the purpose of enabling universities to delegate their responsibility to provide retirement benefits for their employees, are so closely intertwined with those universities, (in this case LIU), that they must be deemed an “employer” for purposes of Title VII. It is also relevant that participation in TIAA-CREF is mandatory for tenured faculty members at LIU, and that LIU shares in the administrative responsibilities that result from its faculty members’ participation in TIAA-CREF. In addition, the language of the Supreme Court in Manhart would seem to compel a finding that delegation of responsibility for employee benefits cannot insulate a discriminatory plan from attack under Title VII. The Cour 66 (N.D.Ohio 1981); Peters v. Wayne State Univ., 476 F.Supp. 1343, 1350 (E.D.Mich. 1979) (<HOLDING>). IV. Impact of the McCarran-Ferguson Act
holding that a title vii plaintiff could not hold coworkers liable in their individual capacities under title vii holding title vii subject to equitable tolling holding tiaacref subject to title vii holding claims based on title vii subject to arbitration holding that title vii claim was subject to compulsory arbitration