Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation E,wcC $200 K Street, M.W., Washhgb, D.C. 20005-4026 

~e: case 192233, Nashville Textile Cov. 

Hourly Etnployees' Pension Plan (Plan or NTHP) 

Thc Appeals Hoard has reviewed your appeal of PBGC's July 22,2003 deterinination that 

you are not entitled to a PBGC hcncfit from !he WrHP I'lao. For the reasons stated below, wc arc 

denying your appeal. 

PBCiC's detcnnination lctter said that you wcre not eligible lo participate in theN'fHP and, 

thcrcforc, ". . . not entitled to a PBGC benefit because your classification was covcrcd by a colleclivc 

bargaining agrccnlent under the Union of Nccdlctrades Industrial and Tcxtilc En~ployccs" (UNSI'E). 

Your August 13, 2003 appeal (via fax) said that you deserve a bcncJit because: (I) you 

worked for Brislol Lingcrie (Rristol) for 18% years, (2) you wcre no! a union nienibcr, and (3) others 

who received their pay cl~ecks from the sanle payroll as you arc currently recciving bcnefits. 

PBGC filcs contain docun~mtshowing that thc Nl'HP tcnuina~ecl April 30, 1999 without 

suficicnt assets to satisfy all bcnefits PRGC guarantees under Tillc IV of ihc En~ployec Rctiretncnt 

Income Security Act of 1974, as (ERISA). l'hcrcforc, the provisions of N'fMP, liKlSA and 

PBGC: rcgulatio~u delcrminc NTHP pa~licipants' hcnefit cntillctnc~~i. 
ERlSA 5 4022(a) provides that, subject to certain limils, PBGC shall guarantee the payment 

of all nonforfeitablc benefits under a covered plan that terminates.. ERISA defines a "nonforfeilablc 

bencfif as ". . . a benefit for which a participant has satisfied the conditions for entitlement under 

the plan or the requirements of [ERISA]." ERISA 4 4001(a)(8); rllsp 29 Code of Federal 

Regulations (C.F.R.) $4001.2 (definition of "nonforfcitahle benefit"). PBGC! rules provide that a 

guaranteed benefit, among other conditions, niust be nonforfcitable on the plan's termination date. 

29 C.F.R. 5 4022.3. 

i Docunleots in PBGC files rcveal that the NTHP was first eflwtive April 1,1968 and was 

restated or amended from time to time until the last restatanent as of April 1, 1989, which is the 

effective date ofthc "Adoption Agrccmalt to the Hallnlan & Lorber Associates, lnc. Defined Benefit 

Regional PrololypePe~lsion Plan and Tnlst Agtcctnenl" (N&L Prototype). Prior to the adoption of 

the M&L Prototype, Article I1 of the NTllP provided that aner meeting certain age and scrvice 

rcquiren~ents an "En~ployee" was eligible to participate in the Plan. The Plan includes the following 

dchitions: 

Scclion I .OS of the Plan defines "En~ploycc" as ". . . any person who appears on tlic 

Enlploycr's books as a hourly Enlployee at all times when his eligibility to 

participate or to continue to participate shall bc ascertained, . . . excluding any 

person who is a member of a rollcctive bargaining unit on whose behalf the 

Employee representative and the F,mployer Itave engaged in good faith 

bargaining for retirement benefits." (Emphasis addcd.) 

Per Section 1.09 of the Plan, "'Iiniployer' means Nashville Textile Corporation, i Denise Textile Corporation and Bristol Textilc Corporation . . .." 

The Adoption Agreement and the H&I. Prototype continued the exclosion of hourly 

eniployees in the wlleclive bargaining unit whose reprcsenlalive ~logotiaicd in good faith regarding 

pensions. The Appcals Board obtained a copy of the Collcctivc Bargaining Agrenncnt (CRA) for 

1995 - 1998 hetween Brislol Lingerie and Local U406, Southem and Western District Council ofthc 

Upper Soulh Dept., International Ladies' Gani~ent Workers Union (1L.GWU). The CBA covered 

Hristol non-suliervisory production, packing and shipping workers at its Bristol, Virginia plant. 

