Clarification Of Washington, D.c. V. Greater Washington Board Of Trade

Definition of "Washington, d.c. v. greater washington board of trade"

Magdalena Paszkowski, Real Estate Agent Homefront

Legal decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that states cannot require employers to provide disabled employees the same health insurance with which they provide active employees. Regulation by states of employee benefit insurance plans is precluded when it relates in any way to employee benefit plans governed by the federal statute on pensions and benefits (EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT INCOME SECURITY ACT OF 1974 ERISA). The issue in this case was the relationship between WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE (as required by the states for job-related illness or injuries incurred by the employee) and federally regulated health insurance provided by the company for actively at work employees. The Greater Washington Board of Trade challenged the Washington, D.C. law that required employers who provide health insurance for actively at-work employees to continue to offer equivalent health insurance coverage to disabled employees who are eligible for workers compensation insurance.