Taiym v. The Retirement Board of the Policemen's Aunnuity and Benefit Fund of the City of Chicago
10 N.E.3d 267
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Taiym petitioned July 13, 2010 for pension credit for prior City employment with safety duties before becoming a police officer.
- Prior to joining the Chicago Police Department (April 30, 2001), Taiym held City positions: watchman (1988–1990), laborer (1990–1991), laborer for the bureau of electricity (1991–2001).
- Taiym submitted City documents detailing his duties, emphasizing “safety work” performed before police employment.
- The Retirement Board held a hearing on October 26, 2011 and denied credit under 5-214(b) (temporary officer) and 5-214(c) (safety/investigative work).
- Taiym challenged the Board’s interpretations in an administrative-review suit; the circuit court affirmed, and Taiym appealed.
- The issue on appeal is whether Taiym qualifies for credit under 5-214(c) (or 5-214(b)) for his pre-police safety work, and the panel affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Taiym qualifies for pension credit under 5-214(c). | Taiym argues his pre-police safety work falls within 5-214(c) and need not be on leave. | Retirement Board contends Taiym’s duties were not safety/investigative work and he did not perform them while on leave. | No; 5-214(c) does not cover City-employed pre-police safety work; Board’s denial upheld. |
| Whether Taiym qualifies for pension credit under 5-214(b) as a temporary police officer. | Taiym asserts he was engaged in temporary/officer-type duties before police employment. | Board found he was not a temporary police officer. | Not necessary to address on final ruling; Board’s 5-214(b) determination stands as part of decision. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rosario v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund, 381 Ill. App. 3d 776 (2008) (construction of on-leave language in 5-214(c))
- Paris v. Feder, 179 Ill. 2d 173 (1997) (interpretation of legislative intent; dictionary usage in absence of defined terms)
- Shields v. Judges' Retirement System of Illinois, 204 Ill. 2d 488 (2003) (liberal construction in favor of pensioners' rights)
- Collins v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund, 407 Ill. App. 3d 979 (2011) (use of dictionary to define undefined terms; liberal construction)