Analysis of Settlement Terms in Deutsche Bank ERISA Litigation

The bank has agreed to pay $21.9 million to settle charges it benefited from including proprietary funds in its 401(k) plan.

Terms of the settlement agreement reached between Deutsche Bank and participants in the firm’s own retirement plan have been filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The settlement agreement follows a previously issued partial decision for summary judgement, reached after the district court first ruled the lawsuit claims, filed in December 2015, should not be time-barred by ERISA’s various statutes of limitation. Subsequent to that decision, the court approved class action status for the complaint in September 2017.

Get more!  Sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters.

The case history of the litigation offers a prime example of the incredible complexity of Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) challenges. In the run-up to the settlement agreement, while plaintiffs’ motion for class certification was still pending, the plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint, adding additional allegations regarding defendants’ alleged failure to adhere to plan documents as required by ERISA and the U.S. Code.

In sum, the underlying allegations were that Deutsche Bank and other defendants violated their fiduciary duties by offering in the company’s own 401(k) plan proprietary, high-cost investments that profited the bank. According to the plaintiffs’ amended complaints, the Deutsche Bank Matched Savings Plan, as of 2009, had roughly $1.9 billion in assets and offered participants 22 “designated investment alternatives,” 10 of which were “proprietary Deutsche Bank mutual funds.” The core of the complaints’ allegations concerned the inclusion of Deutsche Bank proprietary mutual funds among the plan’s offerings. According to the complaints, “Deutsche Bank earned millions of dollars in investment management fees by retaining [these proprietary mutual funds] in the plan.”

Important to note, the Deutsche Bank defendants still deny all liability to the class representatives; deny all of the claims made in the action; deny all allegations of wrongdoing made in any of the complaints in this action; and deny that the class representatives, the plan, or any of the plan’s current or former participants suffered any losses. Defendants further maintain that they acted prudently and loyally at all times when acting in any fiduciary capacity with respect to the plan.

Details from the settlement

As stipulated by the settlement agreement, within 20 business days after the date the court’s preliminary approval order is entered, Deutsche Bank or its insurers shall deposit 33% of the gross settlement amount ($7,300,000) into the qualified settlement fund. Subsequently, within 20 business days after the settlement effective date, Deutsche Bank or its insurers shall deposit the remainder of the gross settlement amount ($14,600,000) into the qualified settlement fund.

Then, within 120 calendar days after the settlement effective date, the gross settlement amount will be distributed from the qualified settlement fund as follows: “(a) first, all attorneys’ fees and costs approved by the court shall be paid to class counsel within five business days after the settlement effective date; (b) second, any class representatives’ compensation approved by the Court shall be paid within five business days after the settlement effective date; (c) third, all administrative expenses approved by the court shall be paid within five (5) business days after the settlement effective date; (d) fourth, a contingency reserve not to exceed an amount to be mutually agreed upon by the settling parties and approved by the court shall be set aside by the settlement administrator for: (1) administrative expenses incurred before the settlement effective date but not yet paid, and (2) administrative expenses estimated to be incurred after the settlement effective date but before the end of the settlement period; and (e) fifth, the net settlement amount will be distributed pursuant to the plan of allocation.”

After this process, no later than February 15 of the year following the calendar year in which Deutsche Bank makes a transfer to the qualified settlement fund pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, the firm “must timely furnish a statement to the escrow agent, or the settlement administrator on its behalf, that complies with Treasury Regulation 1.468B-3(e)(2), which may be a combined statement under Treasury Regulation 1.468B3(e)(2)(ii), and shall attach a copy of the statement to their federal income tax returns filed for the taxable year in which Deutsche Bank, its insurers, or agents make a transfer to the qualified settlement fund.” After setting out this groundwork, the settlement agreement presents a 10-page “plan of allocations,” describing in detail how class members will be compensated in due course.

Prospective relief also included

Beyond the monetary settlement terms already outlined, the settlement agreement includes substantial description of prospective relief to be provided by Deutsche Bank.

“All decisions regarding the selection, retention, removal, or evaluation of any Deutsche fund in the plan shall be delegated to an independent fiduciary appointed pursuant to ERISA,” the agreement states. “Deutsche Bank shall retain the independent fiduciary to provide a written opinion, within six months of the settlement effective date, regarding whether any of the existing Deutsche funds or non-Deutsche funds in the plan should be replaced with alternative investment vehicles (e.g., separate accounts or collective trusts).”

