Subscribe (Free) to
Daily or Weekly Newsletters
Post a Job

Featured Jobs

TPA Retirement Plan Consultant

EPIC RPS (TPA/DPS)
(Remote)

EPIC RPS (TPA/DPS) logo

Retirement Account Manager

Fringe Benefit Group
(Remote / Austin TX)

Fringe Benefit Group logo

Defined Contributions Compliance Consultant

Loren D. Stark Company (LDSCO)
(Remote)

Loren D. Stark Company (LDSCO) logo

RP-Client Service Associate

Greenline Wealth Management
(FL / Hybrid)

Greenline Wealth Management logo

Senior Specialist 401k Recordkeeping

T Bank N.A.
(Dallas TX)

T Bank N.A. logo

Compliance Officer

New York City District Council of Carpenters Benefit Funds
(New York NY)

New York City District Council of Carpenters Benefit Funds logo

Defined Contribution Account Manager

Nova 401(k) Associates
(Remote)

Nova 401(k) Associates logo

Retirement Plan Consultant

Great Lakes Pension Associates, Inc.
(Remote)

Great Lakes Pension Associates, Inc. logo

Senior Plan Administrator

Retirement Planners and Administrators (RPA)
(Remote)

Retirement Planners and Administrators (RPA) logo

Combo Plan Administrator

Pollard & Associates
(Remote)

Pollard & Associates logo

Retirement Plan Administrator

Retirement Solutions Specialists
(Remote / Jacksonville FL / Hybrid)

Retirement Solutions Specialists logo

View More Employee Benefits Jobs

Free Newsletters

“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”

-- An attorney subscriber

Mobile app icon
LinkedIn icon     Twitter icon     Facebook icon

Supreme Court Dispenses with the Yard-Man Inferences
Proskauer Rose LLP Link to more items from this source
Jan. 28, 2015

"The Supreme Court's opinion rejects the three rationales most commonly employed in support of claims for lifetime retiree health benefits -- that the benefits are deferred compensation, that to prevent vesting the agreement must explicitly curtail the duration of the benefits, and that the duration of the health benefit is tied to the lifetime payment of pension benefits. This does not mean that employers will always prevail, but it should lessen the concerns by employers about litigating retiree benefit claims in the Sixth Circuit, as well as the inconsistency multi-jurisdictional employers faced by having different outcomes in different circuits." [M&G Polymers v. Tackett, No. 13-1010 (U.S. Jan. 26, 2015)]

Please click here to report this link if it is broken (for example, if you see a "404 File Not Found" error message after you click on the linked news item's title).
An important word about authorship: BenefitsLink® created this link to the news item, but we are not the news item's author (unless expressly shown above).
© 2024 BenefitsLink.com, Inc.