A Society Without a Name v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 655 F.3d 342 (2011)

Citation: A Society Without a Name v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 655 F.3d 342 (2011)
Parent Document: A Society Without a Name v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 655 F.3d 342 (2011)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2011-08-24
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/612506/a-society-without-a-name-v-commo... ↗

Full Text

767 chars

Our holding in Stiltner v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 74 F.3d
1473, 1484 (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc), that revocation of gratu-
itous benefits fails to qualify as an adverse action for purposes
of ERISA’s retaliation provision, does not counsel a different
result. In Stiltner, we explained that Congress modeled
ERISA’s retaliation provision on parallel language in the
National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), and so we looked to
the NLRA to determine the meaning of that language. Id. at
1482-84. It was this NLRA-focused inquiry that led us to con-
clude that revoking gratuitous benefits does not constitute
adverse action for purposes of ERISA. Id. But that holding,
which we based on the labor-specific statutory context that
confronted us, provides little guidance here.

Other Sections in This Document (158)

Full Text