Jones v. City of Los Angeles

FLEMING, J. Each plaintiff was employed more than 20 years in the fire or police department of the City of Los Angeles, and retired under the provisions of section 181 of the city charter on a fixed monthly pension. Plaintiffs dispute the city’s computation of their pensions, claiming the city has [820]misinterpreted section 181 in figuring amounts due them as pensioners.

Section 181 provides that a retired member of the fire or police department shall be paid for twenty years’ aggregate service a pension of “forty percent (40%) of the average monthly rate of salary assigned to the ranks or positions held by such member during the three years immediately preceding the date of retirement.” This controversy involves an interpretation of the meaning of the phrase “ranks or positions” in the section and poses these questions: Does one who receives a raise in salary because of length of time in service hold a different rank or position from the one he held before the raise ?

Does one who receives a step-pay increase while holding a given rank or position thereafter occupy a different rank or position although continuing to perform the same duties as before?

To understand the positions taken by the parties we must keep in mind the decision in Henry v. City of Los Angeles, 201 Cal.App.2d 299, 322 [20 Cal.Rptr. 440], in which the court held that fixed pensions under section 181 are to be computed on the basis of a pensioner’s salary within a particular rank at the time of his retirement and not on the basis of his average salary within a rank during the previous three years. Hence the interest of the pensioners in this case lies in a broad interpretation of the phrase, rank or position, in order to keep salary increases within the same rank and thereby minimize the averaging of salaries among different ranks. Plaintiffs claim that salary increases resulting from longevity or step-pay; do not constitute changes in rank or position but rather reflect through increased pay the increased value to the city of an individual’s service after a period of employment within a given rank. Under this view a retired policeman’s or fireman’s pension would be computed solely on the basis of the final rate of salary for his service within the rank or ranks occupied by him during the three years prior to his retirement.

On the other hand, the interest of the city lies in giving the phrase, rank or. position, a narrow interpretation and classifying subcategories within salary scales as separate ranks, in order to require an averaging of salaries among different salary scales in the computation of the amounts of the pensions it must pay. The city argues that longevity and step-pay increases result in the occupation of different ranks within the