CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
DENNIS BLACK; CHARLES CUNNINGHAM; KENNETH HOLLIS; DELPHI SALARIED RETIREE ASSOCIATION,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellee.
   No. 19-1419
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 2:09-cv-13616—Arthur J. Tarnow, District Judge.
Argued: January 28, 2020
Decided and Filed: December 28, 2020
Before: SILER, GIBBONS, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
AMENDED OPINION
_________________________

SILER, Circuit Judge. Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) creates an insurance program to protect employees’ pension benefits. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”)—a wholly-owned corporation of the United States government—is charged with administering the pension-insurance program.

In this case, PBGC terminated the “Salaried Plan,” a defined-benefit plan sponsored by Delphi Corporation. The termination was executed through an agreement between PBGC and Delphi pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1342(c). The appellants—retirees affected by termination of the Salaried Plan—bring several challenges to the termination. First, the retirees argue that section 1342(c) requires a judicial adjudication before a pension plan may be terminated. Second, the retirees contend that termination of the plan violated their due process rights. Third, the retirees assert that PBGC’s decision to terminate the Salaried Plan was arbitrary and capricious.

But the retirees’ arguments do not require reversal. First, subsection 1342(c) permits termination of distressed pension plans by agreement between PBGC and the plan administrator without court adjudication. Second, the retirees have not demonstrated that they have a property interest in the full amount of their vested, but unfunded, pension benefits. Third, PBGC’s decision to terminate the Salaried Plan was not arbitrary and capricious. We affirm.