Aronson v. Public Employees Retirement Board

# Aronson v. Public Employees Retirement Board: Plain English Summary **What Happened** Aronson, a public employee, lost her retirement benefits because the Public Employees Retirement Board said she didn't work enough hours—fewer than 600 per year. The board claimed this meant her membership in the retirement plan had ended. Aronson disagreed and took the case to court. **What the Court Decided** The court sided with Aronson. The judge found that the retirement law's actual language doesn't require employees to work a minimum 600 hours yearly. Instead, the law only says members must continue working for at least one PERS employer—not be completely absent from all PERS jobs. Because Aronson was still employed by a PERS employer, her membership should have continued. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling protects employees who work part-time or variable hours in public sector jobs. It prevents employers from unfairly ending retirement benefits based on rules that aren't actually in the law. Workers can maintain their retirement plan membership even if they work fewer hours, as long as they keep employment with their PERS employer.