Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
National Litigation Hotline
IBM's Cash Balance Plan Did Not Discriminate Against Older Workers
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that IBM's cash balance plan did not discriminate against older workers in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), as amended, where the terms of the plan were age-neutral. Cooper v. IBM Personal Pension Plan, No. 05-3588, 7th Cir. 2006.) In so ruling, a three-judge panel for the Seventh Circuit reversed a 2003 decision of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois finding that IBM's cash balance plan violated ' 204 of ERISA, which prohibits reduction of an employee's benefit accrual rate based on age.
In 1999, IBM converted its traditional defined benefit pension plan into a cash balance plan, pursuant to which participants would receive 'credits' equal to 5% of the employees' gross income and to a pre-determined interest rate. Under the cash balance plan, when a participant's employment with IBM came to an end, the participant could withdraw his or her account balance as a lump sum, convert the account balance to an immediate life annuity, or defer the receipt of a lump-sum payment or life annuity until a later date. Three plan participants brought a lawsuit against IBM alleging, among other things, that the cash balance plan violated ERISA by discriminating against older workers.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?