SEGMENT 1:

Dave Gray, 2nd Vice President, Field Office Service,
StanCorp Equities, Inc. (“The Standard”)

- The market downturn is a wake-up call to re-think retirement planning solutions.
In general, current efforts to engage retirement plan participants and educate them on saving and investment strategies have not been effective. The current market downturn exposes the problem even further. We’ll look at some statistics regarding America’s retirement savings habits and discuss why most current retirement planning solutions have not been effective.

- Defining a participant-centric approach.
The 401(k) plan itself is not the problem. What is needed is a fundamentally different approach to how we engage plan participants in the retirement planning process. We’ll discuss how retirement income security in defined contribution plans can only be achieved through an approach that targets three distinct types of investors, each requiring different tactical solutions.

- Benefits of a managed account solution.
We’ll talk about The Standard’s experience with a managed account approach, and why it is an effective solution for many plan participants -- during both good times and bad.

- We’ll define the components of an effective managed account solution
- We’ll compare a managed account solution with other potential solutions, such as automatic plan
  design features and target date funds
- We’ll briefly discuss what we are currently seeing in terms of usage and effectiveness

SEGMENT 2:

Michael S. Melbinger, Partner, Chair, Executive Compensation and Employee Benefits,
Winston & Strawn LLP

1. Protecting Plan Fiduciaries in a Down Market. Many corporate officers, employees and board members serve as ERISA fiduciaries. For a fiduciary accused of breaching its duties under ERISA, the stakes are high. ERISA Section 409 imposes personal liability on a fiduciary that breaches its duty. ERISA authorizes lawsuits against fiduciaries by participants, beneficiaries, the plan administrator, other fiduciaries and the U.S. Department of Labor. The federal courts have uniformly held that ERISA's fiduciary duty is "the highest duty known to the law."

2. Document Review and Revisions. Employers should review the plan, policies and procedures from top to bottom to improve governance, documentation and compliance and to correct any inconsistencies, updates in plan practices and operational deficiencies (such as those highlighted by recent court decisions). Make certain that the line of delegation of authority (and liability) flows clearly and unambiguously away from the board of directors, and does not inadvertently vest fiduciary responsibility in the Company and/or its senior executives.

3. Recent Supreme Court Cases Require Action. The U.S. Supreme Court's 2008 rulings in Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Glenn and LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc., made it easier for plan participants to challenge the decisions of employers and other retirement plan fiduciaries. However, by reading between the lines in these cases, we can discern guidance on several strategies to protect employers and fiduciaries. Many employers will need to make some changes to implement these strategies and help ensure that plan disputes are channeled through a plan committee and that the committee's decisions receive deference from the courts.

SEGMENT 3:

Michael Hadley, Associate Counsel - Pension Regulation,
Investment Company Institute

Participant activity in market downturns. ICI‘s study of 22 million defined contribution accounts found that, during the recent market turmoil, participants largely stayed the course, with little activity in withdrawals, asset allocation, loans, or stopping contributions. Survey data shows that the bear market has not shaken Americans’ support of 401(k) as a tax-advantaged savings vehicle.

Improvements coming for 401(k) plans. Just as there is broad agreement on preserving the 401(k) system, there is also agreement it can be improved. Congress and the Obama administration are looking at a range of issues, including disclosure and transparency, financial education and advice, and the growth of auto features like automatic enrollment and target date funds. We will also discuss proposals to increase retirement plan coverage like the auto IRA.

Improvements in transparency of fees. The proposals to modernize the rules governing disclosure in the 401(k) systems seek to assure that employers and participants have the information they need to make the decisions charged to them under the plan. Participants need key information –including about fees but not exclusively – on each investment option available to them. We will also describe the findings of a Deloitte/ICI survey of 401(k) plan fees that looks at factors that influence (and do not influence) a plan’s fees.

SEGMENT 4:

Mark S. Ritter, Tax Director, Compensation and Benefit Consulting Practice,
Grant Thornton LLP

** Speaker Talking Points to be added soon.. **

SEGMENT 5:

Josh Shapiro, Director,
and
Denis Roy, FSA, MAAA, EA, Director, Human Resources Services Consulting Practice,
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

1. Background on retirement needs
    a. 3 steps of retirement stool (or is it 4)
        i. Personal savings (discuss savings model)
        ii. Employer-provided retirement
        iii. Government / social security
        iv. Family? Legacy?
    b. How retirement needs have changed over the years
        i. Some history - retirement needs vs. increasing life expectancy vs. sources of income
        ii. Post-retirement expenses increasing rapidly(healthcare, longevity, and inflation)
        iii. How can retirement savings be adjusted for changing postretirement trends?
    c. Employer-provided retirement plans - DB vs. DC
        i. Provide some graphical analysis
        ii. From DB to DC Plan - what does that mean
            1. Investment risk
            2. Longevity risk

2. Replacement Ratio Analysis
    a. Impact of the following should be reviewed
        i. Impact of moving from DB to DC
        ii. Impact of cutting / reducing 401(k) match
        iii. Impact of recession in younger vs. older individuals
        iv. Impact of Social Security ?
    b. Analysis to be performed
        i. Replacement ratio analysis
        ii. Consumption/savings analysis - before and after retirement

3. Short-term and long-term solutions (good and bad) (5 minutes)
    a. Current retirees
        i. Need to find other sources for income stream, or reduce expenses
    b. Older employees
        i. Safe investments
        ii. Delay retirement
    c. Younger employees
        i. Start saving more, earlier
    d. Policy decisions
        i. Do 401(k) plans need to stay or change?
        ii. How do the other legs of the stool need to be adjusted to complement 401(k) savings?
        iii. How much should we rely on governments to fix the problem?