BenefitsLink logo
EmployeeBenefitsJobs logo
Free Daily News and Jobs

“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”
-- An attorney subscriber
Featured Jobs

Retirement Plan Administrator (Fort Worth TX)
Retirement Plan Administrator (Colorado Springs CO / Telecommute)

Senior Defined Contribution Account Manager (Houston TX / Dallas TX / Austin TX / Scottsdale AZ / Telecommute)
Senior Retirement Plan Administrator (Philadelphia PA / Telecommute)

Plan Administrator (Lake Mary FL / Richmond VA / Dallas TX / Los Angeles CA)
Search all jobs
Get the BenefitsLink app LinkedIn
Jump to content
BenefitsLink Message Boards
Sign in to follow this  

Employee excluded from DB Plan and now a participant

Recommended Posts

An employee was excluded from a DB Plan for the past three years (backed by plan document). The plan met 410(b) and 401(a) (26) without having to include this employee. For the current year (and forward) the employee will be included. The benefit formula is based on service.  The employee was not excluded based on job classification or union status etc, rather he was excluded by name.

 If the document states that benefits will not accrue for years that an employee was part of an ineligible class, will the employee only accrue a benefit for the current year and not for the prior years of service (or now that the employee is a participant he will accrue benefits for the prior years as well)? Thank you for any insights on this.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your best option is to address this in the amendment that changes the eligibility provisions to bring him into the plan.  Make sure that amendment clearly defines if you want to count his past service, or if you want him to only accrue benefits from his date of entry.  I don't think there is any "rule", but you need to follow the plan provisions.

Is this person an HCE?  If so, I would recommend that you only count future service.  Otherwise you could have some non-discrimination issues.  

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Effen for your clear and detailed insights. This particular case invloves an NHCE; however, your point about non-discrimination is good to be aware of for other cases. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...