"The Second Circuit found that Xerox's annuity formula was unreasonable, apparently because ... [the guaranteed minimum benefit] would always be lower for a rehired employee than for a comparable employee who had not left and had not received a lump-sum payment. Of course, it would seem logical that an employee who already received a pension payment should receive less in the future than an employee who had received nothing. The Second Circuit did acknowledge that an ERISA plan could be written 'to change the risk borne by rehired employees or reduce such employees' benefits in a manner that treats them worse than newly hired employees[.]' But, the court held, the Xerox plan was not written to achieve that result. Which is sort of expected, given that the court had previously found that the provision written to address rehired employees (the phantom account provision) was unenforceable." [Frommert v. Conkright, No. 12-67-cv (2d Cir. Dec. 23, 2013)]  MORE >>