Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
At issue on this appeal are two employee benefit plans received by the husband prior to the commencement of this action. Although the parties agreed to an equal share of whatever rights and benefits awarded under the plans were to be classified as marital property, they disagree as to how much of those rights and benefits should be classified as marital property.
Considering the characteristics of the employee benefit plans, we conclude that both plans constituted deferred compensation for employment during the term of the marriage and are entirely marital property ( see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [1] [c]; Olivo v. Olivo, 82 N.Y.2d 202, 207; Majauskas v. Majauskas, 61 N.Y.2d 481, 488-491). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly awarded the wife 50% of all rights and benefits awarded under the plans. Balletta, J.P., Miller, Sullivan and Copertino, JJ., concur.