Article XVI, Scction I: Wealth, Welfare, Ketiremcnt and HeaHh Services ~und'providcs that the 

Einployer shall pay apercentagc of ". . . its total gross weckly payroll . . . of all enlployces covered 

under this Agreement (whether Union or non-Union workers, and whethcr regular or trial period 

workers) cnlployed by the Employers . . .." Paragraph (2) of that section specifies the percentage 

thc E~nj>loyer is lo pay "lowards lhc U}px South_Depart~!ien~ Retirciqenl. Jju~id, Ii>GWU, a trust 

fund cslablished hy a collective bargaining agrccnienl fo; the purposc of providing paisi& or 

annuities for employees covcrcd by lhis Agreement on retircmenl." 
The Appeals Board has bccn advised that, aner the NTHP ended, PBGC's auditor for the 

Plan ohtained and accepted as accurate a listing of NTHP participants prepared in 1998 by thc 

NTHP's foniier actuarial consullant, Halln~an & Imher Associates, Ine. Because the list did not 

include you as a Plan member, you wcrc ased to conlplete a PBGC "Plan Participation Infomation" 

(PPI) form and an "Authori7aiion [for PBGC] lo Obtain Earnings Data from thc Social Security 

Administration." 

On thc PPI you reported you wwc honi=hnd worked for Bristol as a niachinc 

operator at the Bristol, Virginia location from April 1G, 1980 until July 6.1998 when the "plant shut 

dow~~." Your appeal stated that you wcrc not a union member. However, on thePP1 you checked 

boxcs indicating you had always been an hourly-paid eniployee and were an NTIlP ". . . participant 

covered by a collective bargaining agrecnicnt (union contract) with the eniployer . . . ." You also 

noted that you were a union-covered cnqdoycc from April of 1980 to July of 1998, and that your 

union was ItGWU Local 406. (In 1995, the 1LX;WU and the Alnalganlatcd Clothing and Textile 

Workcrs Union merged to fom~ the Union of Necdletrades industrial and Textile f?mployecs 

(UNITE).) 

Rased on the prcponderancc of evidence, the Appeals Board concludcd you wcre covered by 

the CBA. 

}laving applied the provisions of thc NTiIP and the CBA to thc facts of this case, thc Appcals 

noard found that you were not a participant in the NTHP while working for BRrtol in a position 

covered by the CBA, whcther or not you wcre a union mcmbcr. Furlhcr, there is no evidalce you 

ever hcld a non-bargained position at Bristol. Therefore, you arc not entitled to a pension paymcnl 

from YRGC. This is the agcncy's final action on this case and you may, if you wish, seck court 

revicw of this decision. 

You niay bc entitled to recci~e apension on the basis of yourc~nploy~nent with Bristol ilnm 

thet~~ultiemploycr pension fund to whicl~ yonr- e~~~ployer contributed. For filrlher information on this 

hcncfit, you should contact: 

LGWU National Kctircment Fund 

.- . Attention: ,Loraim Balco~n . , , ,. , . . . .~ 

730 ~roadwa~, $Floor 

Ncw 'Pork, NY 10003 
You stated that olhcr employees arc receiving bcncfits undcr the Plan. Please know that a 

Conlpany docunleni for the period ending March 31, 1996 shows that Brislol had 259 hourly 

employees -- 237 are identified as ineligible for the NTHP and 22 as participants in NTHP. On the 

basis of another document in PRGC files, it appears that the latter may have becn hourly paid 

supenrisors or oflice staff and apparently not eligible for pensions from the ILGWU retirement fmd. 

lf you need furthcr information from PDGC, you may call PRGC's Customer Contact Center at 1- 

800-400-7242. 

Sherline M. Rrickus 

Mcmber, Appeals Board