My sister has worked for her Employer for the last 24 years. She is one year away from Full Benefit eligibility for Life and less than a year away from Full Pension Eligibility. Yesterday she was "laid-off" for non-disciplinary reasons due to restructuring/position elimination.

I'm not sure if the company acted with any impropriety or violated any labor laws, however I don't think it is a bad idea for her and her husband to talk to an attorney for some insight on the subject.

Does anyone here have any thoughts?

Thanks!

My sister has worked for her Employer for the last 24 years. She is one year away from Full Benefit eligibility for Life and less than a year away from Full Pension Eligibility. Yesterday she was "laid-off" for non-disciplinary reasons due to restructuring/position elimination.

I'm not sure if the company acted with any impropriety or violated any labor laws, however I don't think it is a bad idea for her and her husband to talk to an attorney for some insight on the subject.

Does anyone here have any thoughts?

Thanks!

Who else was laid off?

Several other people in her department and many others within the organization. Does that answer your question or do you need specifics?

Several other people in her department and many others within the organization. Does that answer your question or do you need specifics?

Were all of the people laid off close to retirement?

I don't think so...I'm not sure what the exact demo is of the group

I don't think so...I'm not sure what the exact demo is of the group

Sure, maybe they do illegal terminate her because of her age. However, if other people not near retirement were not laid off at the same time, then why would they have only "targeted" HER for that?

She'll have a hard time proving this, based solely on what you've provided.

What do you mean "full pension eligibility"?

It is federal law that any person eligible for a pension must be fully vested after five years if cliff vesting is used and after 7 years if ladder vesting is used.

After 24 years she should have full pension rights.

Eric

Full Pension Eligibility - Yes she is fully vested in her defined contribution plan (401(k). However she has a traditional defined benefit pension plan vs. a cash balance plan - Meaning her pension is based on age and years of service. Letting her go this year will not give her the YOS she needs to "retire" with a full pension.

Does that help? If not, I can give you specifics.

I understand perfectly.

Her pension is based on years of service. The "full pension amount" is a misnomer. The years of service number and the amount derived is purely arbitrarialy selected.

She will get the sum from mulitipling her years of service times the defined benefit for each years of service.

Perfectly normal operating procedure for a defined benefit pension plan.

The claim you are trying to bring is based on age discrimination, correct?

Age discrimination in a reduction in force situation is extremely difficult to prove. Thats about all i can say about that.

Eric