Thursday, February 19, 2004
Judge rules pension plan hurt IBM workers
The Associated Press
NEW YORK -- IBM Corp. owes back payments -- possibly worth billions of dollars -- to 140,000 older employees who were harmed when the technology giant converted to a new kind of pension plan in the 1990s, a federal judge ruled.
The plaintiffs in the case want IBM to make up for what they lost after the company adopted a ''cash balance'' pension plan, which pays workers a lump sum when they leave the company. A federal judge had ruled last July that the plan amounted to age discrimination because it unfairly penalized older employees.
IBM argued that it should not be forced to make retroactive payments because it could not have foreseen that the judge, G. Patrick Murphy of U.S. District Court in East St. Louis, Ill., would declare the cash balance plan illegal.
But in a ruling dated Feb. 12, Murphy wrote that IBM had no justification for claiming it was blindsided by his decision.
''The prohibition against age discrimination existed long before the appearance of cash balance plans,'' Murphy wrote. ''All that has changed is IBM's clever, but ineffectual, response to law that it finds too restrictive for its business model.''
Murphy has yet to decide the damages IBM should pay or how the figure will be calculated. Under one formula suggested by the plaintiffs, IBM has estimated the payments would total $6 billion.
IBM spokeswoman Kendra Collins said IBM expects to win the case on appeal.
Judge rules pension plan hurt IBM workers
The Associated Press
NEW YORK -- IBM Corp. owes back payments -- possibly worth billions of dollars -- to 140,000 older employees who were harmed when the technology giant converted to a new kind of pension plan in the 1990s, a federal judge ruled.
The plaintiffs in the case want IBM to make up for what they lost after the company adopted a ''cash balance'' pension plan, which pays workers a lump sum when they leave the company. A federal judge had ruled last July that the plan amounted to age discrimination because it unfairly penalized older employees.
IBM argued that it should not be forced to make retroactive payments because it could not have foreseen that the judge, G. Patrick Murphy of U.S. District Court in East St. Louis, Ill., would declare the cash balance plan illegal.
But in a ruling dated Feb. 12, Murphy wrote that IBM had no justification for claiming it was blindsided by his decision.
''The prohibition against age discrimination existed long before the appearance of cash balance plans,'' Murphy wrote. ''All that has changed is IBM's clever, but ineffectual, response to law that it finds too restrictive for its business model.''
Murphy has yet to decide the damages IBM should pay or how the figure will be calculated. Under one formula suggested by the plaintiffs, IBM has estimated the payments would total $6 billion.
IBM spokeswoman Kendra Collins said IBM expects to win the case on appeal.
Comment