Leaderboard

It's understandable how the frustration can mount over dealing with government agencies. (It does for me.) There is no doubt that government professionals may be experiencing similar frustrations when dealing with practitioners. The GP are people trying to do a job that many of us wouldn't want. More likely than not their personsal opinions sometimes differ from how their job description demands they must opine. You can be assured that their eyes are not totally blind to our comments on these boards. They bleed if cut. These boards are generously peppered with criticism, direct and indirect slurs, and inuendo regarding the integrity and honesty of the agencies with which we must work. This furthers no one's cause and does not foster a working relationship. This is not to suggest that if you have a bad experience that you are urged to bury your head in the sand; rather, there are professional and unprofessional ways to express your disappointment, discomfort, and even your disgust. I may have violated my own preaching in the past and if so, shame on me (and I apologize). However, if so, this makes my suggestion of acting professional no less meaningful.

I guess they aren't going to be in the business much longer. To me, this is a no-brainer. The PLAN says certain employees become eligible under certain conditions, and the plan sponsor must adhere to the terms of the plan. In addition, the plan sponsor must, as a fiduciary, select service providers who ALSO will adhere to the plan provisions. If not, I would suggest a fiduciary obligation to fire them and move the plan elsewhere - lest you risk the qualified status of the plan. I understand some participants may take issue with that, but the plan sponsor's fiduciary obligations extend to ALL participants (including the new ones) and to adhere to the terms of the plan.

Wouldn't allow them to contribute to ALL the investment choices or just a fixed investment product? I think the answer to the problem is dramatically different depending on the answer to this question.