English Only Notices May Not Be Enough To Comply With ERISA

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
08/15/2014
A federal court in Maryland has partially dismissed a complaint filed on behalf of nearly 40 Spanish-speaking current and former employees of Hatfield’s Equipment & Dedication Services Inc.  (“Hatfield’s”).  The plaintiffs, who worked as part of a concrete crew, alleged that Hatfield’s did not comply with the reporting and disclosure requirements for the company’s profit sharing plan, because plan documents and benefit statements...
read more

Supreme Court Upholds ERISA Contractual Statute Of Limitations Period

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
12/20/2013
When litigants brings claims for benefits allegedly due them under ERISA,  a participant usually must exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit to enforce his or her rights under the plan.  While this requirement is codified by federal statute, cf. 29 USC § 1132(a)(1)(B), the time a plan participant has to file a claim in court is not set by statute.  The Supreme Court recently addressed whether an ERISA plan may provide in the plan...
read more

Treasury Department Issues Proposed ACA Reporting Rules

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
09/06/2013
On September 5, 2013, the Treasury Department, in conjunction with the Internal Revenue Service, issued proposed rules concerning the reporting requirements for insurers and select employers mandated by the Affordable Care Act (ACA).  Interested parties and the public can submit comments on the proposed regulations through early November.  Once the rules have been finalized, voluntary compliance is encouraged through 2014 (during which time...
read more

Fourth Circuit Upholds The Affordable Care Act Employer Mandate

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
07/17/2013
On July 11, 2013, the Fourth Circuit dismissed a constitutional challenge to the employer mandate established by the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”)), holding that it was a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Cause.  Liberty University Inc. v. Lew, No. 10-2347 (4th Cir. July 11, 2013).  The ACA’s employer mandate requires employers with 50 or more employees to provide health care coverage to their employees and dependents, or...
read more

Adminstration Delays Effective Date of ACA Penalties to 2015

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
07/03/2013
On July 2, 2013, the United States Department of Treasury announced in a blog post that the Obama administration will delay key provisions of the Affordable Care Act.  The postponement will delay the employer shared responsibility payment requirements under Code Section 4980H until 2015. The result of this delay is that employers of 50 or more full-time equivalent employees (those working 30 or more hours per week) have another year before they will...
read more

Paid Sick Leave for Maryland’s Private Sector Employees Could Be Proposed in 2013

Now that flu season is upon us, employers can expect the usual uptick in employees calling out sick.  And in Maryland, while most larger employers offer paid  sick leave, many small businesses do not.  According to the Institute of Women’s Policy Research, forty percent of Maryland’s private sector workers, or nearly 820,000 employees, do not receive time off with pay for being sick. However, Maryland might soon require all employers to offer...
read more

Court Rules Baltimore County Pension Plan Discriminates Based on Age

A federal district court has ruled that Baltimore County violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) when it required older employees to contribute more to their pension than younger employees.  EEOC v. Baltimore County, D. Md. No. 07-2500 (10/17/12). The decision, which will most likely be appealed by the County, is the latest ruling in a multi-year lawsuit which has already been before the United States Court of Appeals for the...
read more

ERISA’s Anti-Retaliation Clause Protects Unsolicited, Informal Internal Complaints

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
09/07/2012
Section 510 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) protects employees from being fired, and other adverse employment actions, because the employee has complained about benefit issues.  The courts interpreting this retaliation protection have differed, however, on what is considered a protected complaint.  The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in George v. Junior Achievement of Central Indiana, Inc., No. 11-3291 (7th Cir. Sept. 4,...
read more

“Unemployed” is the New Protected Status, at Least in D.C.

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
07/06/2012
The District of Columbia has enacted novel legislation, protecting unemployed individuals from discrimination in the hiring process. The new law prohibits employers and employment agencies from discriminating against potential employees based on their “unemployed” status. This law is the first of its kind to both prohibit employers from considering the employment status of potential employees and provide whistleblower protections for current...
read more

The Supreme Court Upholds “Obamacare”

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
06/29/2012
By Eric Paltell On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court upheld “Obamacare” (officially known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010). National Federation of Independent Business et al. v. Sebelius, No. 11-393 (June 28, 2012). In a 5 to 4 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the law is constitutional as an exercise of Congress’ power to tax, notwithstanding the fact that it was an impermissible exercise of...
read more
Email Updates

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Loading