Still v. Barden
Still v. Barden
Opinion of the Court
(After stating the foregoing facts.) The pertinent provisions of the Fulton — School Employees’ Pensions Act (Ga. L. 1945, p. 528) are as follows:
Section 1 provides: “The following terms, when used in this Act, shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly requires otherwise: . . (6) ‘Member’means a teacher or employee contributing to the pension fund before retirement. (7) ‘Pensioner’ means a member after retirement under this Act or by reason of being a beneficiary.”
Section 4 of the act is as follows: “Every teacher and employee, as defined herein, of the Board of Education in active service and on the payroll of the Board, of Education of Fulton County as of May 1, 1945, and all future teachers and employees of said school system may, as a matter of right, retire from active service in said school system provided he shall have served (a) at least 25 years and has reached the age of 55 years, or (b) has had 20 years’ service and has reached the age of 60 years. It shall be compulsory for all teachers and employees to retire at the end of the fiscal school year nearest their 65th birthday.”
Section 5 of the act provides: “When any teacher or employee shall retire, voluntarily or automatically, according to age, and has credit for the number of years’ service as provided herein, he shall be paid a monthly pension which shall, as to amount, be the equivalent of one-half of the monthly salary or wage of such teacher or employee, arrived at by taking the average monthly salary paid during the five consecutive years that the teacher or employee drew his highest monthly salary or wage.”
It is contended by the plaintiff that, since he was a “member,” contributing to the pension fund before retirement, and was compelled to retire under the terms of section 4, upon reaching the age of 65 years, he became a “pensioner,” as defined by subparagraph 7 of section 1 of the act, and entitled to the monthly pension provided by section-5, regardless of
With this contention we cannot agree. It is conceded by counsel for both the plaintiff and the respondents that the plaintiff’s right to a pension, if any, must be found within the four corners of the act of 1945 (Ga. L. 1945, p. 528) as it existed at the time he left the service of the county. Section 4 of the act makes provision for the retirement of employees, and proAÚdes that an employee of the school system may, “as a matter of right, retire from active service in said school system provided he shall have served (a) at least 25 years and has reached the age of 55 years, or (b) has had 20 years’ service and has reached the age of 60 years. It shall be compulsory for all teachers and employees to retire at the end of the fiscal school year nearest their 65th birthday.”
Section 5 of the act fixes and prescribes when a pension shall be paid and the amount thereof, and provides: “When any teacher or employee shall retire, voluntarily or automatically, according to age, and has credit for the number of years’ service as provided herein, he shall be paid a monthly pension which shall, as to amount, be the equivalent of one-half of the monthly salary or wage of such teacher or employee, arrived at by taking the average monthly salary paid during the five consecutive years that the teacher or employee drew his highest monthly salary or wage.”
While under section 4 of the act one who reaches the age of 65 years is compelled to retire, or is automatically retired because of age, section 5 provides that before such an employee, either retiring as a matter of right or automatically according to age under the terms of section 4, shall be paid
To hold, as contended by the plaintiff, that the definition of “pensioner” as contained in subparagraph 7 of section 1 entitled a member employee who has retired to a pension regardless of the number of years’ service, would render meaningless the following clause of section 5: “and has credit for the number of years’ service as provided herein.” To further illustrate the fallacy of such a construction, suppose an employee has been employed at the age of 63 and was compelled to retire or automatically retired at the age of 65, after serving only two years, could it be seriously contended that he would be entitled to a pension under the terms of section 5, and if so, how would the amount thereof be ascertained? Section 5 provides that the amount of the payments to be made to any pensioner shall be the equivalent of one-half of the monthly salary or wage of such employee, arrived at by taking the average monthly salary paid during the five consecutive years that the .employee drew his highest monthly salary or wage, and this is the only method prescribed by the act for computing a pension for a retired employee.
We hold that, under the provisions of the act of 1945 (Ga. L. 1945, p. 528), an employee who was automatically retired prior to the passage of the amending act of 1949 (Ga. L. 1949, p. 1466), upon reaching the age of 65 years, and who did not have credit for at least 20 years’ service, is not entitled to a pension under section 5 of the act.
It is argued that such a construction of the act would be inequitable and unjust when an employee has been a member of the pension fund and paid his contribution as required by the act; that he has thus contributed to the pension fund, but receives nothing in return therefor. . We cannot agree with this
We are constrained to hold, as contended by the respondents
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- STILL v. BARDEN
- Status
- Published