Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Retirement Security Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 8 of 8

Full-Text Articles in Retirement Security Law

Introduction, Theodore J. St. Antoine Oct 1985

Introduction, Theodore J. St. Antoine

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Introduction to the 1985 Journal of Law Reform symposium, The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974: ERISA.


A National Retirement Income Policy: Problems And Policy Options, Phyllis C. Borzi Oct 1985

A National Retirement Income Policy: Problems And Policy Options, Phyllis C. Borzi

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article examines the need for a national retirement income policy, identifies the major components of such a policy, and briefly discusses some of the policy options for private pension plans. This Article is an overview of several critical policy areas. It is not an exhaustive policy analysis, nor does it provide a definitive series of options for achievement of a particular policy. Its focus will be on the private pension system, rather than on federally provided benefits such as social security or Medicare, or employer-provided pensions for state, local, or federal employees. The issues discussed are a starting point ...


Erisa-The First Decade: Was The Legislation Consistent With Other National Goals?, Alicia H. Munnell Oct 1985

Erisa-The First Decade: Was The Legislation Consistent With Other National Goals?, Alicia H. Munnell

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Although ERISA explicitly sanctioned defined contribution plans as a legitimate form of retirement saving, this Article focuses almost exclusively on defined benefit plans. ERISA aimed at changing the basic provisions of defined benefit plans, not at modifying the nature of defined contribution plans. Therefore, although a study of the consistency of pension plan provisions with national economic goals would necessarily include an analysis of both defined benefit and defined contribution plans, a study of the impact of ERISA seems appropriately limited to defined benefit plans.


Erisa: To Sue Or Not To Sue-A Question Of Statutory Standing, Constance L. Bauer Oct 1985

Erisa: To Sue Or Not To Sue-A Question Of Statutory Standing, Constance L. Bauer

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note examines the conflicting authority regarding the scope of section 502(a) of ERISA. There is a fundamental split among the United States Courts of Appeals concerning whether parties not specifically enumerated in section 502(a) have standing to bring civil actions to enforce ERISA's provisions. The Ninth Circuit has held consistently that non-enumerated parties are entitled to sue under ERISA. The Second Circuit, however, repeatedly has held that parties not explicitly specified in section 502(a). do not have standing to bring an action under the Act. This Note addresses the question of whether employers and pension ...


Erisa Enforcement: Mandate For A Single Agency, Beverly M. Klimkowsky, Ian D. Lanoff Oct 1985

Erisa Enforcement: Mandate For A Single Agency, Beverly M. Klimkowsky, Ian D. Lanoff

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In Part I, this Article reviews the aspects of pensions that justify the attention of Congress during consideration of budgets and the federal deficit. Part II documents the initial administrative problems created by the congressional compromise that divided administrative responsibility between the Department of Labor and the Internal Revenue Service. Although Reorganization Plan No. 4 solved some of the initial problems, the remaining problems are not amenable to resolution within a system of responsibility divided between separate agencies. The specific problems associated with enforcement are discussed in Part III, which identifies the total failure of enforcement as a major threat ...


Erisa Preemption: Judicial Flexibility And Statutory Rigidity, Leon E. Irish, Harrison J. Cohen Oct 1985

Erisa Preemption: Judicial Flexibility And Statutory Rigidity, Leon E. Irish, Harrison J. Cohen

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Article attempts to describe the ways in which, and the reasons why section 514(a) has caused the courts and Congress so much difficulty. Part I reviews the legislative history of section 514(a), with emphasis on the ambivalence Congress has shown toward its 1974 draftsmanship. Part II attempts to provide a coherent description of the case law that has developed under section 514(a). Part III completes the legislative history by examining the two instances in which experience compelled Congress to revise section 514. Finally, Part IV discusses examples of problems courts have faced when crafting a federal ...


Erisa Retirement Plans In Individual Bankruptcy, John Minton Newell Oct 1985

Erisa Retirement Plans In Individual Bankruptcy, John Minton Newell

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

When an employee covered by an ERISA retirement plan files a petition in bankruptcy, the court is presented with a number of complex issues regarding the relationship among ERISA, the Bankruptcy Code (Code), and the state law of creditors' rights. Three issues have emerged in these cases, and the courts have divided on the proper resolution of each of these issues. First, is the debtor's interest in an ERISA retirement plan "property of the estate," and thus available for distribution to creditors? Second, if the debtor's interest is property of the estate, and the debtor uses the state ...


Pension Plan Terminations And Asset Reversions: Accommodating The Interests Of Employers And Employees, Carl A. Butler Oct 1985

Pension Plan Terminations And Asset Reversions: Accommodating The Interests Of Employers And Employees, Carl A. Butler

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note focuses on the problems that often arise for plan participants when an overfunded defined benefit plan is terminated and the employer recaptures excess assets. Part I explains the relative ease with which employers can terminate plans and receive excess assets under current pension law. Part II argues that pension law must be reformed because its shortcomings threaten American workers' retirement income security, it allows for sham terminations that remove assets from plans that are, in fact, ongoing, and it usually allows excess assets to go to employers rather than employees. Part III discusses two reforms proposed for plan ...