DAVENPORT - They still are proud to say - as many Deere & Co. retirees do - that they bleed green and always will.

But today, a group of retirees found themselves on the opposite side of a federal courtroom from their former employer. In response to a new health benefits plan that Deere rolled out in 2007 for about 5,000 salaried, or flex, retirees, the group filed a class-action lawsuit a year ago. Represented by the Flex Retiree Organization, they hope to force Deere to restore their original benefits - benefits the retirees say they were promised for life.

For those who pushed unsuccessfully for Deere to reverse its decision and then founded FRO, the months leading to their day in court have brought a roller coaster of emotions.

"It's been a gamut of feelings - from anger, sadness and frustration to satisfaction that the judge has seen reason to deny the company their petition to dismiss all of our claims," said Gary Stolley of Coal Valley, Ill., who worked 33 years for Deere, retiring as a personnel manager.

"Who would ever think that we'd have to fight with our ex-employer," said Bill Gabbard of Silvis, Ill., whose 43-year career with Deere began on the factory floor and ended as industrial relations manager at John Deere Parts Distribution Center in Milan, Ill.

Throughout the series of meetings they have held with hundreds of retirees leading up to today's trial in U.S. District Court, Gabbard, who is FRO's president, and his fellow officers have maintained their undying support for Deere and the company's success.

"We're not anti-Deere; that is our company," he said. "It is my grandfather's company and my father's company. But I might bleed a lighter shade of green now."

When Deere announced the new benefits program in September 2007, the company called it "innovative." The company said the new program allowed retirees to be more involved in their health-care decisions.

Deere also said the new plan was designed to leverage changes made in the federal laws, including the creation of tax-advantaged Health Savings Accounts and the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003.

The changes affected about 5,000 of Deere's 28,000 U.S. retirees, most of whom retired on or after July 1, 1993, and their dependents.

Deere spokesman Ken Golden declined to comment on the trial, saying it is the company's policy not to discuss pending litigation.

For the retirees, the trial is about more than broken promises. Gabbard said the flex retirees were the only group singled out for the new program and removed from the group health insurance plan. They argue that the changes, which have affected Medicare-eligible retirees as well as scores of younger, early retirees, have dramatically altered the benefits they once received.

In a hearing last month in federal court, Deere's attorneys told the judge that Deere always reserved the right to amend, modify, suspend or terminate its benefits.

But FRO officers, many of whom guided employees into retirement, said retirees were told for years that they would take all of their benefits into retirement.

While not all retirees have been negatively affected by the changes, Stolley said the calls from those who have been are disheartening. "We've heard from lower-paid people who can't make it now."

No matter the outcome in court, Stolley said FRO plans to keep the organization intact and maintaining a legal defense fund for any future situations. "Win, lose or draw, FRO will continue."