News Archive

24 pages. "This report addresses the OIG's accomplishments for the semiannual reporting period from October 1, 2025, through March 31, 2026.... Investigative activities [in this time period included]: 737 Complaints received; 4 Criminal investigations referred for prosecution; 1/0 Indictments/Convictions; 23 Subpoenas issued."  MORE >>

"Not all withdrawals are planned. Sometimes they occur because an employer loses a business contract and simply no longer has work on which to deploy that union workforce.... ERISA allows contributing employers to annually request from a multiemployer plan estimates of withdrawal liability. They are just that. Estimates.... [H]ad M&K requested an estimate during the plan year in which it withdrew, that estimate would have used the old 7.5% interest rate, around $1.8 million. Yet their actual withdrawal liability was $6.2 million." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"[T]he Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgment upholding an arbitrator's determination that General Electric Company qualified for the building and construction industry exemption to withdrawal liability under the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 (MPPAA), and therefore owed no withdrawal liability to the Boilermaker-Blacksmith National Pension Trust on either of the Fund's partial withdrawal assessments." [General Electric Co. v. Boilermaker-Blacksmith National Pension Trust, No. 25-1442 (8th Cir. May 26, 2026)]  MORE >>

"Resolving a circuit split, the U.S. Supreme Court ... held that actuarial assumptions used to calculate withdrawal liability may be selected after the measurement date. The Court reasoned that actuarial assumptions are forward-looking 'predictive judgments,' and ERISA does not impose a deadline requiring them to be set before the measurement date." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"[1] Withdrawal liability may be higher -- and less predictable -- than you expect.... [2] Arbitration remains your primary remedy.... [3] Engage actuarial and legal advisers early.... [4] Monitor plan communications closely." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"The decision confirms the DC Circuit's view that plans need not have actuarial assumptions in place on the measurement date. The Supreme Court did not decide whether those assumptions must rely only on information available as of that date." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"An employer seeking to challenge actuarial assumptions can still request review and demand arbitration, at which point it is now even more critical to press the actuary on the information relied upon to develop the assumptions used to calculate the pension fund's unfunded vested benefits. To the extent an actuary relies on information that becomes known only after the measurement date in developing an assumption, or the assumption is otherwise unreasonable, that assumption is impermissible." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"Employers might have to pay much more in the future when withdrawing from multiemployer pension plans. In a unanimous decision ... the U.S. Supreme Court ruled May 21 that actuarial assumptions for calculating withdrawal liability may be adopted after the last day of the plan year preceding the employer's withdrawal from the plan -- a decision that in this case could result in a payment six times greater than what the employers thought they owed." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled that ERISA does not require pension plans to assess with­drawal liability based on actuarial assumptions adopted be­fore the measurement date.... [R]equiring actuaries to use assumptions se­lected before the measurement date could prevent them from relying on the most up-to-date data when select­ing their assumption." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"[T]he US Supreme Court ... [held] that, under [ERISA], an actuary for an underfunded multiemployer pension plan may calculate an employer's withdrawal liability based on actuarial assumptions adopted after the relevant measurement date for withdrawal liability. In other words, the actuary is not required to select actuarial assumptions 'as of' the measurement date."  [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]   MORE >>

"Employers planning to exit a multiemployer pension fund may wish to carefully consider the timing of the withdrawal. The measurement date for withdrawal liability will be the end of the plan's fiscal year prior to withdrawal, but the actuarial assumptions may be tied to a later date." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"In a unanimous decision delivered by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the Court held that ERISA Sections 1391 and 1393, which govern the calculation of withdrawal liability, do not require the actuarial assumptions to be selected on or before the measurement date. Instead, the Court said that the 'as of' language in Section 1391 means that while the hard data that feeds the UVB calculation must be fixed on the measurement date, the calculation itself can be performed after the date." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

15 pages. "The question presented in this case is whether the 'as of' language sets the measurement date as the deadline by which actuaries must select the assumptions that underlie the withdrawal-liability calculation. The Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit held that it does not, concluding that actuaries may select their assumptions after the measurement date. We agree. The statute governing the selection and use of actuarial assumptions in the withdrawal-liability context contains no requirement that actuaries use assumptions adopted prior to the measurement date." [M&K Employee Solutions, LLC v. Trustees of the IAM National Pension Fund, No. 23-1209 (S. Ct. May 21, 2026)]  MORE >>

"The PBGC has updated ... information regarding whether the fact that an employer is involved in a merger affects SFA payments, the recipient, and the merger.... After a merger has taken plan, there are restrictions and conditions that apply to the merged plan."  MORE >>

"Criteria for Mergers Involving Plans that Received SFA

• What are the eligibility requirements for a merger involving a plan that received SFA?
• What conditions apply after the merger?
• May plans request a waiver of any conditions beyond those permitted in § 4262.16(f)(4)?

"Request for Approval

• Where should a plan representative file a request for approval?
• When should a request for waiver of one or more conditions be submitted?
• May plans confer with PBGC before submitting a request for approval?
• When must a plan request approval of a merger involving a plan that received SFA?
• If plans want to adopt an alternative allocation method for the merged plan, when should that request be submitted?
• What withdrawal liability methods may a merged plan use to comply with § 4261.16(1)(3)(iv) and (v)?
• How does the example of a compliant alternative allocation method work?
• How does the example alternative allocation method satisfy the requirements of § 4262.16(f)(3)(iv) and (v)?
• Will adoption of the example alternative allocation method satisfy the risk of loss standard?
• May plans propose a different alternative allocation method?"

