Ruling on Visteon retiree benefits overturned

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Auto parts supplier Visteon Corp. cannot terminate its retirees' health and life insurance benefits without following certain procedures under bankruptcy law, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

In overturning two lower court decisions, a three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia unanimously agreed with attorneys representing some 2,100 retirees from two Visteon manufacturing plants in Indiana that the company could not unilaterally terminate their benefits.

The court ordered that the benefits, which were terminated May 1, be reinstated immediately, and that any further attempts to modify them be subject to negotiations with the Industrial Division of the Communications Workers of America, or IUE-CWA, the union representing the retirees, said Tom Kennedy, an attorney who argued the appeal on behalf of the retirees.

"The retirees of Visteon were, we think, deprived of fundamental protections and rights that Congress intended them to have, and now they're going to get them," Kennedy said.

The appeals court agreed that Congress, through the bankruptcy code, intended to restrict a debtor's ability to modify or terminate retiree benefits during a Chapter 11 case, regardless of whether it could unilaterally terminate those benefits outside of bankruptcy.

Other courts have interpreted the bankruptcy code as saying creditors can't be given greater rights in a bankruptcy case than they had outside bankruptcy, but the appeals court cited the "unique nature" of retiree benefits in a bankruptcy proceeding.

The decision comes four months after a Delaware bankruptcy judge refused to halt implementation of his order allowing Visteon to terminate the benefits of hourly workers who retired from Visteon's now-shuttered plants in Connersville and Bedford.

In a prepared statement, Visteon spokesman Jim Fisher said the company, based in Van Buren Township, Mich., was disappointed by the ruling.

"We are assessing this ruling and will determine an appropriate course of action. Once we do, we will communicate with affected retirees as quickly as possible," the statement read.

IUE-CWA President Jim Clark said in a statement that the union will continue to press Visteon for a fair settlement that protects the retirees and rewards them for their decades of service to the company.

Kennedy, the lawyer for the retirees, said that under the bankruptcy code, Visteon must engage in fair negotiations with retirees before it eliminates their benefits, and that if no agreement is reached, the bankruptcy court must determine that any change is fair and equitable to all parties. Visteon also most show that any change in benefits is needed for the company to successfully emerge from Chapter 11 protection.

"Given the present state of Visteon, it's very difficult for them to establish that they need to terminate retirees' benefits for them to successfully reorganize," Kennedy said. "We think the company is doing better and can well afford these benefits, which in our view they have promised people for decades."

Visteon, a top supplier to and a former subsidiary of Ford Motor Co., argued at a hearing last year that the retiree benefits were one of its largest liabilities and posed a significant obstacle to a successful reorganization. The company claimed that the retiree health and life insurance subsidies constituted a liability of about $310 million.

After revisiting the issue at a hearing in March, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Sontchi stood by his earlier determination that the retirees did not have vested rights in the benefits and that Visteon could terminate them unilaterally. A somber Sontchi acknowledged the impact on retirees of his decision, which was later upheld by a federal district judge in Delaware, but said delaying implementation of his order while the retirees filed an appeal would simply be "further delay of the inevitable."

A Visteon attorney also said at the March hearing that an appeal was bound to fail.

But the appeals court rejected Visteon's argument that the provisions of the bankruptcy code upon which the retirees were relying amounted to a "hammer" being used against it.

"It is much more accurately characterized as a 'microphone,' intended to elevate the voices of those who would otherwise not be heard above the din of more powerful creditors carving up the pie of the bankruptcy estate," wrote Chief Judge Theodore McKee.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The east side does have potential...and I have always thought Washington Scare should become an outlet mall. Anyone remember how popular Eastgate was? Well, Indy has no outlet malls, we have to go to Edinburgh for the deep discounts and I don't understand why. Jim is right. We need a few good eastsiders interested in actually making some noise and trying to change the commerce, culture and stereotypes of the East side. Irvington is very progressive and making great strides, why can't the far east side ride on their coat tails to make some changes?

  2. Boston.com has an article from 2010 where they talk about how Interactions moved to Massachusetts in the year prior. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/innoeco/2010/07/interactions_banks_63_million.html The article includes a link back to that Inside Indiana Business press release I linked to earlier, snarkily noting, "Guess this 2006 plan to create 200-plus new jobs in Indiana didn't exactly work out."

  3. I live on the east side and I have read all your comments. a local paper just did an article on Washington square mall with just as many comments and concerns. I am not sure if they are still around, but there was an east side coalition with good intentions to do good things on the east side. And there is a facebook post that called my eastside indy with many old members of the eastside who voice concerns about the east side of the city. We need to come together and not just complain and moan, but come up with actual concrete solutions, because what Dal said is very very true- the eastside could be a goldmine in the right hands. But if anyone is going damn, and change things, it is us eastside residents

  4. Please go back re-read your economics text book and the fine print on the February 2014 CBO report. A minimum wage increase has never resulted in a net job loss...

  5. The GOP at the Statehouse is more interested in PR to keep their majority, than using it to get anything good actually done. The State continues its downward spiral.