Search the Community
Showing results for tags '3(16)'.
Found 1 result
-
I’m hoping BenefitsLink “heavy hitters” will help me think through an issue intensified by the new market for 3(16) administrators. An employer (also its retirement plan’s administrator) engaged a 3(16) provider for some plan-administration responsibilities, including deciding claims for a distribution. A participant submitted a claim for a retirement distribution grounded on her severance-from-employment. The employer signed a statement, on the claim form, to confirm that this participant is severed from employment. (For this hypo, assume no other condition could entitle the participant to a distribution. Also, assume the plan has no provision for a participant loan.) Through other services, the 3(16) provider has actual knowledge that the participant continues to perform (personally) services for the employer, and knows the employer classifies the worker as a “1099” contractor. The 3(16) provider believes the employer’s classification is wrong, and was not made in good faith. To meet its ERISA fiduciary responsibilities, must the 3(16) provider reevaluate or question the employer’s classification of the participant as a nonemployee? If so, how much “poking” must the claims administrator do?