Here is what I think, quoting from the California Supreme Court, which adopted an argument I submitted many years ago:
"ERISA is a comprehensive federal statutory scheme designed to promote the interests of employees and their beneficiaries in employee benefit plans." (Carpenters So. Cal. Admin. Corp. v. El Capitan Development Co. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1041, 1047 [hereafter Carpenters].) ERISA was adopted by Congress "to ensure that 'if a worker has been promised a defined benefit upon retirement--and if he has fulfilled whatever conditions are required to obtain a vested benefit-- . . . he actually receives it.' [Citation.]" (Alessi v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. (1981) 451 U.S. 504, 510 [hereafter Alessi].)"
"ERISA contains an express preemption clause providing in pertinent part that the federal act "shall supersede any and all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any employee benefit plan . . . ." (29 U.S.C. § 1144(a), italics added.) As defined under ERISA, "State la