compensation that, once earned, could not be taken away
retroactively, even through a negotiated agreement by the
teachers’ union. The local board of education appealed the
trial court’s decision.
The appellate division affirmed the trial court’s ruling
and agreed that “payment for accumulated sick leave, as a
form of deferred compensation, is to be protected.” Absent
a knowing and intentional waiver by the persons who were
adversely affected, the court also concluded that a retroac-
tive cap on vested or accumulated compensation was inap-
propriate and unlawful. The court emphatically upheld the
trial court’s decision and stated the following:
...We agree that [prior decisions of the court]
stand for the proposition that compensation for
accumulated sick leave is “earned” during the
service performed by the teachers during the term
of any particular collective negotiation agree-
ment. Once vested, the right to compensation is a
form of deferred compensation that cannot retro-
actively be negotiated away.
Accordingly, the court held that the 2015 agreement was
impermissibly applied to retroactively divest plaintiffs of
their right to compensation they had earned.
Just as the appellate division held that even a bargaining
representative cannot enter an agreement to retroactively
take away accrued sick leave of its members, the state legis-
lature also cannot take away accrued sick leave retroactively.
As has been reported in prior NJ COPS Magazine articles, at
monthly state meetings and at the PBA conventions, numer-
ous bills have been introduced over the years with the intent
of capping payment of accumulated sick leave.
We are not aware of any serious attempts to take away any
accumulated compensation earned by public employees, in-
cluding law enforcement officers. Any bills which have been
introduced, and may still be pending, address the issue of a
cap on accumulated sick leave prospectively, or going for-
ward, not retroactively. And as of this writing, none of those
bills have come close to passage and enactment. The court’s
decision in Barila only highlights the fact that the courts will
not take away deferred compensation, such as accrued sick
leave, retroactively.
As noted above, in January, the NJ Supreme Court agreed
to hear the local board of education’s appeal of this decision.
While no one can predict what the Supreme Court will do,
we are optimistic that it will follow long-standing judicial
precedent on this and related issues concerning deferred
compensation and will affirm the appellate division’s deci-
sion. We will continue to keep the NJ State PBA and its mem-
bers advised of the progress of this case as it goes forward.
www.njcopsmagazine.com
■ FEBRUARY 2019 13