IBJNews

Visteon judge won't halt benefits termination

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Delaware bankruptcy judge on Tuesday refused to halt implementation of his order allowing auto parts supplier Visteon Corp. to terminate its retirees' health and life insurance benefits.

An attorney for a union representing some 2,100 people who worked at two Visteon plants in Indiana argued Tuesday that many are facing hardship, and that the order should be stayed pending an appeal to a federal district court judge.

"Literally, lives are in danger," said Susan Jennick, a lawyer representing retirees who worked at Visteon's shuttered plants in Connersville and Bedford.

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.

According to court records, benefits for retirees of the two Indiana plants alone cost the company more than $1 million a month.

But Vicki Jo Lady, a maintenance worker employed by Visteon for 33 years, said she and her husband both suffer from chronic illnesses and had to cut back on medication as they faced the loss of their employer-sponsored coverage. Lady, 58, began sobbing as she described the choice of paying for COBRA coverage and making house payments and buying groceries.

"They don't look at me as a person, they look at me as a piece of paper," she told Judge Christopher Sontchi before offering a tearful plea to Visteon officials.

"You're messing with people's lives here," she said. "... You're intelligent people; quit taking from people out of greed."

While acknowledging the decision to terminate benefits will cause hardship for some, Visteon attorney Steve McCormick said the appeal is bound to fail, and that further delays will only cause confusion for retirees exploring other health plans in advance of the April 1 benefits termination.

After a three-hour hearing, which included testimony from Connersville mayor Leonard Urban, Sontchi stood by his earlier ruling, in which he determined that the retirees did not have vested rights in the benefits and that Visteon had the ability to terminate them unilaterally.

"Needless to say, this is an extremely serious issue, the court is well cognizant of that," said a somber Sontchi. He agreed with Visteon that the retirees had not met the standards for him to halt implementation of his ruling, including the likelihood that their appeal would be successful.

"It would be further delay of the inevitable," said Sontchi, who also acknowledged the hardship some retirees will face.

In other developments, Visteon submitted a revised reorganization plan that provides more recovery for unsecured creditors than its original plan did.

Visteon attorney Marc Kieselstein said the company is receptive to bondholders who want to propose an alternative plan that would pay off the term loan lenders and leave the bondholders in control of the company, but that the bondholders have yet to submit a definitive proposal.

"We're waiting for a specific plan," he said.

Attorneys for the bondholders and other unsecured creditors accused the company of filing an amended plan in an effort to gain an advantage over the bondholders group, which says it needs time to complete its due diligence.

A hearing on the company's revised plan is set for April 13.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • what a crime
    How did the UAW let this happen, where were the big buck Union lawyers??? Visteon closed the North penn plant and is now building those parts elsewhere in Pa. after the UAW tricked them into another contract to close the plant. Sounds like the UAW was in on this miscarriage of justice from the beginning. What are they getting from it all to sell their retirees down the river. Let it be a lesson to all the UAW members out there..You can't trust your Union...Vote em all out and go with another Union thats smart enough to protect what you worked 30 years to get..Someone should hang by their balls for this

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. We gotta stop this Senior crime. Perhaps long jail terms for these old boozers is in order. There are times these days (more rather than less) when this state makes me sick.

  2. One option is to redistribute the payroll tax already collected by the State. A greater share could be allocated to the county of the workplace location as opposed to the county of residency. Not a new tax, just re-allocate what is currently collected.

  3. Have to agree with Mal Burgess. The biggest problem is massive family breakdown in these neighborhoods. While there are a lot of similiarities, there is a MASSIVE difference between 46218 and 46219. 46219 is diluted by some stable areas, and that's probably where the officers live. Incentivizing is fine, but don't criticize officers for choosing not to live in these neighbor hoods. They have to have a break from what is arguably one of the highest stress job in the land. And you'll have to give me hard evidence that putting officers there is going to make a significant difference. Solid family units, responsible fathers, siblings with the same fathers, engaged parents, commitment to education, respect for the rule of law and the importance of work/a job. If the families and the schools (and society) will support these, THEN we can make a difference.

  4. @Agreed, when you dine in Marion County, the taxes paid on that meal go to state coffers (in the form of the normal sales taxes) and to the sports/entertainment venues operated by the CIB. The sales taxes on your clothing and supplies just go to the state. The ONLY way those purchases help out Indianapolis is through the payroll taxes paid by the (generally low-wage) hourly workers serving you.

  5. The government leaders of Carmel wouldn't last a week trying to manage Indianapolis. There's a major difference between running a suburb with virtually no one below the poverty level and running a city in which 21+% are below the poverty level. (http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/interactive/#view=StateAndCounty&utilBtn=&yLB=0&stLB=15&cLB=49&dLB=0&gLB=0&usSts_cbSelected=false&usTot_cbSelected=true&stateTot_cbSelected=true&pLB=0?ltiYearSelected=false?ltiYearAlertFlag=false?StateFlag=false?validSDYearsFlag=false)

ADVERTISEMENT