Widow Files Federal Lawsuit Against NYC Hotels Pension Fund

Fund knew that neither spouse could speak or read English when it directed them to sign away right to survivor benefits

September 24, 2014, New York, NY— A non-English speaking widow today filed a federal lawsuit against the New York Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Pension Fund, challenging the wrongful denial of her application for a survivor annuity following her husband’s untimely death. The Plaintiff is represented by Legal Services NYC’s Brooklyn Program and Legal Services NYC’s Equal Rights Initiative.

Dinorah Piña was shocked to learn in April 2013 that her application had been denied on the ground that, six years prior to her husband Rafael Piña’s death, the Piñas had signed a so-called Husband-and-Wife Pension Rejection Form at the direction of a pension fund representative. The representative had given them this English-only form to sign despite being fully aware that neither spouse could speak, read, or write in English.  

Mrs. Piña’s complaint charges the pension fund with violating the Retirement Equity Act of 1984, which, in the words of President Reagan, who signed it into law, “improves and protects the vital role of pensions as retirement income for widows.” The Retirement Equity Act requires pension funds to calculate benefits so that after a retiree dies, an annuity is paid to the retiree’s surviving spouse. Using a narrow exception to this rule, the pension fund  is allowed to avoid paying a survivor annuity if both the retiree and the spouse sign a Husband-and-Wife Rejection Form before a notary public. To ensure that this exception is not abused, undermining Congress’s goal of protecting surviving spouses, federal judges have held that the forms are only valid if both the retiree and spouse actually understand that by signing they are giving up the spouse’s right to benefits. The Piñas, who could not even read the form they signed, clearly did not meet this stringent standard. 

The Retirement Equity Act was enacted as an amendment to the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), which makes those administering private sector pension plans fiduciaries to plan participants and their beneficiaries. In addition to violating the Retirement Equity Act, Mrs. Piña’s complaint charges the pension fund’s trustees with failing to fulfill their duty to the Piñas as ERISA fiduciaries, including their duty to make sure that their rights were afforded the same protections as those provided to participants and beneficiaries who are literate in English.

The pension fund’s representatives knew very well that Mrs. Piña’s ability to continue to receive benefits was no small matter for the Piñas. The fund itself had awarded Mr. Piña a pension because his health had deteriorated to the point that he could no longer work. When the fund gave the Piñas the untranslated form to sign, they were well aware of Mr. Piña’s medical condition and the likelihood that he would die well before his wife. Sadly, Mr. Piña died at the age of 56, just six years after signing the form. 

“The trustees who administer the pension fund had a duty of absolute loyalty to the Piñas as fiduciaries under ERISA, and were required to provide the Piñas with information that would allow them to act prudently in deciding whether to sign a form giving up Mrs. Piña’s right to benefits,” said Gary Stone, a staff attorney at Legal Services NYC’s Brooklyn Program. “Instead, they encouraged the Piñas to sign a document the trustees knew they couldn’t possibly understand. As a result, Mrs. Piña, while mourning her husband’s death, has had to spend her time and energy fighting for the benefits her husband wanted her to have.”

“Knowing that the Piñas were monolingual Spanish-speakers, and denying them any type of language services, the fund essentially lured them into signing a document that they could not understand,” said Amy Taylor, Coordinator of Legal Services NYC’s Equal Rights Initiative. “In addition to breaching their fiduciary duty, they discriminated against the Piñas and took advantage of their limited English proficient status. Because of the fund’s actions, Mrs. Piña has been denied essential supports that she needs to survive, and feels deceived by the very people who were supposed to protect her.”

The lawsuit, which seeks the granting of Mrs. Piña’s application effective from the date of her husband’s death, was filed in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

###