Court OKs Subpoena in EEOC Investigation of Casino
May 9, 2014 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received approval from a federal district court to enforce a subpoena against a Wisconsin casino.
This week, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman approved the EEOC’s application to enforce a subpoena against the Potawatomi Bingo Casino in
Milwaukee. This move allows the EEOC to proceed with its investigation of an
age discrimination charge filed against the casino by former employee Federico
Colón.
According to the EEOC, Adelman rejected the casino’s
argument that it is not an “employer” as defined under the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act (ADEA). Citing U.S. Supreme Court and appeals court cases, Adelman
noted that federal statutes generally apply to all persons, including American Indian tribes, except in cases where doing so would negatively impact the autonomy rights essential
to a tribe’s self-governance on “purely intramural” matters.
Adelman found that, in running the casino, the Forest County
Potawatomi Community was not acting in its sovereign governmental capacity but
as a business in interstate commerce and that, because Colón is not a member
of the tribe, his employment relationship with the casino was not “purely
intramural.”
The lawsuit, EEOC v. Forest County Potawatomi Community,
d/b/a Potawatomi Bingo Casino (Case No. 13-MC-61, Eastern District of Wisconsin),
stems from an EEOC charge filed in February 2013, in which Colón alleged that
the casino had violated the ADEA by harassing him and subjecting him to
different terms and conditions of employment than younger co-workers.
Last July, the EEOC’s Chicago District Office requested
information related to Colón’s allegations. After the casino refused to provide
such information, the EEOC served a subpoena for the information and gave the
casino until last August 14, to comply. The casino did not do so and instead
filed its own lawsuit, Forest County Potawatomi Community v. Federico Colón and
EEOC (Case No. 13-MC-53, Eastern District of Wisconsin), before U.S. District
Judge Charles Clevert Jr., in an effort to quash the EEOC subpoena.
In October, the EEOC filed a subpoena
enforcement action which sought dismissal of
the casino’s motion to quash, which was still pending at the time. Later that month, Clevert
ruled in the EEOC’s favor and dismissed the casino’s motion to quash for lack
of jurisdiction.
Provider Websites Face Off in Corporate Insight Report
May 9, 2014 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – Whether their plan is soliciting requests for proposals (RFPs) or not, plan officials have the fiduciary duty to understand how their service providers’ Web offerings match the competitions’.
A new report from financial intelligence and consulting
firm Corporate Insight suggests the plan sponsor’s duty to analyze its participants’
online experience is critically important in the modern defined contribution (DC)
retirement planning context. The research argues that shortcomings in participant
websites should be a compelling case for switching service providers or demanding
more from existing provider relationships, especially as younger generations of
participants expect more of the 401(k) account management experience to be
delivered online.
Drew Maresca, a senior analyst at Corporate Insight who
helped develop the report, “Engaging Participants: Best Practices for Plan
Sponsors,” tells PLANSPONSOR the competitive landscape among defined contribution service providers
has become vastly more complex in recent years. Not only have the various data tools
and transaction resources offered online to participants become more sophisticated—there
has also been a move among the leading providers to make Web-based processes simpler
and accessible across a variety of electronic devices.
This has resulted in a
new set of best practices that plan officials must consider when analyzing participant Web offerings, he says, adding that sponsors are often surprised to see how their Web offerings differ from other plans with similar size and expense characteristics.
Maresca
describes a good participant website as one that features robust income calculators,
data visualization tools and a full-service account management platform through
which participants can easily initiate change in their savings rates and investment portfolios.
It is also important, he says, for this information to be presented with compelling
educational materials and next-best-step education that can guide participants through
actual financial planning decisions, such as when to start drawing Social Security or what asset allocation is best.
“One distinguishing feature of the top websites is the convenience
factor,” he says. “It’s becoming more important to make interacting with your
plan easier and to make the participants’ financial lives simpler to
manage, whether online or through in-person meetings. The data shows convenience online can lead
to better outcomes.”
Corporate Insight has been auditing DC service provider
websites since 2006, Maresca explains, and refocused the effort in 2012 with
the launch of the Retirement Plan Monitor, which tracks the online participant
experiences offered by 17 large defined contribution plan service providers.
“In that time we’ve seen that the digital experience of
participants varies greatly depending on the capabilities of the provider, so
much so that it leads to vastly dissimilar participant experiences in plans
that would otherwise look a lot alike,” he says. “Even in our list of the largest
DC providers, we see a lot of disparity in the online offerings. Some do much better than others, to be frank.”
There
are websites that are very communicative and go the extra mile in terms of online
training and supporting investors at all levels, especially the novice
investors, Maresca says. Other sites just present the bare-bones information,
the account balance and the investment options without teaching the participant
about how to set savings goals or how to optimize investment performance based off
personalized age, health, wealth and salary considerations. These are the
features sponsors should be demanding, Maresca says.
For guidance on assessing current and prospective Web
offerings, Maresca says, sponsors and consulting resources should ask
themselves, “Does our website promote or hinder participant engagement?” There
will always be a wide spectrum of persons with varying degrees of financial
acumen and interest within a given plan, he says, so answering this question
won’t be easy without robust plan demographic data and a good understanding of
the goals and aspirations of participants.
Additionally, plan officials must consider ease of use and whether
their website promotes holistic financial wellness. Both are important
characteristics that a defined contribution plan’s participant website must have in order to improve outcomes, he says. Participants should be able to take corrective action
easily, if necessary. Presenting retirement scenarios in a graphical way is
another best practice, to engage participants, he says.
Maresca pushes back against the notion that robust Web resources
may be prohibitively expensive to develop and maintain among smaller plans or
those with few extra resources.
“I think both low
fees and powerful Web resources can be a part of the same plan,” Maresca says. “There
is no reason why you can’t work with your service provider to at least explore
the steps it would take to streamline and improve the Web offerings. I don’t think
it’s as challenging as one might expect to start moving in the right direction.”
A
summary of the report, as well as information on how to purchase the full
results, is available here.