U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Standing Question on ERISA Pension Lawsuits

Matthew P. Chiarello • March 9, 2020

The U.S. Supreme Court is mulling over whether retirement plan participants must demonstrate individual or imminent risk of financial loss before seeking a breach of fiduciary duty action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”).  On January 13, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the matter of Thole v. U.S. Bank, N.A. (No. 17-1712), and the Court’s coming decision could have wide-reaching implications for participant standing in ERISA causes of action.

The plaintiffs in Thole , who are participants in a U.S. Bank defined benefit pension plan (the “Plan”), allege that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by mismanaging and failing to diversify the Plan’s assets.  According to the plaintiffs, leading up to 2007, the Plan investment manager, FAF, invested the entire Plan portfolio in FAF-managed equities rather than a more diversified set of investments.  The plaintiffs allege that, as a result, the Plan lost $748 million in 2008, which caused the Plan to become underfunded.  The plaintiffs alleged that the underfunded status of the Plan injured the plaintiffs by increasing risk of default.

In 2014, while the parties were litigating, the Plan became overfunded, in part due to voluntary Plan contributions by the defendants amounting to $311 million.  The district court dismissed the suit, agreeing with the defendants that the plaintiffs could not demonstrate injury in fact because the increased risk of Plan default had been alleviated.  The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to dismiss and held that, when a plan is overfunded, defined benefit plan participants no longer fall within the class of plaintiffs authorized to bring suit under ERISA for a breach of fiduciary duty (873 F.3d 617 (8 th Cir. 2017)).  The plaintiffs argued on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court that the Plan’s funding status should not dictate whether participants have an ability to sue for a breach of fiduciary duty.  The Department of Labor expressed support for the plaintiffs’ position in an amicus brief.

The parties are now waiting on a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court which could resolve a circuit split on the issue.

 

Employee burnout: what it is and how to prevent it

By Mardy Gould • May 24, 2024
Employee burnout has become an epidemic in today’s modern workplace. So much so that the World Health Organization (WHO) officially recognizes it as an “occupational phenomenon.”1 While many used to consider mounting workplace stress an individual employee problem, these days, it’s become an employer’s responsibility to prevent burnout before it hurts productivity and business performance—not to mention your employees’ physical and mental health. Luckily, you can prevent burnout from affecting your workforce in several ways. This article will explore the causes and signs of employee burnout and the steps you can take to create a positive work environment where employees feel safe from toxic stress levels.

Form 720 and PCORI fee FAQs

By Mardy Gould • May 23, 2024
If you're a small business owner, you may have heard of the acronym PCORI and the fees that come with it. But what is PCORI, and how does it apply to your organization? Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), sponsors of self-insured health plans must pay a fee to fund the federal Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). PCORI is an independent organization the ACA created to conduct research to help healthcare consumers make better decisions for their specific needs and outcomes. It also performs research related to clinical effectiveness. Employers offering a self-insured medical reimbursement health plan, such as a health reimbursement arrangement (HRA), must pay this fee by July 31 each year via Form 7201. This fee was initially set to expire in 2019, but Congress extended it through September 30, 20292, due to the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 20203.
More Posts