Court Opinion

ID: 9637594
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:11:40.446979+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:39:04.342781
License: Public Domain

MANDERINO, Justice
(dissenting).
I dissent. There is no legitimate state interest in discriminating between employees according to the type of employment by which they are eligible for social security benefits. Early retirement forces the appellant to lose his income before reaching the age of 65. Other teachers are not forced to live on a limited income (or find new employment) between ages 62 and 65. This distinction is in no way related to educational purposes.
*201Moreover, the three years of employment between ages 62 and 65 can be significant in determining a teacher’s retirement income, other than social security benefits, since teacher’s pensions are related to salary amounts earned and length of service.
The justification for the discrimination announced by the majority is a blatant favoring of one teacher over another for reasons unrelated to any legitimate educational interest.
O’BRIEN and ROBERTS, JJ., join in this dissenting opinion.