Caution: Pros and Cons of Arbitrating 401k Fiduciary Claims

401k, retirement, ERISA, fiduciary

Carefully consider your clients' options.

Arbitration is an oft-used form of alternative dispute resolution. Two or more parties fail to resolve a disagreement, they may turn to arbitration.

But is it better to litigate or arbitrate?

The answer to this question depends on several factors.

When it comes to arbitrating ERISA fiduciary claims, the situation becomes even more complex. Is arbitration the best solution? Are there any downsides to solving an ERISA fiduciary claim in this manner?

Anne Tyler Hall

Let’s explore the pros and cons of arbitrating ERISA fiduciary claims.

Is Arbitrating ERISA Fiduciary Claims the Right Move?

There’s no doubt that arbitration offers many benefits over a trial, including:

However, arbitration is not appropriate or acceptable in all situations.

Reasons Arbitrating ERISA Fiduciary Claims Might Not Work

Some of the ‘cons’ of arbitration include:

ERISA Fiduciary Claims Need Immediate Attention

Whether arbitrating or not, any challenges related to ERISA fiduciary guidelines are not to be ignored. Consult with an experienced ERISA attorney to learn more about your options.


Anne Tyler Hall is owner and principal attorney of Hall Benefits Law.

HBL offers employers comprehensive legal guidance on benefits in mergers and acquisitions, Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs), executive compensation, health and welfare benefits, healthcare reform, and retirement plans. We counsel a wide spectrum of clients including small, mid-sized, and large companies, 401(k) investment advisors, health insurance brokers, accountants, attorneys, and HR consultants, just to name a few. HBL is passionate about advising clients, and we are dedicated to our mission: to provide comprehensive, personalized, and practical ERISA and benefits legal solutions that exceed client expectations.

Exit mobile version