If an employer decides to deny a
Recent case: Dennis Saddler worked for the same company for 32 years. When the company was sold, Saddler was told he would simply be transferred to the acquiring company. Under its original ownership, a written severance plan allowed employees who were terminated because of a plant closing or sale to receive a severance payment.
Saddler continued working in the same building, at the same desk, doing the same thing and using the same telephone. A few months later, he quit.
Then, more than two years after he resigned (and nearly three years after he was transferred), he sued to receive a severance payment. The trial court threw out the case and he appealed.
The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals said the benefit was an ERISA-covered benefit. That meant it had to consider whether there was a potential conflict of interest when the new ownership of the company decided not to pay the benefit.
However, the court said the decision wasn’t tainted, an abuse of discretion or both. Saddler won’t receive a payment under the severance plan. (Saddler v. Elliott, No. 09-1476, 3rd Cir., 2009)
Like what you've read? ...Republish it and share great business tips!
Attention: Readers, Publishers, Editors, Bloggers, Media, Webmasters and more...
We believe great content should be read and passed around. After all, knowledge IS power. And good business can become great with the right information at their fingertips. If you'd like to share any of the insightful articles on BusinessManagementDaily.com, you may republish or syndicate it without charge.
The only thing we ask is that you keep the article exactly as it was written and formatted. You also need to include an attribution statement and link to the article.
" This information is proudly provided by Business Management Daily.com: http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/11036/court-must-weigh-potential-conflict-of-interest-when-employer-decides-not-to-pay-benefits "