Browse Previous Page | Table of Contents | Browse Next Page

Chapter 128. Offices and Public Officers.

ARTICLE 3. Retirement System for Counties, Cities and Towns.

§ 128-38. Reservation of power to change.

The General Assembly reserves the right at any time and from time to time, and if deemed necessary or appropriate by said General Assembly in order to coordinate with any changes in the benefit and other provisions of the Social Security Act made after January 1, 1955, to modify or amend in whole or in part any or all of the provisions of the North Carolina Local Governmental Employees' Retirement System.

(1955, c. 1153, s. 9.)


CASE NOTES

Relationship between public employees and retirement system is one of contract. Simpson v. North Carolina Local Gov't Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.C. App. 218, 363 S.E.2d 90 (1987), aff'd, 323 N.C. 362, 372 S.E.2d 559 (1988).


Right of Employee to Rely on Retirement Plan. - A public employee has a right to expect that the retirement rights bargained for in exchange for his loyalty and continued services, and continually promised him over many years, will not be removed or diminished. Simpson v. North Carolina Local Gov't Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.C. App. 218, 363 S.E.2d 90 (1987), aff'd, 323 N.C. 362, 372 S.E.2d 559 (1988).
Plaintiffs, as members of the North Carolina Local Governmental Employees' Retirement System, had a contractual right to rely on the terms of the retirement plan as these terms existed at the moment their retirement rights became vested. Simpson v. North Carolina Local Gov't Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.C. App. 218, 363 S.E.2d 90 (1987), aff'd, 323 N.C. 362, 372 S.E.2d 559 (1988).


Impairment of Rights by 1981 Amendment. - Rights arising under this Article were impaired inasmuch as plaintiff employees stood to suffer significant reductions in their retirement allowances as a result of the 1981 legislative amendment of G.S. 128-27 adding subsection (d4), and where challenge thereto had been resolved below by grant of summary judgment in defendants' favor, but defendants' affidavit failed to demonstrate or reflect that the changes in question were reasonable and necessary to serve an important state interest, the case would be remanded for further proceedings. Simpson v. North Carolina Local Gov't Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.C. App. 218, 363 S.E.2d 90 (1987), aff'd, 323 N.C. 362, 372 S.E.2d 559 (1988).


Cited in Faulkenbury v. Teachers' & State Emps. Retirement Sys., 345 N.C. 683, 483 S.E.2d 422 (1997).





Browse Previous Page | Table of Contents | Browse Next Page