You heard it here. Today, the California Supreme Court heard arguments in another highly anticipated vested rights case.
Linda Ross, Of Counsel for RPLG, recently spoke on vested rights and the “California Rule.”
Pension Reform: In the Wake of the Supreme Court’s Landmark Cal Fire Decision, Is the Glass Half Empty or Half Full?
In the process of attempting to insert a legal framework in the vesting doctrine, the Cal Fire Court significantly limits the grounds under which a benefit can become vested.
The Court is taking a hard look at the vested rights doctrine, and views it to be significantly more limited than the prevailing understanding of the doctrine.
RPLG Partner Jon Holtzman and Associate Ian Long presented a session at the County Counsels’ Association of California Spring Employment Law Conference on the topic of vested rights.
Jon Holtzman and Linda Ross are on deck to discuss public employee pensions as vested rights alongside The Rutter Group in June 2018.
The court found that a “vested” right to retiree health benefits may not be inferred from a labor agreement that is fixed in duration absent “a clear basis in the contract or convincing extrinsic evidence.”
Recent court decisions illustrate the difficulty public employers face after the California Supreme Court’s decision in Retired Employees Assn. of Orange County, Inc. v. County of Orange (known as REAOC).
Effective local governance is another victim of the increasingly polarized world of politics. On one side, strains of the Tea Party refrain that government is the problem can be heard everywhere.
While I think this case badly misreads the MOU, it’s best to avoid using the term “future” in a document that’s intended to have limited duration.