View Single Post
  #156 (permalink)  
Old 07-23-2008, 04:13 PM
Luke's Avatar
Luke Luke is offline
RMO Addict
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Rancho Murieta
Posts: 1,489
Thanks: 4,147
Thanked 2,905 Times in 1,100 Posts
Groans: 0
Groaned at 3 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 61
Luke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond reputeLuke has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Possible security changes discussed by RMA BOD

There are too many variables to really make this simple, but I will try. If you are retired under PERL you can't take a job with a PERS agency and still draw your retirement. If, however, you are retired in a CERA 1937 Act county system (such as Sacramento County - SCERS), then you can retire from there, and then go work for a PERS agency and still receive your retirement.

The difference between safety and non-safety retirement is huge. When I was class counsel for the County retirees in the suit over retroactivity of 1937 Act benefits that settled about 5 years ago now, the settlement had figures worked out where safety retirees received, I believe about double, the amounts of non-safety retirees. I'll see if I can track down the settlement agreement somewhere to see what the actual amounts were. Although that is under the 1937 Act and not PERL, I don't think the differences are significant between the two Acts.

__________________
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Luke For This Useful Post:
lab_lover (07-23-2008), Wilbur (07-23-2008)