COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

6 Months Ended

Mar. 29, 2015

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Commitments and Contingencies

We are generally self-insured for losses and liabilities related to workers’ compensation and employer’s liability insurance. Accrued workers’ compensation liability was $2.0 million and $1.9 million at March 29, 2015 and September 28, 2014, respectively. Our self-insurance accruals are based on estimates and, while we believe that the amounts accrued are adequate, the ultimate claims may be in excess of the amounts provided. 

We are involved in pending litigation, administrative and similar matters arising out of the normal conduct of our business, including litigation relating to acquisitions, employment matters, intellectual property matters, commercial transactions, contracts, environmental matters and matters related to compliance with governmental regulations. The ultimate aggregate amount of monetary liability or financial impact with respect to these matters is subject to many uncertainties and is therefore not predictable with assurance. In the opinion of management, the final outcome of these matters, if they are adverse, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, there can be no assurance with respect to such result, and monetary liability, financial impact or other sanctions imposed on us from these matters could differ materially from those projected.

On February 23, 2015, the Ironworkers Local No. 25 Pension Fund filed a shareholder derivative lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court against the Company’s current and former directors, including James J. Peterson, Dennis R. Leibel, Thomas R. Anderson, William E. Bendush, Paul F. Folino, William L. Healey, Matthew E. Massengill and James V. Mazzo, and the Royal Bank of Canada (“RBC”). The lawsuit challenges a provision in the Company’s credit agreement, as amended prior to that date, that allegedly triggered an event of default if a majority of the board of directors was replaced through various means over a specified period of time. The plaintiff alleges that the directors breached their fiduciary duties by permitting the Company to agree to the challenged change of control term on the theory that the term could have had the effect of entrenching incumbent board members. The lawsuit also alleges that RBC aided and abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duties by the directors. The lawsuit seeks an order invalidating the challenged change of control term and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to the plaintiff's lawyers. On March 31, 2015, before any substantive proceedings in the lawsuit, the Company amended the credit agreement to remove the challenged change of control term, and disclosed the amendment in a Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 1, 2015. On April 21, 2015, the plaintiff advised the Court in writing that the challenged change of control term had been deleted in the Company’s March 31 amendment.  The only issue in the lawsuit that remains to be resolved is the potential award of the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees and costs.  We do not believe the final resolution of this matter will have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.