I have a nephew who has worked for the state of Idaho's education system for 27 years. As of last fall, he qualifies under the state's "Rule of 90" for retirement.

The "Rule of 90" says that if the sum of your years employed by the state and your age in years is equal to or greater than 90, then you get full retirement benefits.

He has documentation (pay stubs, bank records, etc.) proving that he has worked full-time for the Idaho education system in a qualified position for more than 27 years as of last fall, and he is 63 years old. But the employer (the state department of education) only recognizes 25 of those years. They seem to have "lost" a couple of years.

He felt it no big deal that they seem to have "lost" a few years (he's been aware of that for a long time), he'd be happy to work another five or ten years, and didn't plan to retire anytime soon. BUT he was told last month by his boss that they are terminating him in June due to his position going away. They (the HR office at the university where he works) have made no effort to make a lateral transfer, even though his employment reviews are excellent and he has been awarded many special recognition awards for a job well done throughout the whole 27 years. He's not a goof-ball, he's a solid citizen, reliable, conscientious, responsible. No negative reviews, no negative written counseling, no reprimands, no adverse personnel actions, ever, in the entire 27 years. It appears this all boils down to the university bean counters looking for a way to shuck responsibility for almost half of the burden of his retirement costs/worth.

The difference between the partial retirement that they are offering him and the full retirement that he should have under the "Rule of 90" is over $1,000/month. To him, it's NOT chump change. It makes the difference between living in comfort and being under constant financial stress.

I think he needs an employment/labor lawyer, stat. He agrees. But neither he nor I have a clue on how to find one in Southeast Idaho.

Anybody in this magnificent Sigforum brain trust willing to give directions on how to get hooked up with a good lawyer who specializes in fixing this kind of screw-this-guy-out-of-his-retirement hooliganism?

Thanks much in advance. You guys are GREAT!

I would check with the local bar association. They should be able to point you in the right direction.
Also, if local cops are represented by a union, check to see who is their legal advisor. My FOP Lodge kept a very knowledgeable labor attorney on retainer.

Check the AVVO rating system and do a search under employment lawyers in your area. However, shouldn't he call his union first? Don't they provide lawyers for this sort of thing?

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
Check the AVVO rating system and do a search under employment lawyers in your area. However, shouldn't he call his union first? Don't they provide lawyers for this sort of thing?

Don't rely on AVVO. It's completely unreliable in terms of "ratings", practice areas, etc.

The suggestion to call a union and see if he can get a referral out of them isn't bad, but it also may not result in the best lawyer for the job. No way of telling, really.

Also, if he has his own union, I wouldn't necessarily use the union lawyer. Even in a formal grievance (which he may be required to file), the union attorney will have divided loyalties. I see it all the time. I'm talking about an actual union lawyer here, not a referral.

Honestly, sometimes it just comes down to advertising. A lawyer who knows the subject area will be better than the best lawyer in the world who doesn't practice in it at all. There should be at least one or two mid-size or large firms that focus on labor/employment issues. Find one of those.

-Rob

You might have better luck searching in the Boise area. It's been 20 years since I lived in the area but Pocatello and Idaho Falls don't really strike me as areas where labor attorneys would be in high demand. Another place to search might be Salt Lake City. I know there are more than a few lawyers on this forum that are licensed in multiple states, I would think that you may find a few in northern Utah.

If your nephew has pay stubs over his entire gig I would think this case would be a slam dunk. I hope it works out that way for him and I wish him good luck.

You can also get copies of tax returns,
I believe, with W-2s, 1099s, etc.

Start here, http://www.utahjobjustice.com/

Before he gets hooked up with a lawyer I would follow JAllen's advise and get any documentation he can himself.
Also get, in writing, a statement from the state school system that outlines their reasons for denying him his proper pension.

Thanks, gentlemen!

Acting on this now, will post later to let you know how it develops.

Nephew is in kind of a disbelieving funk over this. I'm thinking that's going to turn into righteous anger pretty soon. I hope a good lawyer can get this straight.

