Groseclose contract revealed
CEO's parachute is half a year's base pay
By Allyson Bird
Bernard S. Groseclose Jr. stands to make a minimum of $132,000 in separation pay after offering his resignation as president and chief executive officer of the State Ports Authority.
His contract, obtained by The Post and Courier on Thursday, suggests the agency provide six months base pay to Groseclose, unless he is terminated for misconduct or an inability to perform his job.
The Post and Courier
Bernard S. Groseclose Jr. stands to make $132,000 in leaving his post at the State Ports Authority.
Groseclose, who earned $264,000 a year, volunteered his resignation during a semi-annual evaluation at Tuesday's board meeting.
Joel Sawyer, spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford, said the SPA board discussed tacking even more onto the separation pay spelled out in the six-page employment agreement. That, he said, "would be a mistake."
"The port board had considered offering Mr. Groseclose a few things they are not contractually obligated to offer," Sawyer said. "We think that sends a bad message when state employees are being laid off."
Sawyer said that after the governor's office contacted SPA Chairman David Posek, it was assured that the ports board is "going to make every effort to pull it back. We're not talking about a whole lot of money with the add-ons, but symbolically, it doesn't look good."
Posek would not comment on any proposed terms of the separation package, which, he said, has not been presented to Groseclose and will likely take a few more weeks to prepare.
The Contract
Bernard Groseclose's contract with the State Ports Authority (PDF)
Groseclose, 55, became chief executive by unanimous board vote in 1996. He worked under an unwritten agreement for nearly two years.
The job evaluation that prompted him to offer his resignation also is not documented. Responding to a records request made by The Post and Courier on Tuesday, SPA spokesman Byron Miller said the agency's board delivered its review of Groseclose in a closed-door discussion and that there are no notes, tapes or transcripts of the former CEO's performance evaluation.
"The authority has no performance evaluation documents or records," Miller said Thursday.
Hicks on the SPA
Read Brian Hicks' column on the Groseclose departure and the SPA.
Since Groseclose was named chief executive, the SPA's revenues have climbed from $71 million to a record $165 million, while cargo volume increased by more than a half million containers.
But recently port volume has declined — nearly 10 percent for the last complete fiscal year and more than 4 percent for the current year to date.
Also, the port's biggest customer, Denmark-based Maersk Line, has announced plans to pull its business, which accounts for 20 percent of Charleston's cargo, by the end of 2010. The company has blamed its decision on the International Longshoremen's Association, saying the union would not agree to cost-saving measures the company said it needed in order to stay.
A consulting firm, New Jersey-based Paul F. Richardson Associates, began meeting with maritime leaders and local officials weeks ago and delivered a confidential presentation to key lawmakers Thursday titled "A Port in Transition." The accompanying subtitles were: "A Customer Base in Crisis" and "The Need for Immediate Action."
It warned that Maersk's decision to leave might "signal a potentially broader cargo market share loss" and that Charleston could face continued problems in retaining container business.
"There is a need to prevent further erosion of the Port's market share, which may not be recoverable over the near term, as carriers look to cut costs," according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The Post and Courier.
According to Paul F. Richardson Associates, the study was requested by "various private sector stakeholders within the Port," but it did not specify who paid for it. The firm said its list of maritime-industry clients is diverse. It includes ocean carriers, terminal operators, stevedores, ports authorities, cargo owners, organized labor, management and investors.
The presentation criticized the SPA of focusing on expansion and profits while being inattentive to its customers.
State Sen. Robert Ford criticized the SPA for not alerting lawmakers and the public about the dire situation on the waterfront sooner. "We never knew," he said Thursday.
Both Ford and state Rep. Wendell Gilliard, both D-Charleston, said they would like to see a maritime union member serve on the SPA board in the future. They support a bill that would restructure the board's makeup by scrutinizing the governor-appointed members more closely.
Gilliard also said SPA bonuses, which last fiscal year netted Groseclose an additional $28,000, should stem from increases in business volume, not profit targets.
Referring to Groseclose's base salary, Gilliard said, "Next time ... I want to see a pay cut of at least 50 percent. That is just way too much for somebody to be making" in a state job.
