ERISA Archives - Page 9 of 48 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS BLOG

4 Ways to Manage Retirement Plan Data in New Era of Cybersecurity

by Mark E. Schreiber | Jul 9, 2019 | Employee Benefits, Privacy and Data Security, Retirement Plans

IBM estimated last year that data breaches cost companies $148 per stolen record. Given that, not surprisingly, many employers have grown increasingly concerned about the potential impact of such breaches, including breaches that may affect employer-sponsored benefit plans.

Courts have not yet formally addressed whether ERISA requires benefit plan fiduciaries to manage cybersecurity risks. However, a federal district court recently rejected a motion to dismiss filed by defendants seeking to avoid liability for fraudulent distributions from a plan caused by cyber criminals. There, the court held that the defendants were plan fiduciaries and that the plaintiffs had pled facts sufficient to allege that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties. Although this decision only relates to a motion to dismiss, the case underscores the potential for plaintiffs to assert, even in the absence of clear guidance, that plan fiduciaries are not doing enough to protect plan participants from cybersecurity risks.

As a result, with cybersecurity concerns on the rise, plan fiduciaries are continuing to enhance their focus on the best ways to protect employee data. Recently, on Law360, McDermott’s Mark E. Schreiber discussed four helpful tips for handling cybersecurity risks.

Access the article.

It Could Happen to You: Tips for Acing a Benefit Plan Audit

by Brian Tiemann | Jul 2, 2019 | Employee Benefits, Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), Fiduciary and Investment Issues, Health and Welfare Plans, Retirement Plans

Over the past several years, the IRS and DOL have significantly increased the number of benefit plans audits conducted each year.

As a result, it is important for plan sponsors to understand the types of issues that often arise in connection with such audits. At the recent PSCA 2019 National Conference, Brian Tiemann explained what plan sponsors should expect if their benefit plan is selected for audited. More specifically, Brian discussed the ways audits are typically triggered and how to respond when a plan is audited. In addition, Brian outlined some of the most common retirement and health and welfare compliance issues identified in plan audits. He also discussed how plan sponsors can prepare for audits and even address potential compliance issues before they occur.

View the full presentation.

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Sulyma v. Intel Statute-of-Limitations Decision

by J. Christian Nemeth and Richard J. Pearl | Jun 18, 2019 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Benefits, Fiduciary and Investment Issues, Retirement Plans

The US Supreme Court recently agreed to hear Sulyma v. Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee, a case in which the Ninth Circuit ruled that ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations requires a plaintiff to actually read materials in order to start the running of ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations. ERISA § 413(2) bars actions more than three years after “the earliest date on which the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the breach or violation,” and the Ninth Circuit held that a plaintiff who receives all the relevant information relating to her claim, but does not read it or does not recall reading it, does not have “actual knowledge” to start the limitations period. The Sixth Circuit, however, has held differently; in Brown v. Owens Corning Investment Review Committee, 622 F.3d 564, 571 (6th Cir. 2010), it held that the failure to read documents will not shield a plaintiff from having actual knowledge of the documents’ contents. Several district courts have held similarly, determining that the three-year limitations period begins when the plaintiff receives the relevant information, whether she reads it or not. (more…)

US Supreme Court to Review Unusual Second Circuit Decision in Stock Drop Case Against IBM

by Allison Crowe and J. Christian Nemeth | Jun 11, 2019 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), Fiduciary and Investment Issues, Retirement Plans

On Monday, the US Supreme Court agreed to review the Second Circuit’s decision in Jander v. Retirement Plans Committee of IBM, a “stock drop” lawsuit against IBM’s benefit plan fiduciaries. The Second Circuit’s decision marked one of the few times a federal court permitted a “stock drop” lawsuit to survive dismissal since the Supreme Court’s decisions in Fifth Third Bank v. Dudenhoeffer (2012) and Harris v. Amgen (2016). (more…)

Former Employee’s Release Agreement Bars ERISA Claim Against ESOP Fiduciary

by J. Christian Nemeth and Richard J. Pearl | May 21, 2019 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Benefits, Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), Fiduciary and Investment Issues, Retirement Plans

A recent summary-judgment decision explains how individual releases can bar the individual from pursuing ERISA fiduciary-breach claims on behalf of the plan. A plan, employer or fiduciary that wants to ensure a release that includes ERISA claims on behalf of a plan should consider language that addresses the court’s areas of inquiry in the case, which are outlined in this article.

Access the full article.

