The Apprentice Scholarship Agreement Established In 1985
The court must now decide whether or not the scholarship loan contracts are part of the apprenticeship program, so that the ERISA pre-emption option applies. On the one hand, according to the respondent, JATC standards describe the conditions of the ERISA apprenticeship program and refer to scholarship loan contracts under that program. In addition, the signing of loan agreements is required to participate in the ERISA plan and the loan contracts inform the apprentice of its benefits under the EISA plan. On the other hand, these agreements, as the applicants assert, are separate contracts between an employer and a single apprentice and do not fall within the scope of Congress` intention to adopt the ERISA framework. On July 22, 1999, the Ministry of Labour approved JATC`s proposed standards for apprenticeship programs. (ECF 18, e.g. 4, 13). Among these standards was an addendum entitled „Annex A, Selection and Admission of Apprentices,” which provides in part that any authority the court has found for the savings force of the Fitzgerald Act is limited to the context of government regulation of apprenticeship programs. See id. This dispute arises from a completely different context: an individual right linked to an apprentice`s scholarship contract. While the underlying learning program is, to some extent, governed by the Fitzgerald Act and ERISA, the immediate breach of the right to contract is not recorded for this reason. In this case, the two federal legislation is not contradictory, but complementary. The Supreme Court has left the question of pre-emption time after administration, i.e., whether ERISA anticipates measures for planned benefits after the distribution of benefits.
Kennedy v. Plan Administrator for DuPont Savings and Investment Plan, 555 U.S. 285, 299 n. 10 (2009) (2009) („We also disagree on whether the estate could have brought an action against [the beneficiary] in public or federal court in order to obtain the benefits of the allocation. „). But the Third Circuit recently checked whether ERISA had anticipated a waiver provision in a real estate transaction contract after the distribution of the proceeds of the plan. Nachlass von Kensinger v. URL Pharma, Inc., 674 F.3d 131, 134 (3d Cir. 2012). The court found that „the admission of appeals against beneficiaries after payment of benefits does not raise any problem of prompt payment or undermining a primary objective of ERISA.” Id. to 137 (highlighted in the original). Based on the evidence presented to the Tribunal, JATC`s apprenticeship program is an ERISA plan, not an unfunded scholarship program or a qualified vocational training program.
The Ministry of Labour considered that a similar programme in a 1994 report was an ERISA plan: in this case, a joint apprenticeship trust (JAT) had been created under collective agreements, offered apprenticeship and work in the insulation industry and paid for these benefits from assets derived exclusively from employer contributions. ERISA Advisory Op. 94-14A (1994). Given that the JAT provided benefits in the form of apprenticeships or training and that the benefits were not paid on the general assets of an employer or a workers` organization, the JAT was a benefit plan for workers under the EISA.