*NEWS*SHAME ON XEROX ….AGAIN !

  • clover-depot-intl-us-ca-email-signature-05-10-2017-902x1772
  • ncc-banner-902-x-177-june-2017
  • 2toner1-2
  • 4toner4
  • ces_web_banner_toner_news_902x1776
  • mse-big-banner-new-03-17-2016-416716a-tonernews-web-banner-mse-212
  • cartridgewebsite-com-big-banner-02-09-07-2016
  • banner-01-26-17b
  • 05 02 2016 429716a-cig-clearchoice-banner-902x177
  • Print
Share

*NEWS*SHAME ON XEROX ….AGAIN !

 user 2007-03-26 at 10:11:00 am Views: 76
  • #17468

    Top court rejects Xerox case
    Company stymied as earlier ruling in pension matter stands
    (March
    2007) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider a dispute
    centered on whether Xerox Corp. improperly calculated pension benefits
    for several employees who left the company and were later rehired.The
    decision lets stand a ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which
    determined that the company’s formula for calculating certain pension
    benefits violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or
    ERISA.Xerox had sought the top court’s review, contending that the 9th
    Circuit’s ruling conflicted with an earlier decision by the 2nd Circuit
    Court of Appeals in a separate case.”As a result, a nationwide pension
    plan covering 40,000 employees is lawful in one circuit and unlawful in
    another, and the lawfulness of numerous other pension plans is called
    into question,” Xerox said.The 2nd Circuit case originated in
    Rochester. A group of Xerox workers and retirees sued the company,
    claiming Xerox improperly calculated the benefits of workers who also
    left the company and later returned.The 2nd Circuit judges ruled Xerox
    had also violated ERISA and sent the case back to U.S. District Court
    Judge David Larimer. Earlier this year, Larimer ruled largely for the
    plaintiffs when he decided what formula the company should use to pay
    those affected workers.It is unclear how the Supreme Court’s decision
    in the 9th Circuit case might affect the Rochester case. A Xerox
    spokesman declined to comment, and Robert Jaffe, a New Jersey attorney
    representing the local workers, could not be reached.The three
    employees in the 9th Circuit case — Waldamar Miller, Thomas Sudduth and
    J. Denton Allen — left the company in 1983 and were later rehired.Under
    Xerox’s pension plan, the company reduced the employees’ retirement
    benefits by the amount they received in cash payments when they first
    left the company in 1983. The reduction, or “offset,” also assumed that
    the employees subsequently earned the same rate of return on their cash
    payments as the company’s pension fund received.The employees said
    Xerox’s method resulted in an “exaggerated offset” that denied them
    benefits they had accrued.