Bill Virgin for the Seattle Times writes this important op-ed: “Boomers, Gen-Xers headed for showdown.”
The Future for Baby Boomers?
Bill Virgin for the Seattle Times writes this important op-ed: "Boomers, Gen-Xers headed for showdown."…
Month: October 2003
The PBGC Must Pay Plant Closing Benefits, Court Orders
A federal district court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, ruled that about 2,500 former employees of the defunct Republic Technologies International are eligible for $96 million in plant shut-down benefits from the PBGC. You can access the…
A federal district court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, ruled that about 2,500 former employees of the defunct Republic Technologies International are eligible for $96 million in plant shut-down benefits from the PBGC. You can access the case of Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. Republic Technologies International, LLC, et al. here. Articles on the case:
- Associated Press via the New York Times: “Steelworkers Win Plant Closing Benefits”
- the Philadelphia Inquirer: “Court rules in favor of ex-workers.“
The PBGC said yesterday that it would appeal the decision. The agency had argued it was not obligated to pay up to $2,000 in monthly shutdown payments for workers who lost their Republic Technologies jobs but were too young for regular pensions because it had terminated the company’s underfunded pension plans two months earlier. The article quotes Steven A. Kandarian, the agency’s executive director, as stating: “By forcing the [agency] to pay nearly $100 million in unfunded severance benefits, this ruling will further weaken a pension insurance system that is already billions of dollars in the red.”
The PBGC Must Pay Plant Closing Benefits, Court Orders
A federal district court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, ruled that about 2,500 former employees of the defunct Republic Technologies International are eligible for $96 million in plant shut-down benefits from the PBGC. You can access the…
A federal district court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, ruled that about 2,500 former employees of the defunct Republic Technologies International are eligible for $96 million in plant shut-down benefits from the PBGC. You can access the case of Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. Republic Technologies International, LLC, et al. here. Articles on the case:
- Associated Press via the New York Times: “Steelworkers Win Plant Closing Benefits”
- the Philadelphia Inquirer: “Court rules in favor of ex-workers.“
The PBGC said yesterday that it would appeal the decision. The agency had argued it was not obligated to pay up to $2,000 in monthly shutdown payments for workers who lost their Republic Technologies jobs but were too young for regular pensions because it had terminated the company’s underfunded pension plans two months earlier. The article quotes Steven A. Kandarian, the agency’s executive director, as stating: “By forcing the [agency] to pay nearly $100 million in unfunded severance benefits, this ruling will further weaken a pension insurance system that is already billions of dollars in the red.”
More on California’s Health Insurance Act . . .
This LA Times article published by the Foundation for Taxpayers & Consumer Rights indicates California Governor Davis will probably sign SB 2, the Health Insurance Act of 2003: “Governor Expected to Sign Health Bill; Measure would require more employers to provide insurance.”
Opinion Issued in Enron ERISA Litigation
This just in from the Wall Street Journal: "Ruling Lets Enron Workers Sue Lay, Northern Trust Over Lost Savings." (Subscription required.) More articles: "Banks Cut From Suit by Enron Pensions": the New York Times "Deepest pockets out of case: Some…
This just in from the Wall Street Journal: “Ruling Lets Enron Workers Sue Lay, Northern Trust Over Lost Savings.” (Subscription required.) More articles:
- “Banks Cut From Suit by Enron Pensions“: the New York Times
- “Deepest pockets out of case: Some banks freed from Enron suit“: the HoustonChronicle.com
- “Judge: Enron pension suit can go forward“: the Seattle Post-Intelligencer
- “Enron class-action suit may proceed: Judge says lawsuit over squandered pensions to go forward“: MSNBC News
- “Judge: Enron Workers Can Sue Lay: Says ex-CEO can be held liable for pension losses“: Newsday.com
You can read more about the Enron litigation at this link from ERISAblog. (For those who do not know, ERISAblog is a companion blog to Benefitsblog which is limited to posts regarding ERISA.) Also there are links over on the right under “401(k) Litigation Links” which contain additional information regarding the case.
UPDATE: Link to the federal district court for the Southern District of Texas Notable Cases page which contains the link to the Memorandum and Order re: Tittle Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss in the case of Tittle, et al v. Enron Corporation, et al, Civil No. 4:01-CV-3913 is here. It is a 331-page document which the court’s website says may take 11 minutes to download. Link to the actual Memorandum and Order is here.