ESOPs: What Not To Do (and If You Did, How to Correct It)

by McDermott Will & Emery | Apr 16, 2019 | Employee Benefits, Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), Fiduciary and Investment Issues, Retirement Plans

In a presentation for the National Center for Employee Ownership (NCEO) Conference, Emily Rickard presented on ESOP plan design, operation and administration. She, along with the other presenters, identified ERISA compliance watchdogs including the plaintiff’s bar, Department of Treasury and Department of Labor, and what attracts their attention when it comes to audits. Emily also identified common mistakes employers make during the entire ESOP lifecycle (e.g. lack of employee communication, distribution strategy and planning) and provided guidance on how to correct those mistakes.

View the full presentation.

Court Puts Association Health Plans in Limbo

by Jacob Mattinson and Megan Mardy | Apr 9, 2019 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Benefits, Health and Welfare Plans

On March 28, a District of Columbia federal court agreed with a New York-led challenge by a group of 11 states and the District of Columbia and found that the Department of Labor’s (DOL) 2018 association health plan (AHP) rule (the Final Rule):

Is contrary to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)’s text and purpose; and
Circumvents the protections and standards of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

The decision, penned by Judge Bates, may act to deal a significant blow to the Trump administration’s attempt to expand coverage for small employers. Crafted in response to the October 12, 2017, executive order directing the DOL to promote the availability of AHPs, the Final Rule materially relaxed the standards for qualifying as an AHP under ERISA.

As further described here, the Final Rule sets forth the criteria pursuant to which a “bona fide group or association of employers” may establish a single-employer AHP under ERISA. Under the Final Rule, employers, associations and sole proprietors (referred to as “working owners”) can participate in AHPs provided certain arguably subjective requirements are satisfied. The states challenged the Final Rule, arguing that the DOL unreasonably expanded ERISA’s definition of employer. Applying the Chevron standard, the court agreed with the states to hold that the DOL unlawfully expanded ERISA’s definition of employer by failing to provide a “meaningful limit on the associations that would qualify as ‘bona fide’ ERISA ‘employers.’” The court vacated the bona fide association and working owner provisions of the Final Rule, but also provided some specific critiques and ordered the DOL to determine whether any part of the Final Rule can be salvaged; for now, the Final Rule is in limbo.

In a set of Questions and Answers issued April 2, 2019, the DOL noted that it disagrees with the court’s decision, and is considering all available options in consultation with the Department of Justice (DOJ). The DOJ has until May 28 to file a notice of appeal. The Trump administration could seek a stay of the order pending resolution of any appeal. Unless a court issues a stay, the regulations in effect prior to the Rule would be in effect. Stay tuned for further guidance and developments.

Oracle Granted Partial Summary Judgment in 401(k) Fees/Investment Option Case

by McDermott Will & Emery and Richard J. Pearl | Apr 2, 2019 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Benefits, Fiduciary and Investment Issues

The US District Court for the District of Colorado granted partial summary judgment to 401(k) fiduciaries, holding that ERISA’s six-year statute of repose barred some claims and rejecting challenges to the plan’s fees.

Access the full article.

ERISA Health Plan Fiduciaries Defeat DOL’s Excessive Fee Claims

by Erin Steele, Megan Mardy and Richard J. Pearl | Mar 26, 2019 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Benefits, Health and Welfare Plans

In one of the first ERISA cases to address claims against fiduciaries for excessive health plan fees, the court entered judgment in favor of the defendants on all counts. The decision addresses health plan fiduciary standards for reviewing plan fees and expenses.

Access the full article.

ERISA Plan Controversy | Rising Stakes for Those Unprepared

by Chris C. Scheithauer and Ted Becker | Mar 21, 2019 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Benefits, Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), Fiduciary and Investment Issues, Health and Welfare Plans, Retirement Plans

In a presentation at McDermott’s Employment and Employee Benefits Forum, Ted Becker and Chris Scheithauer explored the various ways that disgruntled employees file lawsuits with plaintiffs’’ lawyers. Lawsuits have been brought in cases alleging, imprudence in the management of plans, challenging fees, involving company stock, actuarial equivalence and more. They used recent cases such as, NYU, American Century Services and IBM, as examples of the various types of lawsuits and the important lessons employers can take away from them. In addition, they provided attendees with key strategies to minimize exposure to lawsuits, including demonstrating a thoughtful and deliberative decision-making process.

Looking ahead to 2019, they touched on ERISA issues to watch for including, venue/forum selection clauses in plan documents, arbitration agreements and impact on fiduciary duty claims, statute of limitations and burden of proof issues.

View the full presentation.

BLOG EDITORS

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

RECENT POSTS