Khan v. Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System

**Khan v. Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System** This case involved a dispute over retirement benefits between an employee named Khan and the Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System (LACERS). Khan had worked for the city and later became a judge. When he retired, he wanted to calculate his pension based on his higher judicial salary rather than his earlier city employee salary. Khan argued that the two retirement systems had reciprocity provisions that would allow him to use his judicial pay for his LACERS pension calculation. The appellate court ruled against Khan, reversing an earlier trial court decision that had favored him. The court determined that LACERS and the Judicial Retirement System (JRS) do not have reciprocity provisions that would allow Khan to retire using his higher judicial salary for his city pension benefits. This ruling matters for workers because it clarifies that moving between different public sector jobs doesn't automatically mean you can use your highest salary from any position to calculate retirement benefits from a previous employer's pension system. Workers should carefully review the specific rules of each retirement system they participate in and understand that benefits are typically calculated based on the salary earned while participating in that particular system.