Also known as:retirement plans · retirement planning · pension plan · qualified plan
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An employee benefit arrangement that provides compensation or benefits to participants after they cease employment, typically funded by employer and employee contributions and governed by ERISA or similar statutes.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Law Firm Profit-Sharing Bonus
Frederick, a nonlawyer procurement advisor at Pine Municipal, contributed to successful bid protests. The partners created an annual bonus pool funded by a portion of net profits from those matters and distributed according to a salary-based formula. The arrangement qualified as a permitted retirement and compensation plan because nonlawyer employees may participate even when the plan incorporates profit sharing.
Pension Plan Shareholder Proposal
AFSCME Employees Pension Plan submitted a bylaw proposal to CA, Inc. seeking to allow shareholders to nominate directors. The plan held shares in the corporation and sought to enforce its rights under the company's governing documents. The court examined whether the proposal could be excluded from the proxy statement, turning on the plan's status as a shareholder with standing to advance governance changes.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Uniform Acts
Model Codes
Restatements
Dictionaries
CA, Inc. v. AFSCME Employees Pension Plan953 A.2d 227 (Del. 2008)
Divorce and ERISA Preemption
David Egelhoff designated his wife Donna as beneficiary of his Boeing life insurance policy and pension plan, both governed by ERISA. After their divorce, David died without changing the designations. The Washington statute automatically revoked the spousal beneficiary status upon divorce, but ERISA preempted that statute because it interfered with the uniform administration of ERISA plans.
Egelhoff v. Egelhoff532 U.S. 141 (2001)
Fetal Protection and Pension Costs
Johnson Controls maintained a fetal-protection policy that excluded fertile women from certain battery-manufacturing jobs involving lead exposure. The company cited potential costs to its retirement and health plans if children were born with lead-related injuries. The Court held that the policy constituted sex discrimination under Title VII and that cost considerations did not justify the exclusion under the BFOQ defense.
International Union, UAW v. Johnson Controls, Inc.499 U.S. 187, 203–04 (1991)
Corporate PAC and Investor Monitoring
Citizens United challenged restrictions on corporate independent expenditures. The opinion noted that many shareholders hold stock through intermediaries such as mutual funds and pension plans, making it difficult for individual investors to monitor or influence corporate political spending. The Court observed that this structure limits shareholders' practical ability to affect company decisions on electoral advocacy funded from general treasury funds.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission558 U.S. 310, 352 (2010)
Pension Plan Note Holder Status
A pension plan purchased notes issued by a company and later claimed status as a holder of securities under the securities laws. The Court analyzed whether the plan's role in the transaction made it a primary violator or merely an aider and abettor. The decision turned on the plan's participation in the distribution of the notes and its ability to assert direct claims against the issuer's accountants.
Reves v. Ernst & Young494 U.S. 56 (1990)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
May a law firm include nonlawyer employees in a retirement plan that uses profit sharing?+
Yes. Model Rule 5.4(a)(3) expressly permits a lawyer or law firm to include nonlawyer employees in a compensation or retirement plan even when the plan is based in whole or in part on a profit-sharing arrangement.
Supporting sources
Does ERISA preempt a state statute that automatically revokes a former spouse's beneficiary designation in an ERISA-governed pension plan upon divorce?+
Yes. ERISA preempts such state laws because they interfere with the uniform national administration of employee benefit plans and conflict with ERISA's requirement that plan documents control benefit payments.
Supporting sources
Can cost considerations related to retirement plans justify a fetal-protection policy that excludes fertile women from certain jobs?+
No. Title VII prohibits such policies as sex discrimination, and cost or potential liability concerns tied to retirement or health plans do not qualify as a bona fide occupational qualification defense.
Supporting sources
514 U.S. 549 (1995)Constitutional Law
…effect on interstate commerce); Railroad Retirement Bd. v. Alton R. Co. , 295 U. S. 330, 368 (1935) (compulsory retirement and pension plan for railroad carrier employees too "remote from any regulation of commerce as such"); A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States , 295 U. S. 495, 548 (1935) (wage and hour law…