Search the News Archive

The Intersection of ERISA Section 510 and the ACA's Whistleblower Provisions

"It remains unclear whether ACA's whisteblower protections will apply to workforce realignment decisions.... [R]ealignments to reduce hours, especially for low wage workers eligible for subsidies and credits, could be viewed as unlawful interference with the terms of employment. From the employees' perspective, such workforce changes directly impact access to medical care for all similarly-situated individuals, and would stem solely from to an employer's desire to avoid ACA's penalties[.]"

Terminated Employee's Release Agreement Barred Claim for Additional Pension Benefits

"The Seventh Circuit dismissed a former employee's claim for additional pension benefits after concluding that a release agreement he signed had waived any claims that arose prior to the signing of the release and his claim was not protected by ERISA's anti-alienation provision.... The Seventh Circuit held that pension claims, unlike pension entitlements, are outside the realm of ERISA's anti-alienation provision and therefore can be released."

Explicit Plan Terms Allow Self-Insured Plan to Recover Medical Benefits Paid to Employee Post-McCutchen

"The court rejected the defendants' argument that the 'make-whole doctrine,' which would prevent the employee from paying monies from his personal injury recovery until he was 'fully compensated for his injuries,' limited the plan's right to recovery, reasoning that the explicit terms of the plan 'unambiguously foreclose[d] the application of the make-whole doctrine.'" [Quest Diagnostics v. Bomani, No. 11-CV-00951 (D. Conn. June 19, 2013)]

The Future of Domestic Partner Health Benefits

"[If] DOMA is repealed, ... [same-gender] couples will have the opportunity to avoid federal taxation of their benefits by marrying. That could lead employers to conclude that the special category of domestic partner coverage is no longer needed. On the other hand, employers also need to consider the impact of state law. If the Supreme Court strikes DOMA, that does not mean that state laws necessarily would change (it will depend on the rationale of the Court's decision). So if a state law prohibiting [same-gender] marriage stands, an employer that otherwise provided domestic partner coverage may keep that category of coverage in place in order to handle the case of employees living in states where only opposite-sex marriage is legal."

Final Wellness Program Regulations Issued

"The Departments reiterated that compliance with the final rules is not determinative of compliance with any other applicable Federal or State law, including the Americans with Disabilities Act. Therefore, uncertainty remains for employers designing wellness programs given that the [EEOC] still has not provided more definitive guidance on permissible incentives in the wellness program context.... The intention of the Departments is that every individual participating in a wellness program should be able to receive the full amount of any reward or incentive, regardless of any health factor."

Expected U.S. Supreme Court Decision on DOMA May Impact Status of Children of Same-Gender Spouses for Employee Benefits Purposes

"[B]ecause a child of a [same-gender] spouse is already considered to be an employee's stepchild for federal income tax purposes if the couple resides in a state that recognizes the employee as the stepparent, the employee can avoid having imputed income for federal tax purposes on the value of employer-sponsored health coverage provided to the child. If DOMA is struck down (and depending on the impact of the decision on state mini-DOMA laws), additional children of [same-gender] spouses may attain similar favorable tax status. This status may even extend to situations where a couple resides in a state that does not recognize the child as a stepchild or permit [same-gender] marriage depending on the specific definition of 'child' in the benefit plan."

Sixth Circuit: Plan Fiduciary Reasonably Relied On Benefit Calculations In Communicating To Participant

"The Sixth Circuit also agreed with the district court that the fiduciary breach claim should be dismissed because any misrepresentation made by the committee was not made negligently.... [T]he service provider performed a ministerial function for the plan by managing software to calculate benefits according to unambiguous plan terms, the committee relied on the service provider's program to provide the estimates, and the committee had no reason to doubt the service provider's competence." [Stark v. Mars Inc., No. 12-3956, 2013 WL 1908889 (6th Cir. May 9, 2013)]