“Employers and employees alike depend on clear, enforceable plan terms to secure retirement benefits.”
—Saad Gul, WLF Senior Litigation Counsel

Click here for WLF’s brief.

WASHINGTON, DC—Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) today asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to clarify that employers who adhere to ERISA and their plan documents face no additional liability. Penalizing an employer for making a permissible choice would discourage other businesses from offering retirement plans, which would harm workers.

The plaintiff contends that ERISA’s fiduciary framework required HP to use forfeited funds to defray administrative expenses, excluding any reduction of future employer matching. Yet ERISA, its implementing guidance, and HP’s plan text uniformly empower fiduciaries to allocate forfeitures either for expenses or for future matches. In rightly dismissing the suit, the district court underscored that ERISA’s overriding aim is to secure participants’ promised benefits, not to engraft judge-crafted obligations aimed at minimizing administrative costs or maximizing financial returns.

Urging affirmance, WLF’s amicus brief argues that only Congress and the plan instrument—not litigation-driven gloss—should shape ERISA fiduciary duties. It cautions that judicial overreach risks dissuading employers from sponsoring the retirement plans on which so many depend. The brief also warns that adding judge-made duties at the urging of class-action lawyers risks scaring employers away from offering the retirement plans that tens of millions of Americans rely on.