Metropolitan Life Insurance is being sued by participants of its retirement plans for alleged underpayment. The plaintiffs claim that the company's benefits committee purposefully used outdated mortality rates to pay out less money. MetLife, which has customers in Washington D.C. and other parts of the country, faces this lawsuit in New York federal court.
A number of changes have been made to the procedures involved with ERISA benefits claims that may affect workers and employers in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. It is important for workers and their employers to be aware of these changes because they could impact the way in which disability claims are handled.
For workers in Washington, D.C. and across the country, employee benefits can be a critical part of their compensation and their preparation for the future. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) aims to protect workers' pensions, insurance plans and other benefits from being squandered. However, the procedures for filing ERISA benefits claims can be complex.
Workers within the federal and public service sectors in Washington D.C. focus their careers on community-oriented goals. As a reward for serving social needs like teaching, you earn extensive benefits that include retirement savings, health insurance and disability insurance. You work hard with the expectation of falling back on these generous programs in your time of need, and a benefits denial hits especially hard when you have given years of service to an organization. You might need outside legal advice to get clear information about the appeals process that would not be forthcoming from your employer.
People in Washington, D.C., may face unexpected and unpleasant results when they seek to file a claim on their disability benefits in the workplace. In one case, a man is suing his former employer as well as the insurance company involved, alleging that they are violating his rights by denying his long-term disability benefits. The man says that the companies' actions violate the protections for workers found in the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or ERISA.
It can be particularly important for public and federal sector workers in the District of Columbia to understand the protections and rights attached to employee benefits. Since benefits packages for public employees can often be quite valuable, they are a major incentive convincing people to prefer a government job to a corporate alternative. The dedication to community -- and, at times, lower salaries -- of government workers are rewarded with secure, generous benefits that include health insurance, disability protection and extensive retirement plans.
The Department of Labor has changed a rule about health benefits that could affect workers in the District of Columbia and across the country, particularly those who work for small businesses. The rule change was prompted by a 2017 executive order by President Trump and is intended to promote the creation of Association Health Plans or AHPs. These plans are designed to provide a form of group health insurance for small employers who come together to form an association. Because they can be considered large group policies rather than small group or individual policies, they are exempt from some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
Workers in Washington, D.C., and throughout the country filed 107 401k lawsuits in 2016 and 2017. That was the highest since 2008 and 2009 when 169 such suits were filed. Excessive fees, self-dealing and poor investment choices are the three main reasons why a 401k lawsuit could be filed. In some cases, a lawsuit is the result of relatively vague guidance given to fiduciaries.
Workers in Washington, D.C., whose retirement plans are managed by TIAA might have a stake in the lawsuit filed against the company by one investor. The attorneys for the plaintiff are pursuing a class-action suit on the grounds that TIAA allegedly made over $50 million a year by keeping interest from payments made by retirement plan participants who took loans. According to the lawsuit, the company should have credited interest paid by borrowers to their retirement accounts instead of keeping some of the money.
Your employer offered health, disability, retirement, life or COBRA insurance or other benefits and now the insurance company is trying to deny them. These benefits are supposed to be provided based on the plan's terms -- not the plan's financial situation or other factors. If the benefits were offered and you qualify for them, they should be paid out, right?