Perrino v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., 209 F.3d 1309 (11^th Cir. 2000)-This court affirmed the district court's finding that four former employees, who sought termination pay allowances in addition to disability-related pension benefits, had to exhaust grievance and arbitration procedures before filing suit.  The district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding not to waive the exhaustion requirement.

A court may excuse the exhaustion requirement "'when resort to administrative remedies would be futile or the remedy inadequate,'" Counts v. Amer. Gen. Life & Accident Ins. Co., 111 F.3d 105, 108 (11^th Cir. 1997), or where a plan denies a claimant 'meaningful access' to the administrative review scheme in place, Curry v. Contract Fabricators, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan, 891 F.2d 842, 846-47 (11^th Cir. 1990)."  Appellants failed to show such lack of access to an adequate remedy.  Appellants' could not substantiate their assertion that the grievance and arbitration procedure contained in the ERISA plan was not available to ex-employees, making resort to this procedure futile.

            This court further declined to recognize a new exception to the exhaustion requirement in which an employer's noncompliance with ERISA's technical requirements (for example, creating a summary plan description, or delineating a formal claims procedure) would excuse a plaintiff's duty to exhaust administrative remedies.  Here, BellSouth failed to provide a summary plan description.  However, the collective bargaining agreement in question set forth with sufficient clarity the provisions for termination pay and the grievance procedures claimants had to follow, and there was no evidence that any of the Appellants lacked access to or knowledge about these sections.