Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2019

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Note 5—Commitments and Contingencies

Guarantees: The Parent Company has guaranteed letters of credit in connection with its credit facility with a group of banks. The letters of credit were issued by TMK Re, Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary, to secure TMK Re, Ltd.’s obligation for claims on certain policies reinsured by TMK Re, Ltd. that were sold by other Globe Life Inc. insurance subsidiaries. These letters of credit facilitate TMK Re, Ltd.’s ability to reinsure the business of Globe Life's insurance carriers. The agreement expires in 2021. The maximum amount of letters of credit available is $250 million. The Parent Company would be liable to the extent that TMK Re, Ltd. does not pay the reinsured party. On April 2, 2019, the letters of credit were amended to reduce the current amount outstanding from $155 million to $150 million. As of September 30, 2019, the outstanding balance remained unchanged.

Litigation: Globe Life Inc. (formerly Torchmark Corporation) and its subsidiaries, in common with the insurance industry in general, are subject to litigation, including putative class action litigation, alleged breaches of contract, torts, including bad faith and fraud claims based on alleged wrongful or fraudulent acts of agents of the Parent Company's insurance subsidiaries, employment discrimination, and miscellaneous other causes of action. Based upon information presently available, and in light of legal and other factual defenses available to the Parent Company and its subsidiaries, management does not believe that it is reasonably possible that such litigation will have a material adverse effect on Globe Life's financial condition, future operating results or liquidity; however, assessing the eventual outcome of litigation necessarily involves forward-looking speculation as to judgments to be made by judges, juries and appellate courts in the future. This bespeaks caution, particularly in states with reputations for high punitive damage verdicts. Globe Life's management recognizes that large punitive damage awards bearing little or no relation to actual damages continue to be awarded by juries in jurisdictions in which the Company has substantial business, creating the potential for unpredictable material adverse judgments in any given punitive damage suit.

On September 12, 2018, putative class action litigation was filed against American Income in California’s Contra Costa County Superior Court (Joh v. American Income Life Insurance Company, Case No. C18-01863) (Joh Action). An amended complaint was filed on October 18, 2018. American Income removed the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Case No. 3:18-cv-06364-TSH). A second amended complaint was filed on May 20, 2019. The plaintiffs, former insurance sales agents of American Income, are suing on behalf of all current and former trainees and sales agents who sold insurance for American Income in the State of California for the four years prior to the filing of the complaint. The second amended complaint alleges that such individuals are employees and asserts claims under the California Labor Code, California Business and Professions Code, and California Private Attorney General Act. The complaint seeks compensatory damages, penalties and attorney fees on claims for failure to pay wages/commissions, failure to appropriately pay agents at termination, failure to provide itemized wage statements, failure to reimburse expenses, misclassification and unfair business practices.

On October 18, 2018, putative class action litigation was filed against Torchmark Corporation and American Income in California’s Los Angeles County Superior Court (Golz v. American Income Life Insurance Company, et al., Case No. 18STCV01354) (Golz Action). American Income removed the case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Case No. 2:18-cv-09879 R (SSx)). An amended complaint was filed on February 5, 2019. On February 6, 2019, Torchmark Corporation was dismissed without prejudice and the case proceeded with respect to American Income. On April 2, 2019, the District Court granted American Income’s motion to dismiss four of the five causes of action asserted. The amended complaint’s remaining claim alleges that plaintiff, as an American Income insurance agent trainee in California, was an employee who should have been compensated accordingly. The plaintiff seeks to represent a class of individuals in California who trained to contract as American Income agents and who subsequently worked as contracted agents. The class period is alleged to begin four years prior to the complaint’s filing. The complaint seeks restitution under the California Business and Professions Code for alleged unfair business practices such as failure to pay minimum wage and overtime, failure to provide meal and rest breaks, and failure to reimburse business expenses.

On December 14, 2018, putative class action litigation was filed against American Income in United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Hamilton v. American Income Life Insurance Company, Case No. 4:18-cv-7535-KAW) (Hamilton Action). An amended complaint was filed on January 23, 2019. The plaintiffs, former insurance sales agents of American Income, are suing on behalf of all current and former sales agents who sold insurance for American Income in the State of California for the last four years prior to the filing of the complaint. The lawsuit alleges that putative class members are employees and asserts claims under the California Labor Code, California Business and Professions Code, and California Private Attorney General Act. The complaint seeks compensatory damages, penalties and attorney fees on claims for failure to pay minimum wage and overtime, failure to provide meal and rest breaks, failure to appropriately pay agents at termination, failure to provide itemized wage statements, failure to reimburse expenses, misclassification and unfair business practices.

On January 16, 2019, putative class action litigation was filed against American Income in Orange County, California Superior Court (Putros v. American Income Life Insurance Company, Case No. 30-2019-01044772-CU-OE-CXC) (Putros Action). An amended complaint was filed on January 22, 2019. The plaintiff, a former insurance sales agent of American Income, is suing on behalf of all current and former sales agents who sold insurance for American Income in the State of California for the year prior to the filing of the complaint. The lawsuit alleges that putative class members are employees and asserts claims under the California Private Attorney General Act. The complaint seeks penalties for failure to pay minimum wage, failure to provide meal and rest breaks, failure to appropriately pay agents at termination, failure to provide itemized wage statements, failure to reimburse expenses, and misclassification.

With respect to the four related cases above, on August 1, 2019, Plaintiffs in the Joh/Hamilton Actions jointly moved for preliminary approval of a settlement of all class and representative claims—which broadly covers “all individuals who trained to become and/or worked as sales agents in California for Defendant during the last four years prior to the filing of the original Complaint in Joh and whose training and/or work began before the date of preliminary approval of this Settlement”—and explained that “The proposed settlement reached here will resolve all claims in Joh and Hamilton, and, in doing so, encompasses all claims asserted in the Putros and Golz actions as well.” On August 16, 2019, the Northern District of California granted the Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and scheduled a hearing for final approval of the settlement for January 9, 2020.

With respect to the aforementioned litigation, at this time, management believes that the possibility of a material judgment adverse to the Company is remote.