Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Jan. 31, 2012
Contingencies	9. Contingencies The Company has been named a defendant in certain proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business, including class actions and purported class actions. Litigation outcomes are difficult to predict and are often resolved over long periods of time. Estimating probable losses requires the analysis of multiple possible outcomes that often depend on judgments about potential actions by third parties. In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 450-20, Loss Contingencies, the Company accrues for loss contingencies when losses become probable and are reasonably estimable. If the reasonable estimate of the loss is a range and no amount within the range is a better estimate, the minimum amount of the range is recorded as a liability. Legal costs associated with loss contingencies are expensed as incurred. At January 31, 2012, the total amount accrued for all probable litigation losses where a reasonable estimate of the loss could be made was $5.4 million. The Company does not accrue for contingent losses that, in the judgment of the Company, are considered to be reasonably possible but not probable. Management currently estimates that the potential exposure for all probable and reasonably possible cases for which an estimate of loss can be made totals up to $13.2 million. Factors underlying this estimate will change from time to time, and actual results may vary significantly from this estimate. Those matters for which the Company cannot reasonably estimate potential losses are not included within this estimated amount and, therefore, this estimated amount does not represent the Company’s maximum potential loss exposure. The ultimate resolution of such matters is always uncertain and any such proceeding brought against the Company could have a material adverse impact on its financial condition and results of operations. There have been no significant changes to the proceedings disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2011 during the quarter ended January 31, 2012, except as described below. The Company is a defendant in the previously reported consolidated cases of Augustus, Hall and Davis v. American Commercial Security Services filed on July 12, 2005 in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County (the “Augustus case”). The Augustus case is a class action involving allegations that the Company violated certain state laws relating to meal and rest breaks. On January 8, 2009, the Augustus case was certified as a class action by the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County. On October 6, 2010, the Company moved to decertify the class and for summary judgment. Plaintiffs also moved for summary judgment on the rest break claim. On December 28, 2010, the Superior Court de-certified the portion of the class related to the meal break claims and granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs with respect to the rest break issue. On July 11, 2011, the Court closed the class period as of July 1, 2011 and vacated the previously scheduled trial date of September 12, 2011. On February 8, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment on the rest break claim which seeks damages in the amount of $103.0 million. On February 8, 2012 the Company filed a motion for decertification of the class. Both motions are scheduled to be heard on April 23, 2012. The Company continues to believe it has strong defenses against this lawsuit and is vigorously defending it. No trial date has been scheduled. An estimate of the potential exposure, if any, cannot be made at this time. The Company is a defendant in the previously reported consolidated cases of Diaz/Morales/Reyes v. Ampco System Parking filed on December 5, 2006 in L.A. Superior Curt (the “ Diaz case”). On June 22, 2011, the parties accepted a mediator’s proposal which involves settling all the claims made in the first amended complaint for the period of October 1, 2002 to the date on which the Court grants preliminary approval of the settlement. The Court granted its preliminary approval of the settlement on December 13, 2011. On January 27, 2012, the notice to the class of the settlement was mailed. The hearing for final approval of the settlement is scheduled for May 21, 2012. Under the proposed settlement, the maximum amount which could be paid to claimants is $4.7 million. The anticipated payment under the terms of the mediator’s proposal is approximately $2.9 million. The Company has accrued $2.9 million with respect to this matter, which is included in the total amount accrued for all litigation matters described above. The Company is a defendant in the previously reported case of Simpson v. ABM Janitorial Services-Northwest and ABM Industries Incorporated filed on September 24, 2010 in the Superior Court for the State of Washington in and for King County (the “Simpson case”). The Simpson case involves allegations relating to unpaid overtime, off-the-clock work, and failure to provide meal and rest periods under Washington state law. The plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is due June 15, 2012, and the trial date is currently scheduled for February 11, 2013. The Company is a defendant in the previously reported case of Khadera v. American Building Maintenance Co.- West and ABM Industries filed on March 24, 2008 in the U.S. District Court of Washington, Western District (the Khadera case”). The Khadera case is a collective action and involves allegations relating to unpaid overtime and meal and rest claims. It is an opt-in class under the Fair Labor Standards Act and 343 plaintiffs are in the class. On December 1, 2011, the Court denied the Company’s motion for decertification, so the case will proceed to trial as a collective action. Class certification was granted only with respect to certain overtime claims under federal law. Trial is currently set for April 2, 2012. Environmental Matter During 2011, a proceeding was commenced by the State of Texas against a subsidiary of the Company alleging that the subsidiary discharged industrial waste in violation of applicable law. The subsidiary has reached an agreement with the State for Pretrial Diversion of the charge against it and has paid $0.1 million restitution to the State. Once all requirements of the Pretrial Diversion are met and the other defendants’ cases have been adjudicated, the charge against the subsidiary will be dismissed. Other During October 2011, the Company began an internal investigation into matters relating to compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the Company’s internal policies in connection with services provided by a foreign entity affiliated with a Linc joint venture partner. Such services commenced prior to the Company’s acquisition of Linc. As a result of the investigation, the Company has caused Linc to terminate its association with the arrangement. In December 2011, the Company contacted the U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission to voluntarily disclose the results of its internal investigation to date. The Company cannot reasonably estimate the potential liability, if any, related to these matters. However, based on the facts currently known, the Company does not believe that these matters will have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. There have been no significant changes to this contingency during the quarter ended January 31, 2012.

