One particularly significant example of how perseverance can turn group annoyance into legal advancement is the Elevator ERISA Settlement. In 2022, two elevator builders named Bradley McLachlan and Alex Graham sued, demanding justice rather than notoriety or attention. Their lawsuit against the Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401(k) Retirement Plan trustees revealed how thousands of workers’ retirement funds had been covertly depleted by exorbitant administrative costs and underperforming investments.
The lawsuit claims that although the plan represented over 30,000 members and managed over $5.8 billion, participants were paying more than three times the typical administrative costs of funds of a comparable size. After decades of work, these hidden costs resulted in smaller balances and less financial security for many workers. The plaintiffs transformed a technical legal dispute into a remarkably similar symbol of fairness that resonated across various industries by the time the settlement reached the federal court in Pennsylvania.
Approved in April 2025, the $5 million settlement was a moral correction in addition to a financial remedy. Anyone who took part in or benefited from the plan after October 2016 was covered by the agreement. It seemed to many members like a late acknowledgment of their trust being betrayed. Notably clear was the settlement’s breakdown: approximately $1.67 million for legal fees, $75,000 for litigation costs, $8,000 for each lead plaintiff, and a $25,000 cap for an impartial fiduciary to manage the allocation. The numbers showed a well-balanced attempt to rebuild trust and money.
Elevator ERISA Settlement Overview
| Category | Information |
|---|---|
| Case Name | McLachlan et al. v. The Board of Trustees of the Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401(k) Retirement Plan |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Settlement Amount | $5 million |
| Plaintiffs | Bradley J. McLachlan and Alex D. Graham |
| Defendant | The Board of Trustees of the Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401(k) Retirement Plan |
| Allegations | Excessive administrative fees and poor investment choices under ERISA |
| Class Members | Approximately 30,000 elevator workers and beneficiaries |
| Settlement Approval Date | April 15, 2025 |
| Class Period | October 13, 2016 – November 26, 2024 |
| Reference | ElevatorERISASettlement.com |
The Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or ERISA, was created to safeguard retirement assets by enforcing strict fiduciary rules. However, this case showed that when attention wanes, even well-established systems can break down. According to McLachlan and Graham, the trustees of the plan disregarded more profitable, higher-performing investment options and did not take advantage of their size to bargain for reduced administrative fees. Workers in a variety of industries and trades found their claim to be uncomfortably familiar.
Because the Elevator ERISA Settlement demonstrated how regular professionals could hold big financial stewards accountable, it became especially symbolic. It was comparable to well-known ERISA cases from corporate America, in which workers from large healthcare and educational institutions contested comparable mismanagement. However, the union context was what set this case apart. The plaintiffs belonged to a trade union that is typically seen as worker-first, rather than being corporate employees. This paradox made the victory even more meaningful, demonstrating that organizations founded on solidarity must also be transparent.
A deeper societal trend—a renewed emphasis on financial literacy among employees—was also reflected in the story. Retirement plans functioned behind layers of administrative jargon and financial terminology for many years. These layers were removed by this lawsuit, which showed how minor poor management can have significant consequences. In addition to securing compensation for their peers, McLachlan and Graham’s systemic challenges promoted an inquiry-based culture. Employees started to read their plan statements carefully, ask more questions, and learn how to gauge value beyond promised returns.
The resolution of the case, according to observers, was remarkably successful in enhancing oversight. Reforms were necessary as part of the settlement to guarantee frequent audits and open communication with plan participants. Participants who frequently rely solely on trustee decisions without having direct access to information about how their money is managed will especially benefit from these new measures. The case became a standard for many unions regarding what constitutes fair, transparent, and accountable fiduciary responsibility in the modern era.
The lawsuit’s emotional impact went beyond statistics and regulations. The deeds of McLachlan and Graham demonstrated how bravery frequently manifests as quiet, tenacious forms. Bringing legal action against one’s own union entails risks to one’s professional, interpersonal, and reputation. However, their resolve represented a potent idea: justice should always come before loyalty. Their narrative sparked comparisons with other whistleblowers from various sectors who took action to preserve their organizations’ integrity rather than harm them.
It is equally important to consider the wider economic impact. Over the last ten years, similar ERISA lawsuits have resulted in billions of dollars in recoveries and, more significantly, reforms that have affected the entire industry. Managers of pension funds are now subject to increased scrutiny, and fiduciaries are much more careful about recording their choices. According to legal analysts, this change in retirement governance is especially novel because it combines empowerment and accountability. That change was further weighed by the Elevator ERISA Settlement.
It’s interesting to note that the settlement was reached at a time when public discussion of labor justice was growing and unions from various industries reclaimed their power over pay, benefits, and protections in the digital age. Thus, the settlement had symbolic significance, serving as a reminder to unions and employers alike that openness in benefits administration is equally as important as equitable compensation. It linked the boardroom ledger and the tradesman’s toolbox, two sides of the same social contract.
Experts in finance have also noted that this case demonstrated how workers are becoming more aware of collective bargaining, not just for pay but also for the effectiveness of benefit systems in general. The lawsuit showed how a small group could produce quantifiable reform while challenging a $5.8 billion plan. The result demonstrated that data and diligence could be extraordinarily powerful change agents.
The plaintiffs’ legal team, Capozzi Adler P.C., received recognition for their exceptionally effective mediation process management. By steering clear of protracted legal disputes and concentrating on methodical negotiations, they made sure the settlement reached beneficiaries without requiring additional funding. Their strategy provided a very clear template for ERISA cases in the future: cooperative but unyielding.
The restored trust that the Elevator ERISA Settlement helped to cultivate may be its most enduring legacy, rather than the millions of dollars that were recovered. It was a polite but stern reminder that retirement plans need ongoing care, just like elevators. They may operate silently if left unattended — until someone sounds the alarm. In the case of McLachlan and Graham, the alarm alerted a system that had become overconfident in its own height.
