Employee benefit plans could not force arbitration before disputes

Arbitration terms agreed to before a dispute would be unenforceable, and covered plan actors could not require them for plan participation or benefits. The ban would bind plans, plan sponsors, employers, and people hired to run or administer plans, and would protect participants and beneficiaries. This would not cover an arbitration term that the Labor Secretary finds resulted from genuine collective bargaining. The rule would cover disputes or claims arising or accruing on or after enactment, even under older terms. Outdated documents alone would not count as a violation until after the first plan year begins on or after the one-year anniversary, if the actor follows the rule meanwhile.

A participant or beneficiary could accept arbitration or give up claims after a dispute only through a voluntary written agreement meeting the safeguards. The waiver rules would cover both individual and group claims under the law's civil-enforcement section in any court or other forum able to hear them. The agreement could not be required, coerced, tied to benefits or work, or secured by a threat. The person would need understandable paper notice of the right to refuse without retaliation and at least 45 days after receiving the final terms and required information before consenting in writing. A dispute would count as having arisen only when the plaintiff actually knows of the breach or violation behind the claim. The safeguards would cover disputes or claims arising or accruing on or after enactment, including those involving older terms.

For plans not legally classified as multiemployer plans, terms granting discretion over benefit decisions or plan wording would be unenforceable. Courts would also decide whether arbitration terms can be enforced. The no-deference rule would cover plans other than multiemployer plans; the court-decision rule would cover arbitration terms related to any covered plan. A court would decide whether an arbitration term is enforceable even if a contract assigns that question to an arbitrator or the challenge also attacks other contract terms. These rules would cover disputes or claims arising or accruing on or after enactment, including those involving older terms.