LEGAL
UNIT FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS |
|
|
| How
is the term veteran defined to determine eligibility
to purchase military service credit under chapter 71
of the acts of 1996? |
| |
| The
term is defined in G.L. c. 4, § 7, cl. 43rd. This statute
requires active service in the armed forces of the United
States (army, navy, air force, marine corps or coast
guard) during certain specified wartime periods. |
| |
| Does
receipt of partial disability benefits from the federal
Veterans’ Administration constitute a "federal
military pension" which would disqualify a member
from the right to purchase military service under chapter
71? |
| |
| The
answer to this question is no. A court has ruled that
the receipt of a federal military pension does not prevent
an eligible veteran from purchasing military service
under G.L.C. 32, s.4(1)(h). |
| |
| What
should a Board look for when reviewing a Domestic Relations
Order pertaining to a member of the retirement system? |
| |
| A
Domestic Relations Order cannot create a right or benefit
in a member’s spouse (or alternate payee) which
is not provided for or is inconsistent with the provisions
of chapter 32. For example the spouse of a member cannot
receive a refund of a portion of the member’s annuity
savings account while the member continues in active
service. Likewise, a separate account in the System’s
annuity savings fund cannot be established for a non-member.
|
| |
| How
is creditable service derived and how much creditable
service are elected officials entitled to? |
| |
| Members
may not receive more than one year of creditable service
for any one year period. Boards may prorate creditable
service for part-time employees but must promulgate
supplementary rules in order to do. Boards may also
allow creditable service for any period of unpaid leave
of absence which does not exceed one month. An elected
official is entitled to a full year of creditable service
for any portion of a year in which they serve in such
capacity. This opinion is premised upon the language
of G.L. c. 32, s.4(1)(a) and an Opinion of the Office
of the Attorney General. See, Op.Atty.Gen., May 14,
1976, p. 174. |
| |
| Is
"Quinn Bill" money considered regular compensation?
What else would be considered regular compensation and
what is outside the definition of regular compensation? |
| |
| The
Legal Unit is often asked about specific types of pay.
For example, "Quinn Bill" money, that is educational
incentives paid to police officers, is considered regular
compensation based upon the provisions of PERAC’s
regulation 840 CMR 15.03(e). Based upon court decisions,
workers’ compensation benefits and violence pay
are not considered regular compensation. Injured-on-Duty
pay for police officers and fire fighters under G.L.
c. 41, §111F is considered regular compensation based
upon the express provisions of that section of the law.
For other types of compensation or pay which are not
expressly covered by the definition of regular compensation
in G.L. c. 32, s.1 or 840 CMR 15.03, the ultimate determination
as to whether a payment is regular compensation is to
be made by the Board. |
| |
| May
an employer or department head file an application for
involuntary ordinary disability retirement on behalf
of a member who has appealed the denial of his or her
own application for accidental disability retirement? |
| |
| The
answer to this question is yes. In a case, City of Lynn
v. Labor Relations Commission, the Appeals Court held
that a department head could file such an application.
See PERAC Memo #27/1997 for more information about this
decision. |
| |
| What
is the proper forum for appeal of a decision involving
an involuntary disability retirement application? |
| |
There
has been some confusion as to whether a member who is
appealing the Board’s denial of the involuntary
retirement application filed on his or her behalf must
appeal to District Court as set out in G.L. c. 32, §
16(3) or whether the appeal could be filed with the
Contributory Retirement Appeal Board (CRAB). CRAB has
recently held that where a member fully cooperates with
the processing of an involuntary retirement application
and, in fact, appeals the denial of that application,
the member’s actions effectively transform the
application from that of an involuntary one to a voluntary
one. For this reason, CRAB held that it did have jurisdiction
to hear a member’s appeal of a denied accidental
disability retirement application. Nasuti v. Saugus
Retirement Board, CR-93-491 (decision dated September
12, 1995).
In other cases, the proper forum for
appeal of a decision involving an involuntary retirement
application may be District Court. For this reason,
Boards should include copies of both section 16(3) and
16(4) in notices of retirement board decision sent to
the parties.
The foregoing represents just a small
sampling of the types of questions to which PERAC’s
Legal Unit has been asked to respond. If you have specific
questions which have not been addressed above, please
call or write to our Legal Unit. |
| |
| |
