approval on December 19, 1996… the settlement provides for approximately $4 million to fund motor vehicle fire safety research. The court ordered General Motors to pay plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and costs totaling approximately $28 million.”... more»
7. Breach of Contract
In 1995, DIRECTV, then a subsidiary of General Motors, entered into a contract with General Electric Capital Corporation (GECC) “in which GECC agreed to establish and manage a private label consumer credit program for consumer purchases of hardware and related DIRECTV programming… A complaint and counterclaim were filed by the parties in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut concerning GECC's performance and DIRECTV's obligation to act as a surety… On July 21, 2000, the jury returned a verdict in favor of GECC and awarded contract damages in the amount of $133.0 million. The trial judge issued a order granting GECC $48.5 million in interest under Connecticut's offer-of- judgment statute. With this order, the total judgment entered in GECC's favor was $181.5 million.”... more»
8. Violations of the Clean Air Act
On November 30, 1995, General Motors announced that the company would “spend approximately $45 million to settle government charges that it put illegal devices to defeat pollution controls inside nearly a half-million Cadillacs since 1991 that resulted in carbon monoxide emissions of up to three times the legal limit… GM will pay an $11 million fine, more than $25 million to recall and retrofit the polluting vehicles, and up to $8.75 million on projects to offset emissions from these vehicles.”... more»
9. Violations of the Civil Rights Act
On September 26, 2001, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission “resolved its consolidated lawsuits against General Motors Corporation (GM) alleging violations of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (42 USC § 2000, et. seq.) at the company's Linden, N.J., facility. The suits, filed in September 2000, alleged that GM had failed to provide Mary Scott a work environment free from sexual harassment and similarly failed to address incidents of racial harassment affecting her and other African-American employees. In addition, the EEOC charged that Melvin Wood was retaliated against when he supported Ms. Scott's complaints to management about discriminatory treatment…According to the settlement, GM will pay $1.25 million to Ms. Scott, Mr. Wood, and a group of 14 other African-American workers who had alleged they had been subjected to racial harassment on the job. GM also agreed to revise its procedures, to report the results of all investigations of complaints, and to continue to train all employees in positions of authority concerning worker rights and employer responsibilities under Title VII.”... more»
10. Unreadable Cost Disclosures in Advertisements
On November 21, 1996, five major automobile manufacturers “signed settlement agreements with the Federal Trade Commission to take important lease costs out of the blur of unreadable print in car lease and financed purchase advertising. The FTC said these agreements will require the companies to provide consumers with clear, readable, and understandable cost information in their new advertising. Under the settlements, General Motors Corporation, Mitsubishi Motor Sales of America, Inc., American Honda Motor Co., Inc., American Isuzu Motors Inc., and Mazda Motor of America, Inc. will be prohibited from featuring low monthly payments or low amounts 'down' in large, bold print, while hiding additional costs and sometimes contradictory information in 'mouse print' that is difficult or impossible to read.”... more»
11. Failure to Meet Air Resources Board Certification Standards
On February 4, 1998, the California Air Resources Board announced “that it received a settlement of $80,000 from General Motors Corp. (GM) for selling vehicles that did not meet ARB certification standards for sale in the state…According to ARB information, General Motors was aware that the 19 vehicles, all 1995 Pontiac Grand Ams, were not certified for sale in California when they were delivered for sale with the intention of later bringing them into compliance with ARB emissions standards, a violation of Board regulations…In an effort to correct the problem, GM recalled the vehicles but were only able to reconfigure 13 to California specifications. Although the California Health and Safety Code allows for a maximum of $5,000 per vehicle civil penalty in this case, the ARB accepted $80,000 as a reasonable settlement.”... more»
12. Required Warranty Extensions
On February 11, 2003, the California Air Resources Board announced “that General Motors (GM) has been required to extend fuel injector warranty coverage on approximately 700,000 1996 through 2001 model year light- and medium-duty SUVs, trucks and vans…Warranties on the vehicles' fuel injector systems will be extended to 10 years/200,000 miles. GM will soon begin notifying vehicle owners of the extended warranty coverage. Repairs under the extended warranty could ultimately cost GM more than $100 million dollars…The trouble-prone Sequential Central Port Injector (SCPI) fuel system was installed on GM's popular SUVs, pickup trucks and vans with 4.3L, 5.0L, and 5.7 liter engines. The defective fuel injection systems cause GM owners to experience a 'Service Engine Soon' light, misfires, rough idle, and hard start problems due to deposit build-up that cause poppet valves to stick and fail.”... more»
13. Violations of Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards
On June 3, 1997, the California Air Resources Board announced a $1.3 million settlement with General Motors Corporation (GM) for potential violations of California motor vehicle emission standards…According to ARB data, at least 18 tons of added carbon monoxide were emitted each day from Cadillacs built between 1991 through 1995 equipped with 4.9 liter engines. As a result of ARB analysis in this investigation, General Motors has subjected about 45,000 Cadillacs built between 1991 and 1993 to a California recall program.”... more»
14. Failure to Meet Report Deadlines
"MassDEP entered into a Consent Order with $33,000 Penalty involving General Motors Corporation...GMC was cited for failure to submit reports within the deadlines established in a Notice of Noncompliance issued by MassDEP on 8/10/04."... more»
15. Cleanup at Superfund Sites in New Jersey, Maryland and Missouri
The United States entered into a settlement agreement with General Motors to settle environmental liabilities arising from its releases of hazardous substances at Diamond Alkali Superfund Site in New Jersey, the Kane & Lombard Street Drum Superfund Site in Maryland, and the Hayford Bridge Road Groundwater Superfund Site in Missouri. The settlement resolved claims brought under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) to recover the cleanup costs incurred by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at the three sites. General Motors agreed to pay $20.9 million and perform cleanup work valued at $2.89 million.... more»
16. Unauthorized Export of Technical Data
General Motors and General Dynamics, as successor owner of portions of General Motors, allegedly violated the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. § 2778, in connection with the unauthorized export of technical data, defense services and defense articles to foreign person employees to include those of proscribed countries and other matters. Under a consent agreement, both companies agreed to pay $20 million in fines and remedial measures, with General Motors responsible for $15 million and General Dynamics responsible for $5 million. See related General Dynamics instance, “Unauthorized Export of Technical Data.”... more»
Quick Search
= link