At & T COMMUNICATIONS, INC. v. Superior Court
Opinion
Opinion
Werdegar, J.
We consider whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 United States Code section 1001 et seq., preempts an action brought under state law for wrongful termination where an employee was terminated for not returning to work when medically cleared by his employer’s physicians.
“ERISA includes a ‘virtually unique pre-emption provision’ [citation], which provides: ‘Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section [the saving clause], the provisions of this subchapter and subchapter III of this chapter shall supersede any and all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any employee benefit plan . . . .’ (§ 514(a), as set forth in 29 U.S.C. 1144(a) (preemption clause).)” (Barnick v. Longs Drug Stores, Inc. (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 377, 381 [ 250 Cal.Rptr. 10 ].) AT&T Communications, Inc. (AT&T) has an ERISA benefit plan that includes health and disability coverage. AT&T directed Robert Jack Voakes to return to work after AT&T doctors determined his nonindustrial disability had ended. Voakes’s personal physician advised him he was not ready to return, and he did not. AT&T terminated him.