MORE >>

"This checklist helps employers understand their obligations when an employee notifies them of a need for military leave. The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) provides federal job protection to employees serving in uniformed services, which include active and inactive duty and training in the armed services, reserves, National Guard or Air National Guard, and more."  MORE >>

"For plans, the decision reinforces the importance of filing a proof of claim when an employer (or anyone whom the plan believes may be an employer) files for bankruptcy and monitoring the proceeding to ensure that the plan's rights are adequately preserved. For employers, the decision is a reminder that while bankruptcy may be used to protect the rights of the debtor who commenced the proceeding, a plan may assert its rights to collect withdrawal liability from other controlled group members outside the context of the bankruptcy[.]" [Int'l Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund v. Florida Glass of Tampa Bay, Inc., No. 25-1312 (4th Cir. Jan. 26, 2026,)]  MORE >>

"The construction industry exemption has several criteria, some of which are poorly defined even after 45 years. It often comes as an unpleasant surprise to construction employers that they are not eligible for the exemption ... Most funds take the position that off-site work does not usually qualify.... [W]ithdrawal liability can be triggered by reductions in force, location closures, mergers and acquisitions, asset sales and other circumstances."  MORE >>

"The Ninth Circuit recently issued a pair of decisions clarifying how the rules governing withdrawal liability apply to employers in certain industries. In [one case] the Court held that an employer did not withdraw from a multiemployer pension plan, and thus did not owe withdrawal liability, because the employer's asbestos abatement work qualified for the 'building and construction industry' exemption. And in [a second decision], the Court held that the plan primarily covered employees in the entertainment industry because the majority of employees in the plan performed at least some entertainment-related work." 
[Walker Speciality Constr. Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of the Constr. Ind. and Lab. Jt. Pension Trust for S. Nev., No. 24-1560 (9th Cir. Jan. 5, 2026); Nevada Resort Ass'n-Int'l Alliance of Theatrical Stage Emps. & Moving Picture Mach. Operators of the US & Canada Loc. 720 Pension Tr. v. JB Viva Vegas, LP, No. 24-2791 (9th Cir. Jan. 6, 2026)]  MORE >>

"Participants often work for multiple participating employers during a year. As a result, no single employer may have complete visibility into an individual's prior-year wages. In addition, coordination across multiple payroll and recordkeeping systems can make compliance significantly more complicated.... Although the relief provides additional time, implementation will require careful coordination among boards of trustees, plan professionals, participating employers, payroll providers, and recordkeepers."  MORE >>

"Plaintiffs contended that the Garmon doctrine [1] only applies to state law claims, and [2] only applies to federal claims 'within the jurisdiction of the NLRB,' i.e., not ERISA claims. The Sixth Circuit rejected both arguments. The court emphasized that the doctrine applies to all federal claims arising from activities arguably subject to the NLRA, including ERISA claims.... According to the Sixth Circuit, 'Plaintiffs' ERISA claims can succeed 'only if' Defendants' 'conduct violates the NLRA,' rendering the NLRA issues 'anything but collateral.' " [Rieth-Riley Construction Co., Inc. v. Trustees of the Operating Engineers' Local 324 Fringe Benefit Funds, No. 25-1823 (6th Cir. Apr. 3, 2026)]  MORE >>

"The court held ... [that] Plaintiffs' complaints expressly grounded the Trustees' alleged ERISA violations in the Funds' purported NLRA status quo obligation to accept contributions -- not merely Rieth-Riley's obligation to make them. Because Plaintiffs' ERISA claims could succeed 'only if' the Funds' refusal violated the NLRA, the NLRA issues were not collateral but central to the claim. The court declined to address alternative grounds for dismissal." [Rieth-Riley Construction Co., Inc. v. Trustees of the Operating Engineers' Local 324 Fringe Benefit Funds, No. 25-1823 (6th Cir. Apr. 3, 2026)]  MORE >>

"The IRS Employee Plans has digitalized Form 15315 to allow you to electronically report the actuarial certification of a multiemployer defined benefit plan's funding status. No additional attachments or letters should be submitted with your Form 15315 submission."  MORE >>

"[T]he Second Circuit held that 'unfunded vested benefits allocable to the employer,' as used in Section 1415(c), refers to the entire amount of liabilities transferred when an employer withdraws pursuant to Sections 1415(a) and 1415(c).... The decision represents a significant clarification of how withdrawal liability must be calculated when an employer is forced to withdraw from a [multiemployer plan] due to a union representation change." [Mar-Can Transportation Co., Inc. v. Loc. 854 Pension Fund, No. 24-1431 (2d Cir. Feb. 18, 2026)]  MORE >>

"[T]he Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of two companies accused of successor liability for a defunct employer's withdrawal liability, holding that the pension fund's eight-year delay in issuing a withdrawal liability demand violated the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act's requirement that notice and demand be made 'as soon as practicable.' " [RTI Restoration Techs., Inc. v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension Fund, No. 24-2874 (3d Cir. Mar. 3, 2026),]  MORE >>