Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver

California's premier full-service law firm with an emphasis on the representation of peace officers in disciplinary, criminal, labor, workers' compensation, personal injury and other civil matters.

  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    • Labor Representation
    • Civil Litigation
    • Personal Injury
      • Example of Case Results
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • DOE Security Clearance Hearings
    • Peace Officers
    • Firefighters
    • EMS Agency Investigations
    • Criminal Defense
    • CalPERS Appeals
  • Our Team
  • Classes
  • Media
    • Bulletins
    • RLS in the News
  • Resources
    • Links
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
  • Clients
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy

Oral Arguments Heard in Key Pension Rights Case Affecting Marin

December 6, 2018 by Hien Nguyen

From: Marin Independent Journal
By: Richard Halstead, 12/05/18

The state Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a case that could have implications for the pensions of Marin public employees and quite possibly the pensions of public employees throughout the state.

The case, Cal Fire Local 2881 v. California Public Employees’ Retirement System, involves a right granted to many public employees by the California Legislature in 2003 to add to their years of service used for calculating their pensions by paying a one-time fee. This is often referred to as purchasing “air time.”

After the Legislature withdrew this right by passing the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) of 2013, Cal Fire Local 2881 filed a legal challenge.

A similar case, Marin Association of Public Employees v. Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association, is pending before the state Supreme Court. In that case, Marin Association of Public Employees filed suit after Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association reacted to PEPRA by excluding standby pay, administrative response pay, callback pay and cash payments for waiving health insurance from the calculation of members’ final compensation.

In its 2016 ruling on that case, the Court of Appeal wrote, “While a public employee does have a ‘vested right’ to a pension, that right is only to a ‘reasonable’ pension — not an immutable entitlement to the most optimal formula of calculating the pension.

“And the Legislature may, prior to the employee’s retirement, alter the formula, thereby reducing the anticipated pension. So long as the Legislature’s modifications do not deprive the employee of a ‘reasonable’ pension, there is no constitutional violation.”

Gregg Adam, one of the attorneys representing MAPE and the attorney who presented the oral argument for Cal Fire Wednesday, has said that this ruling challenges the so-called “California rule,” the legal precedent that prohibits government agencies in California from cutting retirement benefits without providing employees with comparable pension compensation.

The California Rule gives workers security that their retirement will be safe and predictable after a career in public service. But it also ties lawmakers’ hands in responding to exploding pension costs — a problem for the state, cities, counties, schools, fire districts and other local bodies.

In a sign of the case’s importance to the governor, Jerry Brown had an attorney from his office, not the state attorney general’s office, argue before the high court.

After Wednesday’s hearing, Adam said, “I think it was tough for both sides. The court asked very challenging questions that went to the heart of the matter and extended more broadly to future rules and pensions in general.”

Timothy Talbot, an attorney representing the Contra Costa Deputy Sheriff’s Association in another of the five cases pending before the Supreme Court with implications for the California rule, said, “I thought the justices had difficult questions for both sides. They were sincerely trying to understand how this particular ‘air time’ benefit fits into the whole pension scheme and what level of protection it is entitled to under current California law.

“There were questions and assertions by both sides on the broader question of the California rule and changes to vested rights,” Talbot said, “but my sense was the majority of the argument focused on this air-time benefit.”

Several of the justices appeared skeptical that the ability to purchase “air time” constituted a traditional pension benefit. Employees had to work for five years before they could make the one-time credit purchase.

Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye asked, “How does it directly affect (your pension) if you only have the opportunity to purchase?”

Associate Justice Goodwin Liu asked if health care benefits, vacation accrual, and transit subsidies could also considered to be similarly vested benefits.

Adam said, Liu “was concerned that the rule that we were asking for would cover too many elements of what an employee gets. I argued that we were really only asking that the benefit in front of the court be considered a pension benefit.”

Talbot said Rei Onishi, the attorney who made the oral arguments on behalf of California Public Employees’ Retirement System, argued that pensions can be modified because employees are only entitled to a substantial and reasonable benefit. Talbot said the justices asked Onishi to define what that would mean in real terms; one justice asked if that meant a pension could be reduced to one dollar.

“Mr. Onishi didn’t really answer the question,” Talbot said, “but he didn’t say that would be wrong.”

The justices have 90 days to issue a ruling. Adam said depending on what the justices decide, the Marin case might be sent back to the Court of Appeal.

The Marin case was granted review by the Supreme Court more than year ago, but in an unexpected move earlier this year, the court deferred action on the case pending a decision in Alameda County DSA, et al. v. Alameda County Employees Retirement System, another case involving the California rule. Lawyers have submitted briefs for that case and are awaiting a date for oral arguments.

Pension hawks such as Marin’s Citizens for Sustainable Pension Plans are watching the Supreme Court hearings with much anticipation.

“I’m pretty certain the state Supreme Court judges will find that air time is not a vested benefit,” said Jody Morales of Lucas Valley, the group’s founder. “That might well open the door to challenges to other benefits now considered ‘vested,’ such as those adopted after the contracts were agreed to.”

Filed Under: RLS In The News Tagged With: timothy-k-talbot

Consultation Form

Offices across California to serve you.
Contact us now to schedule a consultation.
Contact form not loading? Click here!
Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC publishes this website as a service to our clients and other friends for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be used as a substitute for specific legal advice or opinions, and the transmission of information through this website is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship between sender and receiver. Internet subscribers and online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. By providing a telephone number and submitting the form you are consenting to be contacted by SMS text message. Message & data rates may apply. Reply STOP to opt out of further messaging.

© 2025 Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC. All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer

Click here for our privacy policy. We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. Read our privacy policy for more details.
Do not sell my personal information.
Cookie settingsACCEPTREJECT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

Please read our full privacy policy by clicking here.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.

Please see our privacy policy for more information.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT
  • Contact Us

  • News Alerts

  • Privacy Policy

Official logo for Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver
Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver Logo
  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    ▼
    • Labor Representation
    • Civil Litigation
    • Personal Injury
      ▼
      • Example of Case Results
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • DOE Security Clearance Hearings
    • Peace Officers
    • Firefighters
    • EMS Agency Investigations
    • Criminal Defense
    • CalPERS Appeals
  • Our Team
  • Classes
  • Media
    ▼
    • Bulletins
    • RLS in the News
  • Resources
    ▼
    • Links
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
  • Clients
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
Hotline phone numbers. Northern California: 925-609-1699. Southern California: 310-393-1486.