Many employers choose to provide a variety of employee benefits, or non-wage compensations, to their workers in addition to paying monetary compensation. Benefits can include group health, dental, or life insurance, retirement benefits, daycare, tuition reimbursement, sick leave, vacation (paid and non-paid), social security, profit sharing, funding of education, and other specialized benefits. With proper legal advice, employees can take full advantage of their employers’ benefits plans and ensure that those plans are being properly administered. The three plans our firm most often advises clients about are ERISA, the FMLA, and COBRA. Contact us today with your questions.
What is ERISA?
ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, is a federal law that guarantees certain categories of employees a pension after some period at their employer; sets minimum standards for pension plans by guaranteeing that pension rights cannot be unjustly denied to workers or taken from them; and requires that employers provide full and clear information about employees’ pension rights, including the way pension benefits accumulate, how the company invests pension funds, and when and how pension benefits can be collected.
To discuss your case with a knowledgeable lawyer, please call 612-294-2600.
ERISA further attempts to standardize pension plans and medical, surgical, sickness, disability, and death benefits plans and to ensure that the plans are financially sound and equitable. Both individual employees and groups of employees can challenge the employer’s failure to equitably and profitably administer an ERISA-governed plan.
Call 612-294-2600 to discuss your case with a knowledgeable lawyer.
The Client: 75,000 401(k) Participants.
Approach: Larry Schaefer participated in the prosecution of this novel ERISA class action, challenging management of 401(k) funds on behalf of more than 75,000 participants.
Solution: Class action status was approved and the case was settled for $26 million. Plaintiffs also obtained the appointment of an independent advisor to assist in fund management, comprehensive reporting obligations and introduction of new funds, and extensive reporting obligations.
The Client: 500+Pension Plan Participants Representing Terminated Executives.
Approach: Larry Schaefer participated as one of the lead counsel in an ERISA challenge to the failure to honor promises made following a company purchase in funding a pension plan, including taking the deposition of the CEO.
Solution: The case settled for substantial monetary and injunctive relief.
The Client: 33 year-old nurse and mother of five
Problem: State denied unemployment benefits after resigning from physically violent workplace
Approach: Appealed denial of unemployment benefits
Solution: Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed state’s denial; client received full unemployment benefits
What is the Family & Medical Leave Act (FMLA)?
FMLA, the Family & Medical Leave Act of 1993, is a federal law that entitles “eligible” employees to take off up to 12 weeks of unpaid sick leave in any 12 month period for the birth or adoption of a child, to care for a family member, or if the employee herself has a serious health condition, without losing their jobs or benefits. An “eligible” employee is an employee who has been employed by the employer for a least 12 months and worked at least 1,250 hours. The 12 months do not need to be consecutive. You are only an “eligible” employee if your employer employs 50 or more employees within 75 miles of the worksite. If the company is a public agency, it is subject to provide FMLA regardless of the number of employees employed. If an employee qualifies and has unused FMLA leave time, the employer cannot deny FMLA leave.
When you return to work from family or medical leave, under the FMLA your employer is required to re-employ you in your original job or an equivalent. Although an employer cannot legally retaliate against an employee because the employee legitimately takes family or medical leave under the FMLA, the employer could be entitled to discharge the employee while on FMLA leave if the reason is not retaliatory under the FMLA and not wrongful termination in any other way. Minnesota has enacted its own version of the FMLA which is more generous in many respects than the Federal version. Employees are entitled to apply whichever version of FMLA is most generous to their situation.
What are COBRA Benefits?
COBRA stands for the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, a 1986 federal law. Minnesota has a version of COBRA called the Continuation law. Both laws require most employers to offer employees continuation of some health insurance benefits for a period of time after they leave employment. COBRA generally covers group benefit plans maintained by employers with 20 or more employees. If an employer has less than 20 employees, they are required to offer continuation of coverage under Minnesota law. In many cases, Minnesota law provides more coverage to the individual than does COBRA. In these instances, the employer must follow Minnesota Continuation law requirements. In some areas, however, Minnesota Continuation laws are silent where COBRA provides regulation.
If you’re covered by an employer-provided group health insurance plan, your employee rights might entitle you to COBRA or Continuation extended health insurance benefits if you quit or get laid off or fired from your job. Because the laws in this area can be complex, it is important to get good legal advice about which options are available. Our experienced attorneys can advise you about applicable laws to make sure that you can take full advantage of health insurance options available to you after you leave employment.
What Our Clients Say
Larry Schaefer represented me in years of discrimination litigation against my former employer, culminating in a jury trial in which we won on every issue and I was awarded full damages (including punitive damages). This would not have been possible without his exceptional advocacy and trial skills, as we were opposed by one of the largest employers and the largest law firm in the Upper Midwest. I'm proud to call Larry my friend as well as my trusted legal advisor.
Never once did I ever feel like I was all alone in my case or predicament. My lawyer and staff made me feel like I was fully supported and that the firm and staff was fully supportive of me. They were very honest and up front with me at all times, along with a very positive outlook on all the options available to me. Everyone was very helpful and showed concern. They would listen and in some cases would dig deeper into the conversation or communication to further understand just exactly wh...
As a single mom of three kids when I found myself in a position of being discriminated against, I panicked in my ability to take on a large corporation or be unfairly pushed out of my employment and still provide for my children. Larry calmed me down and worked through options that allowed me to stand up for my rights without losing my ability to support my children. This allowed me to not only take a stand but show my children how to be strong and always do the right thing no matter how d...
Lisa has been a great leader and mentor and I am sure she will continue doing great things. I personally think she is so well suited to handling people and representing their cases in the delicate balance of advocate, attorney, and friend that only she can do. I will always be proud to call her a friend.
Larry Scaefer and Peter Christian know employment law. I would not hesitate to refer or recommend them. Schaefer Halleen was an aggressive and zealous advocate for my co-plaintiff’s and my case. Both Peter Christian and Larry Schaefer were determined and aggressive to the correct wrongs that had been done plus protect my reputation.
After winning summary judgment, a fourth mediation followed and a favorable outcome advanced with an agreeable settlement. Throughout my case, Schaefer...
By Lawrence P. Schaefer | On Tuesday, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a split (2-1) decision in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. North Memorial Health Care, No. 17-2926 (8th Cir. Nov...
By Lawrence P. Schaefer | Workplace sexual harassment claims are usually prosecuted as “civil” claims, generally under applicable federal (Title VII) or state (MHRA) laws in Minnesota. The broad r...
By Lawrence P. Schaefer | Discrimination in the workplace occurs when an employee, or job applicant, is treated differently and suffers adverse action because of his or her “protected class status.&...
By Lawrence P. Schaefer | Few areas of employment law are as important or as misunderstood as the legal protections for individuals who have been subject to sexual harassment. Specific and detailed le...