Opinion ID: 3018977
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The CIC Plan and SPD

Text: Exxon and Mobil began merger discussions in June of 1998. In September 1998, in anticipation of a possible merger with Exxon, Mobil’s Board of Directors revoked the company’s existing severance plan and implemented the CIC Plan. The CIC Plan provided that employees in salary groups 19 and below, together classified as “Tier 4” employees, were not eligible for severance benefits if their business unit or activity was divested after the merger and they were offered comparable employment by the acquiring entity. Plaintiffs were all Tier 4 employees. Hooven v. Exxon Mobil Corp., No. 00-CV-5071, 2004 WL 724496, at  (E.D. Pa. Mar. 31, 2004). After the Boards of Directors of Exxon and Mobil formally approved the merger, Mobil prepared and mailed the Initial SPD to its employees. The Initial SPD did not allude to the specific non-eligibility of divested employees, or even mention divestiture.2 The District Court found that the Initial SPD “failed to advise Plaintiffs that they would be ineligible 2 The parties argue as to how to characterize this mistake–as a mere “omission,” or as a “misrepresentation” that conflicts with the language of the CIC Plan. We need not resolve this disagreement in light of our reasoning along different lines. 9 for severance in the event of a divestiture.” Id. at . However, the Initial SPD cautioned that it was merely “a summary of the Plan and does not replace the official Plan documents, which govern in all cases.” Id. at . See also Id. (“If the Plan description in this handbook does not agree with the Plan text, the Plan text will govern.”). It also stated that, although Mobil reserved the right to “modify, suspend, or terminate benefits at any time for any reason,” the CIC Plan “may not be terminated or modified while a change of control is pending, or within: [s]ix months following a potential change in control, or [t]wo years following a change in control.” Id. at .