Boos v. AT&T, INC.
643 F.3d 127
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- Plaintiffs sue AT&T, BellSouth, and BellSouth Concession Plan under ERISA alleging Concession is a pension plan and violates funding, vesting, and disclosure requirements.
- Concession provides discounts on local telephone services; OOR retirees receive reimbursement for qualified services, while in-region retirees receive no-additional-cost benefits.
- BellSouth extended Concession to OOR beneficiaries by reimbursing their local service costs; administration of OOR benefits began outsourcing in 1997.
- Pre-merger BellSouth policy continued after the 2006 AT&T merger; Concession terms have remained largely unchanged since 1985, with post-1996 ineligibility for new hires after April 1, 1996.
- District court granted summary judgment to Defendants, holding Concession is not a pension plan; Plaintiffs appealed.
- Court analyzes whether Concession is a single ERISA plan, whether it provides retirement income, and whether it results from deferral of income.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Concession a single ERISA pension plan? | Boos: Concession is a single plan for all retirees. | AT&T/BellSouth: Concession is a single plan or multiple plans depending on administration; evidence supports single plan. | Concession is a single plan as to all retirees. |
| If not separate, does OOR Retiree Concession qualify as a separate plan within Concession? | Boos: OOR Concession is separately administered and thus a separate plan. | Defendants: No genuine separate-plan issue; administration does not create multiple ERISA plans. | No genuine issue that Concession is a single plan for all retirees. |
| Does Concession provide retirement income to its beneficiaries? | Boos: Concession provides retirement income; thus a pension plan to the extent it pays retirement income. | Concession's primary purpose is discounted service; income is incidental for some retirees, not the plan's thrust. | Concession does not provide retirement income as its primary thrust. |
| Does Concession result in a deferral of income? | Boos: Some beneficiaries defer income by receiving benefits later via Concession. | No fixed or deferred entitlement; OOR reimbursements are contingent on expenses and not deferred income. | Concession does not result from deferral of income. |
Key Cases Cited
- Musmeci v. Schwegmann Giant Super Markets, Inc., 332 F.3d 339 (5th Cir. 2003) (ERISA plan vs welfare distinction; 'income' linkage to pension plans)
- Murphy v. Inexco Oil Co., 611 F.2d 570 (5th Cir. 1980) (benefits unlikely to be pension plan if primary thrust is active-year rewards)
- Loren v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich., 505 F.3d 598 (6th Cir. 2007) (single vs multiple plans; plan documents and administration exam)
- Chiles v. Ceridian Corp., 95 F.3d 1505 (10th Cir. 1996) (whether employer intended to create separate plans; plan documents evidence)
- House v. American United Life Ins. Co., 499 F.3d 443 (5th Cir. 2007) (single policy vs multiple; ongoing administrative scheme relevance)