Reach Allyson Bird at 937-5594 or abird@postandcourier.com.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
bohicasc (anonymous) says...
"State Sen. Robert Ford criticized the SPA for not alerting lawmakers and the public about the dire situation on the waterfront sooner. "We never knew," he said Thursday."
I love this comment! Another State Senator who now has conveniently, jumped on board the amnesia bandwagon. Didn't the Port of Charleston stress the need to expand to Daniel Island to remain competitive with other Ports 8 years ago?
Now, the price is being paid. Thanks to McConnell, Sanford, and "Contain The Port", Charleston will continue to loose container business to Savannah whose State's elected officials backed all of its efforts to expand and compete.
January 23, 2009 at 8:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
algorelost (anonymous) says...
I can tell you this it is cheaper to work vessels in Charleston as well as more productive that Savannah. I can also tell you that the SPA is easier to work with and cheaper to work with than the GPA.
January 23, 2009 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Strings (anonymous) says...
>>>>>Referring to Groseclose's base salary, Gilliard said, "Next time ... I want to see a pay cut of at least 50 percent. That is just way too much for somebody to be making" in a state job.>>>>Since Groseclose was named chief executive, the SPA's revenues have climbed from $71 million to a record $165 million, while cargo volume increased by more than a half million containers.>>>Also, the port's biggest customer, Denmark-based Maersk Line, has announced plans to pull its business, which accounts for 20 percent of Charleston's cargo, by the end of 2010. The company has blamed its decision on the International Longshoremen's Association, saying the union would not agree to cost-saving measures the company said it needed in order to stay.<<<<<
So why are we not beating the union piñata
January 23, 2009 at 9:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JC (anonymous) says...
It is the ILA's fault and the economy for the falling volume and profits, not Mr. Groseclose's.
Once again, why are bonuses paid to any executive? You are supposed to give 100% and performing your best for your paycheck to begin with. Does that mean they get to coast if they just want to collect their check and not worry about getting a bonus?
January 23, 2009 at 11:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mkris (anonymous) says...
Am I mising something, he had no written contract? So why did the Board give him a severance package?
January 23, 2009 at 11:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
algorelost (anonymous) says...
In the contract it says he can not go to work at any port in GA, FL, VA, NC. If they are going to limit where the man can go and work, then they have got to pay him. If they don't want to pay him, then they have to remove the clause in his contract limiting where he can go from here.
January 23, 2009 at 12:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
panasonic (anonymous) says...
The statement by Rep. Gilliard is troubling because you pay for what you get with employees. Yes the ports autority is a state agency but get's its funding from the revenue they generate. If Mr. Groseclose was working a privatized port he would likely be making close to S1M a year. Yes $250K is a good amount of money but the SPA Board will likely have to pay Mr. Groseclose's replacment at least $500k per year. If they are looking for a qualified top notch person to be President of SPA. I really hope they are able to turn the SPA around because it truly is the economic engine for the entire state. There is not a county in South Carolina that is not affected by the Port of Charleston.
January 23, 2009 at 12:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JohnGalt (anonymous) says...
"That is just way too much for somebody to be making" in a state job." What? Walking away with 132k of agency earned money is nothing compared to Bowden's 3.5mil of taxpayer dollars.
January 23, 2009 at 12:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mkris (anonymous) says...
Posted by algorelost on January 23, 2009 at 12:18 p.m. In the contract it says he can not go to work at any port in GA, FL, VA, NC. If they are going to limit where the man can go and work, then they have got to pay him. If they don't want to pay him, then they have to remove the clause in his contract limiting where he can go from here.
___________________________________________________________
Am I missing something? If this man has a contract that he negociated that restricts where he can go and its term; doesn't that mean that he CANNOT work at the places even if he QUIT?
He seems to be having it both ways.... heads he wins, tails he wins.
January 23, 2009 at 1:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
beentook2 (anonymous) says...
"That's is just way too much for somebody to be making in a state job", according to Rep. Gilliard in reference to Mr. Groseclose salary of $264,00.
Well Mr. Gilliard whatever you are smoking, you need to quit!!
