Deals & People July 14, 2010

LPL Acquiring NRP

LPL Financial Corporation is acquiring National Retirement Partners Inc. (NRP).
Reported by

LPL Holdings Inc. the parent company of LPL Financial, will acquire certain assets from NRP, LPL said in a press release.

====================================

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

an updated version of this story is available HERE

====================================

Upon completion of this transaction, NRP employees will join LPL Financial to form a new division within the company, LPL Financial Retirement Partners, led by NRP’s current CEO and president, Bill Chetney.

As for NRP’s 150 member firm offices and their advisers; “Through this acquisition, NRP’s independent advisers will have the opportunity to join LPL Financial,” LPL said in its announcement. No word as to what that means for the current NRP broker/dealer, NRP Financial, which NRP acquired in the first quarter of 2007 (see “NRP Acquires Ohio B/D“).

This will give LPL a foothold in the retirement plan space, something the broker/dealer has tried to establish in the past, last with Bruce Harrington, who left the firm in December (see “Harrington Exits LPL”).  

Last year, NRP announced its intention to recruit not just retirement plan advisers, but producing third-party administrators (TPAs) to become member firms and create the NRP National TPA Network (see “NRP Plans National TPA Network“).

 

Compliance July 14, 2010

9th Circuit Says CA Law Trumps Labor Contracts

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that while workplace contracts may be subject to out-of-state law, actual workplace terms and conditions affecting workers in California are governed by state statutes.

Reported by

The plaintiffs’ “claims arose under the Labor Code, a California regulatory scheme, and consequently, California law should apply to define the boundaries of liability under that scheme,” District Judge Edward Korman wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel, according to The Recorder. The panel also held that under California law, a jury trial would be necessary to determine whether the plaintiffs were properly designated as independent contractors.  

Three California freight-truck drivers employed by EGL, Inc. alleged they were improperly classified as independent contractors and denied employee benefits, including overtime, business-related expenses, and meal compensation. EGL required the workers to sign contracts acknowledging their status as independent contractors subject to the labor laws of Texas.  

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

The news report said plaintiffs’ lawyers claim multistate companies have increasingly tried to designate workers as independent contractors to avoid California’s perceived worker-friendly regulations on overtime and meal-and-rest periods.  

The court’s opinion is here.

«