thedailytimes.com : Your 24/7 news source

KNOXVILLE — A lawsuit against ALCOA Inc. filed by nearly 5,000 retirees because of changes to their retirement benefits was heard by Judge Thomas Phillips Wednesday morning in federal court in downtown Knoxville.

Phillips, the U.S. District Court Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee, ruled that the case would move forward as a class action suit rather than the “mass action” certification it was originally filed under. A mass action certification differs from a class action suit because each retiree and surviving spouses would have had individual case numbers and would have been treated as individual plaintiffs.

By certifying the lawsuit as a class action, the number of retirees represented by the suit could jump significantly — possibly as high as 13,000 retirees.

According to the suit, the contract ratified just over one year ago between ALCOA and the United Steel Workers union imposes premium obligations, higher deductibles and coinsurance on most — if not all — previously fully covered health-care expenses. The benefit changes were effective at the beginning of this year and apply to retirees who left the company between June 1, 1993, and June 30, 2006.

The contract was approved nationwide by a razor-thin margin. At Local 309, the vote was also close, with 511 union members (51.7 percent) voting in favor of ratifying the contract and 478 members (48.3 percent) voting against it. Retiree benefits was a key point of contention.

The lawsuit charges that the ALCOA violated the retirees’ vested rights under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and breached its contract under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

On Wednesday morning, Knoxville-based attorney Greg Coleman, who represents the retirees, argued that ALCOA told union officials and negotiators that the “side letter” document inserted into the back of the actual contract was for “accounting purposes” only — and would not be implemented or used against employees.

“When you tie benefits to a pension plan,” Coleman said, “it is a contractual vested program.”

ALCOA’s attorneys, led by attorney John Lucas, maintain that the contract language has been in place for years and “speaks for itself.”

Judge Phillips also ruled that the suit could not use the word “cap” when referring to limitations placed on retiree benefits, as requested by Coleman.

While Coleman submitted a tentative “road map” or schedule for the trial, ALCOA’s attorneys did not. Because the ALCOA attorneys did not agree with the retirees’ proposed schedule, Judge Phillips gave them 10 days to submit their own proposed road map.