You want the next state ports director to make no more than $132,000. The State newspaper has a web page titled SC State Salary Database and it lists over approx. 100 people who make more than $150,00 in a "state" job. I am sure there are just as many who make between $150,000 and $132,000 in a "state" job. Of course you, as a legislator, would not have this information available to you.
Just a suggestion: Why don't you introduce legislation turning over the state ports authority to the City of Charleston. Little Joe seems to be the only one in the Holy City that can get anyting done.
January 23, 2009 at 3:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
localboy (anonymous) says...
Poor ol' JohnGalt can't read or at least comprehend that Bowden wasn't paid with tax money. Even sadder that someone still obsesses over a coach that beat his in state rival coach so often.
January 23, 2009 at 4:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
truthseeker (anonymous) says...
Once again most of us can not get our heads around how to pay and compensate a quasi state agency monopoly that has no oversight. How do we know if they do a good job? Is it volume , or profit, or do they hire someone to make up bogus job numbers they create and get rewarded for job creation?
We need to find out how Putin rewards his managers of Russia's state run businesses.
The true American answer is to privatize the terminals and get the state out of the way to focus on vital services private business can not provide.
January 23, 2009 at 5:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Reticle (anonymous) says...
I mistakenly posted this to another article, but it is written in reply to JC's "It is the ILA's fault and the economy for the falling volume and profits, not Mr. Groseclose's."
To put the blame soley on the ILA for Maersk leaving is ludicrous. They were given 2 choices with the same end result. If Maersk left, they would lose their jobs to other ports, if Maersk stayed they would lose their jobs to the SCSPA.
They had nothing to gain or lose either way, yet were told the final decision was their's? Why would they care either way?
Just my $.02
January 23, 2009 at 6:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Reticle (anonymous) says...
Now that I think about it a little more, how exactly would the ILA cause a decline in volume and profits? Please don't use the cliche of "they're union...... they"re overpaid". Every container port in competition with Charleston is a union port and most are posting double digit increases in volume and profit. I would really like to see how you came to this conclusion, but I won't hold my breath as I am quite sure it is just more anti-union rhetoric.
January 23, 2009 at 6:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
smp (anonymous) says...
If it was a private organization he would have been fired already. The port is a ridiculously mismanaged. And to algorelost who states that it is cheaper to work cargo here than in savannah, then there must be another reason the companies take their business to our neighbor.
You can make a million excuses for failures of the port...ILA...State legislature...no support from the community...blah blah blah. At the end of the day it is the job of the Executives to Execute. Not try to execute. Groseclose wasn't the man for the job. He and all of the current board and executives need to go. They simply haven't done anything the execute. They are failures.
The public does not support the self promoting and closed arrogance of the port. Thats why they can't succeed.
We need a whole new team.
January 24, 2009 at 4:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
truthseeker (anonymous) says...
I just heard from a very well placed gnome that Groseclose is going to take his severance money and buy a confidential super fancy mathematical model .
He and Al Parish are going into business together selling economic impact studies that overestimate jobs created by poorly run state and federal agencies. Bernie will do all the traveling- Al doesn't get out much these days.
January 24, 2009 at 8:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
boatrite (anonymous) says...
The Port Authority Board whom is appointed by the Gobner is the the Navigator of the Port Ship. Everything is being placed on Groseclose and more questions needs to be raised about the direction that they have taken the SPA. Bernie as "head coach" had nothing but productive winning seasons until Gobner Sanford and his executive friends got involved.
January 26, 2009 at 11:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full Terms and Conditions.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Thank you for your interest in this story. The comment thread for this article has been closed.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- Shared
- Upper King on rise: Hotels, apartments, restaurants changing face of downtown area
- Missing woman case gets murkier
- UPDATE: Missing woman's fiance seen leaving scene of burned SUV, carrying a shovel
- Magnolia Gardens offering free dream wedding to contest winner
- Body of missing woman's fiance was found near handgun
- DAVID SLADE: S.C. offers hybrid car tax credit
- Pinterest: Pinning hopes and dreams
- Black women today: Strong. Resilient. Ambitious.
- MCDERMOTT COLUMN: Golf business has risks, rewards
- Ex-Boeing worker claims racism, retaliation in firing
