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

Featured Jobs

Retirement Plan Administrator

Pattison Pension
(Albuquerque NM / Hybrid)

Pattison Pension logo

Plan Administrator, Defined Benefit & Cash Balance

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

The Pension Source logo

Regional Vice President, Sales

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Data Administrator II

DWC - The 401(k) Experts
(Remote)

DWC - The 401(k) Experts logo

Plan Consultant - DB/CB

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Retirement Plan Consultant

Sentinel Group
(Remote / Everett MA)

Sentinel Group logo

Temporary Document Specialist

BPAS
(Utica NY)

BPAS logo

Retirement Plan Consultant

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Retirement Relationship Manager

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Defined Benefit Plan Consultant/Actuarial Analyst

Sentinel Group
(Remote / Everett MA)

Sentinel Group logo

Strategic Retirement Plan Consultant

Retirement Plan Consultants
(Urbandale IA / Des Moines IA)

Retirement Plan Consultants 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

The Retro-Effect: Outstanding Issues in Qualified Plan Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage as Highlighted by Schuett v. FedEx
Trucker Huss Link to more items from this source
Feb. 4, 2016
"[This case] highlights the reality and potential impacts of a retroactive application of Windsor. Plan administrators and fiduciaries should remain aware of the possibility of claims brought under Title I of ERISA to enforce a benefits claim by a participant in a same-sex marriage who retired before the Windsor decision ... Furthermore, Plan administrators should be aware that plan amendments that provide for recognition of same-sex marriages beginning on the date of the Windsor decision will not protect the plan and fiduciaries from Title I claims stemming from events prior to the Windsor decision." [Schuett v. FedEx Corp., No. 15-cv-0189 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2016)]

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).