We are very pleased to have Jerry Schlichter centre-stage at this symposium. For over 10 years he has been battling for fair treatment for pension savers through litigation. 

This is a definite not-to-be-missed event for anybody interested in transparency on costs/charges and the role of litigation/class actions in driving pro-consumer reform in the pensions space.

In particular, this event will be of meaningful importance to pension scheme trustees; they ought to know the risk of exposure on a scheme and personal basis if they were to fail to properly take care of pension scheme members’ interests. 

Jerry is with the US law firm, Schlichter Bogard & Denton, which is recognised as a leader in protecting victims of financial abuse. 

They have successfully obtained relief valued at more than $1.5 billion on behalf of individuals harmed by financial wrongdoing – often by bringing lawsuits that other attorneys were unwilling to bring. 

This work has been repeatedly profiled, and the firm featured, in the US national media, and the firm’s work has been repeatedly highlighted by federal judges.

A representative sample of recent media coverage concerning their efforts on behalf of 401(k) investors is below:

• The New York Times, A Lone Ranger of the 401(k)’s
• The Wall Street Journal, 401(k) Fees, Already Low, Are Heading Lower
• PBS, Are 401(k) Fees Making Companies Richer at the Expense of Workers?
• Investment News, Attorney Jerry Schlichter Opens Up About 403(b), 401(k) Suits

It does make you wonder whether litigation has done more to drive down costs/charges in pensions and investments than anything else in the USA; and what the potential is for legal action to drive pro-consumer reform in other parts of the world too.

Here are some of the firm’s more high-profile cases:

• Tibble v. Edison. Obtained a unanimous 9-0 landmark decision in the United States Supreme Court on behalf of a class of 401(k) investors in the first Supreme Court case to consider fees in 401(k) plans.
• Abbott v. Lockheed Martin. Achieved an historic $62 million settlement on behalf of employees and retirees, the largest ever in a 401(k) case involving excessive-fee allegations; obtained substantial additional non-monetary relief.
• Tussey v. ABB, Inc.  Obtained an historic $55 million settlement on behalf of participants in ABB, Inc.’s retirement plan after a dozen-year battle including the first full trial in a 401(k) excessive fee case.
• Spano v. Boeing. Obtained $57 million settlement on behalf of 401(k) investors, the second-largest ever in a case involving excessive-fee allegations.
• Nolte v. Cigna. Achieved a $35 million settlement, including substantial non-monetary relief, on behalf of a class of 401(k) investors in a case involving allegations of excessive fees and mismanagement.
• Kruger v. Novant. Obtained $32 million settlement for employees and retirees, in addition to considerable non-monetary relief.
• Gordon v. Mass. Mutual.  Obtained a $30.9 million settlement, with substantial non-monetary relief, on behalf of 401(k) investors.
• Beesley v. International Paper. Obtained a $30 million settlement, with significant non-monetary relief, on behalf of 401(k) investors in retirement plan with alleged unreasonable high fees and unsuitable investments.
• Krueger v. Ameriprise Financial. Obtained a $27.5 million settlement, with significant non-monetary relief, on behalf of 401(k) investors in retirement plan with alleged excessive fees.
• Sims v. BB&T. Obtained a $24 million settlement on behalf of BB&T retirees and employees in a case alleging BB&T paid itself excessive fees to administer the plan and included underperforming and proprietary funds.
• Kanawi v. Bechtel. Obtained an $18.5 million monetary settlement with substantial non-monetary relief on behalf of 401(k) investors.
• Ramsay v. Philips North America. Secured a $17 million settlement in a case alleging excessive fees and retention of imprudent investment options in a retirement plan.
• Waldbuesser v. Northrop Grumman Corp. Obtained a $16.75 monetary settlement with substantial non-monetary relief on behalf of 401(k) investors.
• Martin v. Caterpillar Inc. Obtained a $16.5 million monetary settlement with substantial non-monetary relief on behalf of 401(k) investors.
• Will v. General Dynamics. Obtained a $15.15 million monetary settlement with substantial non-monetary relief on behalf of 401(k) investors.
• Clark v. Duke University. Obtained a $10.65 million settlement in a case alleging 403(b) plan fiduciaries allowed excessive fees to be charged and imprudent investments included in the plan.