The lower court ruling in Drutis v. Quebecor World (USA) Inc. held thatany difference in benefits that employees of different ages received under the cash balance plan was “merely the result of the time value of money.” (See 6th Circuit Latest to Reject Cash Balance Age Discrimination Claims )
Four former employees of Rand McNally & Co. claimed a cash balance pension plan sponsored by a firm that acquired Rand McNally violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act’s (ERISA) anti-discrimination provision.
The Supreme Court also refused in 2007 to review a similar ruling by the 7 th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals involving IBM Corp.’s cash balance plan (See US Supreme Court Turns Away IBM Cash Balance Appeal ).
The federal appellate courts for the 2 nd , 3 rd , 6 th , 7 th and 9 th Circuits have rejected cash balance plan challenges.
« DC Providers in UK Differ in Default Offerings