Published on:
Authors: D. Mark Wilson
Topics:
For the second time in three years, the U.S. Supreme Court instructed lower courts to use ordinary principles of contract interpretation when evaluating whether a “general duration” clause in a bargaining agreement provides for vested health benefits, rather than presuming that those benefits are to be continued. General duration clauses establish when and whether a contract’s provisions survive the expiration of the contract. In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that the operative collective bargaining agreement contained a general duration clause that applied to all terms and conditions of employment and contained no provision stating health care benefits were subject to a different duration. Therefore, the Court held, the parties did not agree to lifetime health benefits.
MORE NEWS STORIES
Maximizing Employer Influence for Next-Level Employee Benefits
March 22, 2024 | News
House Seeks Feedback from Employers on ERISA and Health Care System
January 26, 2024 | News
HR Policy Urges Senate to Pass Telehealth Bill
October 20, 2023 | News