This class action against General Motors, LLC (GM) has nothing to do with automobiles. Instead, it brings suit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). It alleges that GM did not give employees who participated in its General Motors Health Care Program Plan adequate notice that they could continue their health insurance coverage, after a “qualifying event,” under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA).
The class for this action is all participants and beneficiaries in GM’s health plan to whom GM sent a COBRA notice, during the applicable statute of limitations, as a result of a qualifying event, as determined by GM, who did not elect COBRA.
GM is the sponsor of the General Motors Health Care Program Plan.
COBRA applies to sponsors of group health plans where the company normally has employed more than twenty persons on a typical business day during the preceding year. If an employee would lose coverage because of a “qualifying event,” the company must give the person the opportunity to continue coverage for a certain length of time after leaving the company.
The complaint alleges, “The COBRA notification requirement exists because employees are not presumed to know they have a federally protected right to continue healthcare coverage subsequent to a qualifying event.”
This notice must be made according to specific rules. The complaint contains a long list of things that must be included in the notice. For example, the COBRA notice must be “written in a manner calculated to be understood by the average plan participant.”
The Department of Labor (DOL) has put out a Model COBRA Continuation Coverage Election Notice. The complaint quotes the DOL website as saying that DOL “will consider use of the model election notice, appropriately completed, good faith compliance with the election notice content requirements of COBRA.”
However, the complaint alleges that GM did not use the model notice. The two points of inadequacy in GM’s COBRA notice alleged by the complaint include the following:
- Failure to include a termination date for COBRA coverage, if the person chooses it.
- Failure to sufficiently identify the plan administrator.
The complaint alleges that this is “critical information required by law” which is “included in the Model Notice.”
The complaint alleges, “Based, in part, on the deficiencies identified above as to [GM’s] COBRA notice, [the plaintiff in this case] did not elect COBRA continuation coverage.” It alleges that she suffered economic loss “as she was forced to pay for medical expenses for both herself and her son after she lost her health insurance.’
Article Type: LawsuitTopic: Employment
Most Recent Case Event
General Motors Inadequate COBRA Notice Complaint
February 7, 2022
This class action against General Motors, LLC (GM) has nothing to do with automobiles. Instead, it brings suit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). It alleges that GM did not give employees who participated in its General Motors Health Care Program Plan adequate notice that they could continue their health insurance coverage, after a “qualifying event,” under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA).
General Motors Inadequate COBRA Notice ComplaintCase Event History
General Motors Inadequate COBRA Notice Complaint
February 7, 2022
This class action against General Motors, LLC (GM) has nothing to do with automobiles. Instead, it brings suit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). It alleges that GM did not give employees who participated in its General Motors Health Care Program Plan adequate notice that they could continue their health insurance coverage, after a “qualifying event,” under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA).
General Motors Inadequate COBRA Notice Complaint