9. Contingencies

The Company has been named a defendant in certain proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business, including class actions and purported class actions. Litigation outcomes are difficult to predict and are often resolved over long periods of time. Estimating probable losses requires the analysis of multiple possible outcomes that often depend on judgments about potential actions by third parties. In accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 450-20, Loss Contingencies, the Company accrues for loss contingencies when losses become probable and are reasonably estimable. If the reasonable estimate of the loss is a range and no amount within the range is a better estimate, the minimum amount of the range is recorded as a liability. Legal costs associated with loss contingencies are expensed as incurred. At January 31, 2012, the total amount accrued for all probable litigation losses where a reasonable estimate of the loss could be made was $5.4 million.

The Company does not accrue for contingent losses that, in the judgment of the Company, are considered to be reasonably possible but not probable. Management currently estimates that the potential exposure for all probable and reasonably possible cases for which an estimate of loss can be made totals up to $13.2 million. Factors underlying this estimate will change from time to time, and actual results may vary significantly from this estimate. Those matters for which the Company cannot reasonably estimate potential losses are not included within this estimated amount and, therefore, this estimated amount does not represent the Company’s maximum potential loss exposure. The ultimate resolution of such matters is always uncertain and any such proceeding brought against the Company could have a material adverse impact on its financial condition and results of operations.

There have been no significant changes to the proceedings disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2011 during the quarter ended January 31, 2012, except as described below.

The Company is a defendant in the previously reported consolidated cases of Augustus, Hall and Davis v. American Commercial Security Services filed on July 12, 2005 in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County (the “Augustus case”). The Augustus case is a class action involving allegations that the Company violated certain state laws relating to meal and rest breaks. On January 8, 2009, the Augustus case was certified as a class action by the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County. On October 6, 2010, the Company moved to decertify the class and for summary judgment. Plaintiffs also moved for summary judgment on the rest break claim. On December 28, 2010, the Superior Court de-certified the portion of the class related to the meal break claims and granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs with respect to the rest break issue. On July 11, 2011, the Court closed the class period as of July 1, 2011 and vacated the previously scheduled trial date of September 12, 2011. On February 8, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment on the rest break claim which seeks damages in the amount of $103.0 million. On February 8, 2012 the Company filed a motion for decertification of the class. Both motions are scheduled to be heard on April 23, 2012. The Company continues to believe it has strong defenses against this lawsuit and is vigorously defending it. No trial date has been scheduled. An estimate of the potential exposure, if any, cannot be made at this time.

The Company is a defendant in the previously reported consolidated cases of Diaz/Morales/Reyes v. Ampco System Parking filed on December 5, 2006 in L.A. Superior Curt (the “ Diaz case”). On June 22, 2011, the parties accepted a mediator’s proposal which involves settling all the claims made in the first amended complaint for the period of October 1, 2002 to the date on which the Court grants preliminary approval of the settlement. The Court granted its preliminary approval of the settlement on December 13, 2011. On January 27, 2012, the notice to the class of the settlement was mailed. The hearing for final approval of the settlement is scheduled for May 21, 2012. Under the proposed settlement, the maximum amount which could be paid to claimants is $4.7 million. The anticipated payment under the terms of the mediator’s proposal is approximately $2.9 million. The Company has accrued $2.9 million with respect to this matter, which is included in the total amount accrued for all litigation matters described above.

The Company is a defendant in the previously reported case of Simpson v. ABM Janitorial Services-Northwest and ABM Industries Incorporated filed on September 24, 2010 in the Superior Court for the State of Washington in and for King County (the “Simpson case”). The Simpson case involves allegations relating to unpaid overtime, off-the-clock work, and failure to provide meal and rest periods under Washington state law. The plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is due June 15, 2012, and the trial date is currently scheduled for February 11, 2013.

The Company is a defendant in the previously reported case of Khadera v. American Building Maintenance Co.- West and ABM Industries filed on March 24, 2008 in the U.S. District Court of Washington, Western District (the Khadera case”). The Khadera case is a collective action and involves allegations relating to unpaid overtime and meal and rest claims. It is an opt-in class under the Fair Labor Standards Act and 343 plaintiffs are in the class. On December 1, 2011, the Court denied the Company’s motion for decertification, so the case will proceed to trial as a collective action. Class certification was granted only with respect to certain overtime claims under federal law. Trial is currently set for April 2, 2012.

Environmental Matter

During 2011, a proceeding was commenced by the State of Texas against a subsidiary of the Company alleging that the subsidiary discharged industrial waste in violation of applicable law. The subsidiary has reached an agreement with the State for Pretrial Diversion of the charge against it and has paid $0.1 million restitution to the State. Once all requirements of the Pretrial Diversion are met and the other defendants’ cases have been adjudicated, the charge against the subsidiary will be dismissed.

Other

During October 2011, the Company began an internal investigation into matters relating to compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the Company’s internal policies in connection with services provided by a foreign entity affiliated with a Linc joint venture partner. Such services commenced prior to the Company’s acquisition of Linc. As a result of the investigation, the Company has caused Linc to terminate its association with the arrangement. In December 2011, the Company contacted the U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission to voluntarily disclose the results of its internal investigation to date. The Company cannot reasonably estimate the potential liability, if any, related to these matters. However, based on the facts currently known, the Company does not believe that these matters will have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. There have been no significant changes to this contingency during the quarter ended January 31, 2012.