ARTICLE
13 January 2016

Another Post-Tackett Ruling Denying Retiree Health Benefits

PR
Proskauer Rose LLP

Contributor

The world’s leading organizations and global players choose Proskauer to represent them when they need it the most. Our top tier team of star trial attorneys, acclaimed transactional lawyers and exceptionally talented partners and associates have earned a reputation for the relentless pursuit of perfection and a dauntless pursuit of success.
A district court in West Virginia recently held that retirees were not entitled to lifetime health benefits under the clear and unambiguous language of the relevant collective bargaining agreements.
United States Employment and HR
Proskauer Rose LLP are most popular:
  • within Energy and Natural Resources topic(s)
  • in Africa
  • with readers working within the Banking & Credit industries

A district court in West Virginia recently held that retirees were not entitled to lifetime health benefits under the clear and unambiguous language of the relevant collective bargaining agreements.  Shortly after Constellium modified retiree health benefits to provide less favorable coverage, the retirees sued, alleging that they had a vested right to the prior level of health benefits.  The court held that the retirees were not entitled to lifetime benefits in light of clear and unambiguous durational clauses in the CBAs that limited retiree health benefits to the term of the labor agreement.  Since the language was clear, the court also found that it should not consider extrinsic evidence.  The case is Barton v. Constellium Rolled Products-Ravenswood, LLC, 13-cv-03127, 2016 WL 51262 (S.D. W. Va. Jan. 4. 2016).

Another Post-Tackett Ruling Denying Retiree Health Benefits

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More