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

Featured Jobs

Defined Benefit Plan Consultant/Actuarial Analyst

Sentinel Group
(Remote / Everett MA)

Sentinel Group logo

Temporary Document Specialist

BPAS
(Utica NY)

BPAS logo

Regional Vice President, Sales

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Retirement Relationship Manager

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Retirement Plan Consultant

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Plan Administrator, Defined Benefit & Cash Balance

The Pension Source
(Remote / Stuart FL / NY / TX / Hybrid)

The Pension Source logo

Strategic Retirement Plan Consultant

Retirement Plan Consultants
(Urbandale IA / Des Moines IA)

Retirement Plan Consultants logo

Retirement Plan Administrator

Pattison Pension
(Albuquerque NM / Hybrid)

Pattison Pension logo

Retirement Plan Consultant

Sentinel Group
(Remote / Everett MA)

Sentinel Group logo

Plan Consultant - DB/CB

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Data Administrator II

DWC - The 401(k) Experts
(Remote)

DWC - The 401(k) Experts 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)]  MORE >>

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).