Also notable is this description of the establishment of a “settlement website” to help distribute relevant information to stakeholders: “On or before the date that the settlement notices are mailed, the settlement administrator will establish a settlement website on which it will post the following documents or links to the following documents: the third amended complaint, settlement agreement and exhibits thereto, settlement notices, former participants claim form, preliminary approval order and any other court orders related to the settlement, and any other documents or information mutually agreed upon by the settling parties in writing. When filed, the settlement administrator will also post or include links to the motion for attorneys’ fees and costs, administrative expenses, and class representatives’ compensation (and any documents submitted in support). … The settlement administrator will take down the settlement website at the conclusion of the settlement period.”

The full text of the decision is available here

SURVEY SAYS: Employee Demotions

We covered a survey which found nearly half of HR managers (46%) have seen someone at their company moved down a rung on the career ladder.

Last week, I asked NewsDash readers, “Have you ever been demoted at an employer, and if you were demoted now, would you quit your job or stick it out?”

 

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan benefits news.

Two in ten (21.2%) responding readers reported they have been demoted at an employer, while nearly eight in ten (78.8%) have not.  More than half (58.1%) said they would stick it out if demoted now, and 41.9% said they would quit.

 

In verbatim comments left by readers, many caveated that they would stick it out UNTIL they found a new job. Several said demotions are a sign the employer wants the employee gone, but a few said it could be a good thing. Editor’s Choice goes to the reader who said: I’ve seen demotions work very well in finding a good person a job with a better fit. Positioning should be about both the success of the business and the person.”

 

Thanks to everyone who participated in the survey!

 

Verbatim

It was done poorly and not communicated to those of us who were demoted until the announcement was made.

Demoted, no. Fired, yes.

There’s generally a good reason for them.

The specific situation would greatly impact my action. If it was a stretch position and it was realized I wasn’t actually ready, I could accept the demotion and stay with the company. Otherwise, I see a demotion as a failure either on my part to rise to the occasion or on my manager for not effectively communicating that I wasn’t performing up to expected standards.

As long as the pay is the same — there’s really no problem with staying.

I’d stick it out only until I found a better job. I don’t have enough money to just quit! By the way, it happened to me and I’m still looking. Wish me luck.

If I were demoted but they didn’t reduce my salary or other benefits, it would be like a promotion! Less work & same pay. Perfect.

Despite assurances that you are still valued by Mgmt, the internal network has already labeled you as damaged goods.

Although I wouldn’t like a decrease in pay, I might welcome a demotion. I could use easier work as I near retirement!

I’ve never seen a person last long at an employer after being demoted.

It’s demoralizing and I would lose my commitment to the company as a partner. No point in working for a company if I don’t feel a mutual vested interest.

Stick it out ONLY to search for a new job. My hours in the office would be much less!

Quit, once I have a new job.

I would stick it out if demoted now because I don’t have that long to retirement, but when younger, I would just move on. Demotions are usually used to edge someone out the door. Otherwise they usually make hard feelings. Usually they are disguised as a new exciting opportunity!

It happened in my early 30’s and I stayed but searched out other employment. In a perverse way it motivated me to double down on savings. Today at 58 I could quit tomorrow — but my plan is another 5 years just to be sure! So I would stick it out.

To me there are 3 reasons for a demotion. 1) The person is unable to perform the duties of the position. 2) A tool to have someone resign without terminating them. 3) The person wants less job responsibility.

I stuck it out only because I was in my early 20’s and did not comprehend what had happened. I was told I could come back the next day to a different job or not come back. So in a sense, I guess I really got fired but was too ignorant to realize it so I went back to the ‘other’ job until I found a new one! What we learn as we grow older 🙂

I would quit after I found a job at another place.

I am extremely confident that I will not be demoted unless I decide to be stupid. But if I am forced to deal with it, I would quit but after getting a new job. And, I will have no problem with landing one soon. I trust my credentials and work ethics.

I’ve seen others be demoted at work, sometimes just to take them “down a notch”…which I think is extremely wrong. It is better off not doing it, the work productivity goes down and so does their attitude…work demotions are not ideal for any party involved…it would just be easier and safer to fire someone.

I’ve seen demotions work very well in finding a good person a job with a better fit. Positioning should be about both the success of the business and the person.

Sometimes they can be a positive change for the person and team.

Sometimes business considerations affect good people. Unless I felt like I was targeted for no good reason, I’d stick it out.

I think a demotion is a polite way an employer is telling you to take a hike.

 

 

NOTE: Responses reflect the opinions of individual readers and not necessarily the stance of Strategic Insight or its affiliates.

«