PPL Corp. has agreed to shell out $8.2 million to settle a class action lawsuit that accused the energy giant of mishandling its retirement plan investments. According to Pennsylvania federal court filings, the company allegedly failed to prune costly, underperforming target date funds from its plan, potentially shortchanging thousands of employees on their retirement savings.

The agreement, which was preliminarily approved by the court on Friday, marks the culmination of a legal battle that nearly went to trial. The workers claimed PPL breached its fiduciary duty by keeping the Northern Trust Focus Funds in the plan’s investment lineup—despite glaring signs of underperformance.

Retirement Funds in the Hot Seat

The lawsuit painted a troubling picture: while other investment options flourished, the Northern Trust Focus Funds lagged, underperforming their peers by 4% to 17% between 2015 and 2017. The employees alleged that PPL had opportunities to swap these funds for lower-cost, higher-performing alternatives but failed to act until 2020—far too late for those relying on their investments to grow.

The settlement, if finalized, will benefit a class of workers who participated in the plan from January 12, 2016, through June 30, 2020. Additionally, six named plaintiffs who spearheaded the lawsuit are requesting $20,000 each in service awards for their role in the case.

Legal Wrangling and a Near-Trial Twist

This high-stakes lawsuit nearly saw its day in court. In January 2024, just a week before trial, both parties alerted the court to an impending deal. But the battle leading up to the settlement was anything but smooth.

PPL fought tooth and nail to get the case dismissed, arguing that the workers cherry-picked funds to make their case look stronger. However, U.S. District Judge Mia R. Perez rejected PPL’s motion to dismiss in March 2024. Soon after, she also denied the company’s attempt to win a summary judgment, citing unresolved factual disputes over PPL’s oversight of the funds.

PPL’s Defense: Settlement to Avoid Prolonged Litigation

PPL, which serves 3.5 million customers across Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island, maintained that it did nothing wrong. However, facing the risk of an expensive, drawn-out trial, the company chose to settle.

"We are fully confident in our plans’ design and processes and maintain there is no merit to plaintiffs’ allegations," said Ryan Hill, PPL’s vice president of corporate communications. "This resolution avoids the burden and uncertainty of prolonged litigation."

Attorneys and the Path Forward

The class is represented by a team of legal heavyweights, including Jerome J. Schlichter, Troy A. Doles, Kurt C. Struckhoff, Chen Kasher, and Nathan D. Stump of Schlichter Bogard LLP, as well as David Promisloff of Promisloff Law PC.

PPL’s defense was led by attorneys from O’Melveny & Myers LLP and LeVan Law LLC, including Catalina J. Vergara, Kevin A. Kraft, Deanna M. Rice, William Pollak, Scott Harman-Heath, and Peter H. LeVan Jr.

If approved, this $8.2 million deal will close the chapter on a lawsuit that, had it gone to trial, could have set a significant precedent for how corporations manage employee retirement plans.