Much more on this later . . .
Opinion Issued in Enron ERISA Litigation
This just in from the Wall Street Journal: "Ruling Lets Enron Workers Sue Lay, Northern Trust Over Lost Savings." (Subscription required.) More articles: "Banks Cut From Suit by Enron Pensions": the New York Times "Deepest pockets out of case: Some…
This just in from the Wall Street Journal: “Ruling Lets Enron Workers Sue Lay, Northern Trust Over Lost Savings.” (Subscription required.) More articles:
- “Banks Cut From Suit by Enron Pensions“: the New York Times
- “Deepest pockets out of case: Some banks freed from Enron suit“: the HoustonChronicle.com
- “Judge: Enron pension suit can go forward“: the Seattle Post-Intelligencer
- “Enron class-action suit may proceed: Judge says lawsuit over squandered pensions to go forward“: MSNBC News
- “Judge: Enron Workers Can Sue Lay: Says ex-CEO can be held liable for pension losses“: Newsday.com
You can read more about the Enron litigation at this link. Also there are links over on the right under “401(k) Litigation Links” which contain additional information regarding the case.
UPDATE: Link to the federal district court for the Southern District of Texas Notable Cases page which contains the link to the Memorandum and Order re: Tittle Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss in the case of Tittle, et al v. Enron Corporation, et al, Civil No. 4:01-CV-3913 is here. It is a 331-page document which the court’s website says may take 11 minutes to download. Link to the actual Memorandum and Order is here.
Much more on this later . . .
Implications of Mutual Fund Scrutiny for ERISA Fiduciaries
The following articles imply that ERISA fiduciaries of retirement plans may find it necessary to replace some of the mutual funds implicated in the current mutual fund scrutiny in order to avoid the possibility of violating fiduciary obligations under ERISA:…
The following articles imply that ERISA fiduciaries of retirement plans may find it necessary to replace some of the mutual funds implicated in the current mutual fund scrutiny in order to avoid the possibility of violating fiduciary obligations under ERISA:
Implications of Mutual Fund Scrutiny for ERISA Fiduciaries
The following articles imply that ERISA fiduciaries of retirement plans may find it necessary to replace some of the mutual funds implicated in the current mutual fund scrutiny in order to avoid the possibility of violating fiduciary obligations under ERISA:…
The following articles imply that ERISA fiduciaries of retirement plans may find it necessary to replace some of the mutual funds implicated in the current mutual fund scrutiny in order to avoid the possibility of violating fiduciary obligations under ERISA:
Deloitte & Touche Discusses SB 2
Deloitte & Touche has posted a great article via Benefitslink regarding the Health Insurance Act of 2003 (SB 2) passed by the California legislature: "California Legislature Approves Bill Mandating Employer-Provided Health Coverage." The bill has not yet been signed by…
Deloitte & Touche has posted a great article via Benefitslink regarding the Health Insurance Act of 2003 (SB 2) passed by the California legislature: “California Legislature Approves Bill Mandating Employer-Provided Health Coverage.” The bill has not yet been signed by Governor Davis. Interestingly enough, the article makes the point discussed here before, that the bill faces legal challenge under ERISA and that the issue will be decided by the “unpredictable Ninth Circuit.” The article also discusses the fact that the bill may face a legal challenge under the California state constitution that the bill in fact imposes a “fee” or tax on employers. Under the California constitution, a new tax must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the California Assembly and Senate – a level of support SB 2 did not achieve.
Deloitte & Touche Discusses SB 2
Deloitte & Touche has posted a great article via Benefitslink regarding the Health Insurance Act of 2003 (SB 2) passed by the California legislature: "California Legislature Approves Bill Mandating Employer-Provided Health Coverage." The bill has not yet been signed by…
Deloitte & Touche has posted a great article via Benefitslink regarding the Health Insurance Act of 2003 (SB 2) passed by the California legislature: “California Legislature Approves Bill Mandating Employer-Provided Health Coverage.” The bill has not yet been signed by Governor Davis. Interestingly enough, the article makes the point discussed here before, that the bill faces legal challenge under ERISA and that the issue will be decided by the “unpredictable Ninth Circuit.” The article also discusses the fact that the bill may face a legal challenge under the California state constitution that the bill in fact imposes a “fee” or tax on employers. Under the California constitution, a new tax must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the California Assembly and Senate – a level of support SB 2 did not achieve.