Skip to main content

Theron M. McClain v. Retail Food Employers Joint Pension Plan and Board of Trustees of Retail Food Employers Joint Pension Plan

7th CircuitJune 27, 2005No. 04-3360Cited 39 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Manion, Rovner, Sykes
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the Retail Food Employers Joint Pension Plan, holding that ERISA § 203(b)(1)(F) permits the Plan to disregard McClain's pre-ERISA service due to a break in service, and that § 204 must be read consistently with § 203.

What This Ruling Means

**What the Case Was About** Theron McClain worked for employers covered by the Retail Food Employers Joint Pension Plan. He had worked for these employers before 1974, when federal pension law (ERISA) took effect. After ERISA began, McClain returned to work but had a gap in his employment. When he applied for pension benefits, the plan refused to count his pre-1974 work years toward his pension, citing the break in his service record. **The Court's Decision** The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the pension plan. The court ruled that federal pension law allows retirement plans to ignore work years that happened before 1974 if the employee had a significant break in service afterward. The judges found that the plan was legally allowed to exclude McClain's earlier work years from his pension calculation. **What This Means for Workers** This ruling is important for workers with long career histories that include breaks in employment. If you worked for a company before 1974 and then had a gap in service, your pension plan may legally exclude those early years from your benefits calculation. Workers should carefully review their pension statements and understand how breaks in service might affect their retirement benefits, especially if their careers span multiple decades.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.