Unregulated Corporate Internal Investigations: Achieving Fairness for Corporate Constituents

This article focuses on the relationship between corporations and their employee constituents in the context of corporate internal investigations, an unregulated multi-million dollar business. The classic approach provided in the 1981 Supreme Court opinion, Upjohn v. United States, is contrasted with the reality of modern-day internal investigations that may exploit individuals to achieve a corporate benefit with the government. Attorney-client privilege becomes an issue as corporate constituents perceive that corporate counsel is representing their interests, when in fact these internal investigators are obtaining information for the corporation to barter with the government. Legal precedent and ethics rules provide little relief to these corporate employees. This Article suggests that courts need to move beyond the Upjohn decision and recognize this new landscape. It advocates for corporate fair dealing and provides a multi-faceted approach to achieve this aim. Ultimately this Article considers how best to level the playing field between corporations and their employees in matters related to the corporate internal investigation

On the Edge: Facing a Challenging and Uncertain Future

Introduces the Boston Elder Economic Security Standard as a tool to assess the real economic circumstances, needs, and resources of the low- and middle-income elderly in Boston, depending on their health, housing, marital status and other factors

Testimony before the ERISA Advisory Council

I am the director of the Pension Action Center of the Gerontology Institute at the University of Massachusetts Boston. In that capacity, I run the New England Pension Assistance Project (NEPAP), a U.S. Administration on Aging (AoA)-funded pension counseling project, and the Illinois Pension Assistance Project (IPAP) funded by the Retirement Research Foundation. Both of these projects represent low- and moderate-income plan participants who are having difficulty claiming their employer-sponsored retirement income. The AoA funds six pension counseling projects covering 29 states; all of which represent clients in much the same way we do at the Pension Action Center. My testimony today is reflective of their experiences as well

Summary of Mass State Pension Reform Law Chapter 176 of the Acts of 2011

Massachusetts passed significant changes to its public pension system meant to create cost savings for the state and to encourage employees to work longer. Most of the changes apply only to people hired after April 2, 2012. This summarizes the most important changes

Rethinking Retirement Policy in Massachusetts

Women are significantly poorer than men in old age. One major cause of women’s disproportional poverty is retirement income policy that bases pensions and savings incentives on earned income. This paper describes the structure of our retirement policies and argues that some policies should be implemented that are not associated with earned income as a way to both support women’s caregiving roles and insure their economic well-being in old age

Prosecutorial Discretion and Post-Conviction Evidence of Innocence

Traditionally, discussions of prosecutorial discretion focus on charging and plea bargaining decisions. But on occasions when new evidence casts doubt on a convicted defendant’s guilt, questions of prosecutorial discretion take on comparatively greater importance. When there is an inadequate factual basis for criminal charges, a criminal trial will often (though not invariably) act as a corrective. In contrast, the legal process holds out little hope for wrongfully convicted defendants, especially in the absence of help from prosecutors. Commentators have written about psychological reasons why prosecutors might be unduly skeptical of post-conviction challenges, have identified institutional impediments to a fair response, and have proposed structural reform. But comparatively little attention has been given to the fundamental question of what we affirmatively expect prosecutors to do when new evidence comes their way suggesting that a convicted person may be innocent. This article explores that question. It maintains that even when not required to do so by a professional conduct rule, in exercising its discretion after obtaining a conviction, a prosecutor’s office should investigate significant new evidence that suggests that the convicted defendant was innocent. When the office then concludes that the defendant was probably innocent, it should take measures, whether by supporting an application for judicial relief or by supporting a pardon application, to correct the apparent mistake. This article also explores questions regarding what investigative steps must be taken and by whom, drawing on examples of current practices both in the United States and abroad

Letter Regarding IRS Form 8955-SSA Participant Notice Requirement

On April 27, 2012, the Pension Action Center wrote to the Internal Revenue Service to advocate for the pension rights of American workers and retirees. The Pension Action Center’s letter was prompted by a request from the American Society of Pension Professionals and Actuaries (ASPPA) that plans be relieved of their legal obligation to notify departing workers of their right to a pension

Letter Regarding PBGC Request for Information on Missing Participants in Individual Account Plans, Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 120, June 21, 2013

On August 19, 2013, the Pension Action Center wrote to the Office of the General Counsel of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation in response to their request for comments on the implementation of a new program to deal with benefits of missing participants in terminating individual account plans