Thanks again!

Did he earn vacation or sick leave at different rates during those years? If,so, at what rate did he earn?

I doubt he has a union since Idaho is IRCC a Right-to-Work (for less) state

Did he ever receieve any offical recognition by the state for his service (anniversary gift)

How long has he made state pension contributions?

Has he kept the same bank over that career? Did he have autodeposit? Does the bank have records going back that long?

Tax returns and Tax ID of his employer from 30 years ago?

Was he ever employed by the Dept. as temporary, PT or contractor during his service?

the more info he can dig up and present to his lawyer, the better.

In the education system, teacher pay is Computer by education level and years of teaching. Does this apply to him? If so, those missing years effected his pay for years.

Can we assume the missing years are at the start of his career? If not, when were they? Did the conditions of his employment change during the missing year period?

In answer to some of the questions above:

Nephew (who is actually a year older than I am -- he's the oldest son of my wife's older sister, who is 20 years older than my wife) is NOT a teacher. He is a machinist, and he works for the ISU College of Engineering and for the ISU Vo-Tech College in Pocatello.

No, he is not a member of a union. This is Idaho; we don't unionize here. Though I gotta admit, preventing what he is encountering right now would be a pretty damned good reason to have a union.

Don't know when the "missing years" are. He first became aware of it when he got a second 20-year service plaque two years after he got his first one. Then it happened again when he received a second 25-year service plaque two years after he received the first one. He thought that was funny. He wasn't worried about how it might affect "The Rule of 90"; still wouldn't be if the University were not pulling the rug out from under him. He'd be happy to work another five or ten years before retiring.

Yes, he has 1040s, W2s, pay stubs (most of 'em, some are missing), and other miscellaneous documents showing continuous employment as a machinist at ISU for over 27 years.

He's a machinist, and a good one. He is not a politician or a public speaker. He is just plain fummoxed that the system is trying to screw him, and he needs an effective advocate to speak for him. Thus the request for help in identifying a good employment lawyer in the SE Idaho area.

Thanks again!

Thanks,

Sap

Sweet Jesus!

What a difference a lawyer makes!

Now the HR folks at ISU appear to be taking my nephew seriously, or stated more accurately, now they are telling his lawyer that they recognize that his employment history DOES satisfy the "Rule of 90".

Looks like his retirement date will be 1 July, and he will be receiving full benefits as defined by the "Rule of 90".

quote:

Originally posted by SapperSteel:
Sweet Jesus!

What a difference a lawyer makes!

Now the HR folks at ISU appear to be taking my nephew seriously, or stated more accurately, now they are telling his lawyer that they recognize that his employment history DOES satisfy the "Rule of 90".

Looks like his retirement date will be 1 July, and he will be receiving full benefits as defined by the "Rule of 90".

Real glad to hear that. Sometimes it's just knowing how to present the information to the right people.

quote:

Originally posted by SapperSteel:
Sweet Jesus!

What a difference a lawyer makes!

Words of wisdom right here, folks.

You should see what we can do to the value of an insurance settlement.

-Rob

quote:

Originally posted by BurtonRW:

quote:

Originally posted by SapperSteel:
Sweet Jesus!

What a difference a lawyer makes!

Words of wisdom right here, folks.

You should see what we can do to the value of an insurance settlement.

-Rob

Yeah, we're disdained (or worse), until we work for you.

OP, glad it is going well.

Sometimes, you just need to know how to say something, focus the listener's mind on important considerations, clear the air of irrelevant trivialities, leading to a fair conclusion.

I've seen this happen dozens of times.

Yup. Everyone makes fun of lawyers until they need one.

I've never had a bad experience with a lawyer that I have hired.
I don't know why I don't trust them (in general) or why they scare the shit out of me.
It's not a fair assessment I know.

quote:

Originally posted by SapperSteel:
Looks like his retirement date will be 1 July, and he will be receiving full benefits as defined by the "Rule of 90".

Excellent, I was hoping you'd provide a followup.