In September, we reported on a significant case, Marin Association of Public Employees v. Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association, in which a California appellate court ruled that the government could make reasonable modifications to public employees’ pension benefits without infringing on their vested right to a reasonable pension. We predicted the case would be appealed to the California Supreme Court—and it was.
In November 2016, the California Supreme Court agreed to review the ruling. However, the Court deferred action on the case until the California Court of Appeal resolved a similar case which originally had been consolidated with the Marin County case. This case has not yet been resolved.
Nate Kowalski is Chair of the firm’s Public Entity Labor and Employment Practice Group. He is an accomplished litigator who represents employers in both the private and public sectors. Mr. Kowalski has litigated hundreds of ...
Jay Trinnaman specializes in the representation of both public and private sector employers in all aspects of labor relations and employment law matters, including disciplinary and grievance arbitrations, unfair labor practice ...
Jorge Luna has been practicing law since 1996 in a variety of areas, including employment, construction, business litigation, intellectual property and entertainment. For the past 12 years, Mr. Luna has focused his practice ...
Other AALRR Blogs
- “California Rule” Survives (For Now) — But “Airtime” Does Not
- Be Cautious About “DROP” Programs
- California Supreme Court Hears Cal Fire Oral Argument
- Amortization Period for New Debt Shortened to 20 Years
- New CalPERS Compensation Limits, Effective Immediately
- CalPERS Responds to Its Critics
- Senate Bill 525 Amends California Public Pension Laws
- New Stanford University Study Predicts Public Pensions Costs in California to Consume 14-17.5% of Operating Expenses by the Year 2030
- New Law Penalizes Employers Who Fail to Provide Information About Annuitants Working During Retirement
- Appellate Court Holds That MOU Does Not Provide Vested Interest in Retiree Medical Benefits