If unionized retirees are entitled to retiree health benefits, their contract cannot beat around the bush on the topic; it must be made clear. Or, at a minimum, courts cannot jump to conclusions without a broad-scale examination of the dispute.
Thats the essence of a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruling issued yesterday in M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett. The ruling flatly rejects the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuits opinion that the precedent of a 1983 6th Circuit ruling (UAW v. Yard-Man) requiring that in ambiguous situations, courts should make a presumption of lifetime vesting for health benefits.
Register or login for access to this item and much more
All Employee Benefit News content is archived after seven days.
Community members receive:
- All recent and archived articles
- Conference offers and updates
- A full menu of enewsletter options
- Web seminars, white papers, ebooks
Already have an account? Log In
Don't have an account? Register for Free Unlimited Access