Lawsuits by 401(k) plan participants related to employer stock in a 401(k) plan are nothing new. These lawsuits typically allege that ERISA plan fiduciaries failed to protect employees' retirement savings when the employer stock price falls. In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's Dudenhoeffer decision, which included the elimination of the presumption of prudence, these suits are often dismissed. However, during oral arguments for the case of IBM et al. v. Jander et al., the Supreme Court is now faced with reconciling the tension between federal securities law and ERISA ...
The Seventh Circuit recently issued a stern warning about the importance of strict compliance with ERISA claim review timeframes in holding that the “substantial compliance” standard “does not apply to blown deadlines.” In this case, Fessenden v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co. (7th Cir. 2019), the disability plan administrator issued a decision on review about eight days after the time prescribed by ERISA. In the short time period after the ERISA deadline expired and before the decision on review was rendered, the claimant filed suit as he was deemed to have ...
On October 22, 2019, the Department of Labor issued proposed rules intended to relax the current (and, in many respects, outdated) electronic disclosure rules. The proposed rules offer additional e-disclosure options and have the potential to save ERISA plans significant time and money. Notably, the proposed rule includes a new, voluntary safe harbor which would allow employers to make retirement plan disclosures via website, subject to certain requirements such as participant notifications and specific website standards. The rule would permit default electronic delivery ...
The United States Supreme Court recently agreed to hear two ERISA class-action cases next term that were decided by the lower courts in favor of plan participants. First, the Supreme Court agreed to review Retirement Plans Committee of IBM et al. v. Larry W. Jander, an employer stock-drop case from the Second Circuit. IBM workers claimed that IBM’s Retirement Plans Committee breached its fiduciary duty by allowing workers’ retirement funds to be invested in artificially-inflated IBM stock. The Second Circuit applied the “more harm than good” standard that was set forth ...
Topics/Tags
Select- Labor & Employment Law
- Employment Law
- Workplace Violence
- Discrimination
- EEOC
- NLRB
- Department of Labor
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Religion Discrimination
- Title VII
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Coronavirus
- Department of Justice
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Diversity
- NLRA
- Labor Law
- National Labor Relations Board
- Wage & Hour
- Artificial Intelligence
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- Privacy
- FLSA
- Overtime Pay
- Federal Trade Commission
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- FMLA
- Arbitration
- Workplace Accommodations
- Employment Litigation
- Medical Marijuana
- IRS
- Litigation
- Social Media
- Employer Policies
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Disability Discrimination
- Retirement
- National Labor Relations Act
- Accommodation
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Race Discrimination
- OSHA
- Employer Handbook
- ERISA
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- ADAAA
- Whistleblower
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- United States Supreme Court
- Employer Rules
- Sexual Harassment
- Technology
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Transgender Issues
- Disability
- 401(k)
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Sixth Circuit
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Benefits
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Securities Law
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Health Savings Account
- Environmental Law
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Privacy Laws
- Representative Election Regulations
- Healthcare Reform
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Affirmative Action
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Telecommuting
- Compensable Time
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Security Screening
- Supreme Court
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- American Medical Association
- Attendance Policy
- Classification
- Confidentiality
- Equal Pay
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Disability Leave
- Social Media Content
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
- Taxation
Recent Posts
- Workplace Violence: Are You Taking Required Steps to Protect Your Employees?
- EEOC & DOJ New Guidance on DEI-Related Discrimination: What Does it Mean for Employers?
- EEOC Targets 20 Large Law Firms regarding DEI related Employment Practices
- Ohio Senate Bill 11: Key Provisions and Implications for Employers
- Shifting Burdens: Is McDonnell Douglas Past Its Prime?
- Uncertain Ground: The NLRB, EEOC, and the Fallout of Presidential Firings
- UPDATED: What’s Next for the Department of Labor? The Confirmation of Lori Chávez-DeRemer
- Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Where Things Stand in Response to Actions Taken by President Trump
- Recent Executive Orders’ Impact on the EEOC
- NLRB Acting General Counsel Rescinds Numerous Predecessor’s Memoranda