Are some of your benefits—such as bonuses or other merit payments at retirement or departure—contingent on complying with a covenant-not-to-complete? Chances are theadministrator—not a federal court—will be interpreting the terms.
Recent case: George worked in pharmaceutical research. Sometime during his employment, he signed onto a benefit plan that made payments at departure contingent on not working for a competitor.
George retired and went to work for another pharmaceutical company. He requested payments under the plan. When his former employer discovered George was working for what it considered a competitor, it denied his request.
He went to federal court, arguing that his new employer wasn’t a competitor under the benefit plan’s definition. The court deferred to the plan administrator and dismissed George’s case. (Wall v. Alcon, No. 13-10117, 5th Cir., 2014)
- How to Fire an Employee the Legal Way: 6 Termination Guidelines
- Health care reform: California weighs in on essential health benefits
- Strategies for sidestepping the higher rate for PSCs
- Florida high court sides with employees—Employers liable for unconcealed negligence
- Feds kick in $205 million for N.C. unemployment comp