Petitioners also emph size that a worker taking part in the Arizona plan can elect to get a lump-sum payment upon retirement and then “purchase the largest advantages which their accumulated efforts could command in the great outdoors market. ” The truth that the lump-sum option allows this has no bearing, but, on whether petitioners have actually discriminated due to intercourse in providing an annuity solution to its workers. Even as we have actually described above, ante, at note 10, it really is no protection to discrimination when you look at the supply of the fringe advantage that another fringe advantage is supplied for a nondiscriminatory foundation.
Although petitioners contended in the Court of Appeals that their conduct ended up being exempted through the reach of Title VII by the McCarran-Ferguson Act, 59 Stat. 33, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 1011 et seq., no mention has been made by them associated with Act in a choice of their petition for certiorari or their brief in the merits. “Only within the many excellent cases will we give consideration to problems maybe maybe maybe not raised into the petition, ” Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 481, n. 15, 96 S. Ct. 3037, 3046, n. 15, 49 L. Ed. 2d 1067 (1976); see Sup. Ct.R. 21(a), and however for the discussion of this concern by Justice POWELL we might have observed no explanation to handle a contention that petitioners intentionally made a decision to abandon after it had been rejected because of the Court of Appeals.
Since Justice POWELL hinges on the Act, but, post, at 1099-1102, we think it is acceptable to lay the problem to sleep.