Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-pension fund’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s ERISA action alleging that defendant improperly failed to include $2,500 quarterly payments plaintiff received for his duties on union’s Executive Board when calculating his pension benefits. Record showed that plaintiff obtained regular weekly salary as business representative of union, and terms of pension fund excluded from definition of “compensation,” “non-wage” payments even if such payments are considered income for tax purposes. Moreover, plan administrator found that plaintiff’s payments for his Executive Board duties were more akin to “stipend” that was not wage payment, and Ct. of Appeals found under standard of deference owed to plan administrator, that administrator’s interpretation of plan’s language was not arbitrary or capricious, especially where payments for plaintiff’s Executive Board duties were not included in his weekly wage payments and were given different payment code.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
ERISA