Trandell v. The Village Club, 062905 MIWC, 2007-553

• Case Date: June 29, 2005
• Court: Michigan

ROSEANNE TRANDELL, SS# xxx, Plaintiff, v. THE VILLAGE CLUB, Michigan Clubs Self Insurance Fund, And Cambridge Integrated Services Group Defendants. No. 2007-553 Michigan Workers Compensation State of Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth Worker’s Compensation Agency 2007          The social security number and dates of birth have been redacted from this opinion.           PLAINTIFF Mr. Frederick J. Ruby P# 19740           DEFENDANTS Mr. Bradley S. Mitseff P# 36897           OPINION ON REMAND           VICTOR A. MCCOY, MAGISTRATE (232G), JUDGE          The State of Michigan Worker’s Compensation Appellate Commission decision 2007 ACO #148 directs a modification of my opinion and order on remand relative to point 6 of Defendant’s Appeal as stated in their opinion:

Defendant’s sixth issue argues that it is entitled to coordinate benefits under MCL 418.354 and MCL 418.358. We agree, insofar as plaintiff’s pension is concerned. At the beginning of trial, during the taking of stipulations, the magistrate asked the parties about “benefits subject to section 354 or 358.” [Trial transcript, p 13.] Plaintiff responded that “she does receive a pension. As to what—what extent that may be coordinateable, that’s proofs.” [Id., pp 13-14.] Plaintiff also “receive[d] unemployment benefits.” [Id., p 14.] This is not, as a result, a case in which the parties left issues of coordination for later adjudication in the event they could not agree. The parties did not agree in this trial, and the issue was ripe for adjudication in the order from which defendant has filed the instant claim for review.

Not every pension a person might receive is subject to coordination. MCL 418.354(1) is applicable to “pension or retirement payments pursuant to a plan or program established or maintained by the employer.” For such a pension, “the employer’s obligation to pay . . . weekly benefits . . . shall be reduced by . . . [t]he after-tax amount of the pension . . . received or being received pursuant to a plan or program established or maintained by the same employer for whom benefits under Section 351, 361, or 835 are received.”6

         What plaintiff calls her pension is something which is funded by her union dues and employers may have contributed toward it, as well:

A. Pension; two-seventy-four for a lifetime.

...