fact sheet which supported the PBAs ’ position . The Court found that these outside sources buttressed the court ’ s conclusion about the clear language of the law . The Appellate Division therefore reversed the trial court ’ s decision and sent the case back to the trial court to address the issue of Mr . Spallina ’ s entitlement to reimbursement for the contributions he previously made toward his health insurance premiums under his Local ’ s collective bargaining agreement , an issue not addressed by the trial court .
This decision is significant for several reasons . First , it was a unanimous opinion . Therefore , the township does not have an automatic right of appeal to the New Jersey Supreme Court . The township does have the right to request that the Supreme Court hear an appeal , but it is discretionary with the court . As of the date we prepared this article , the township had not yet filed a request for review . Second , the decision will be published . This means that it will serve as precedent and will be binding throughout New Jersey unless it is reversed by the Supreme Court .
Finally , the case is significant because it affects all public employees , not just law enforcement officers . Public employees who retire on an accidental or ordinary disability pension can now rest assured that they will not be required to make contributions toward the cost of their health insurance premiums , even if they did not have 20 years of pensionable service when Chapter 78 became effective . The key is that the applicable collective bargaining agreement must provide for employer-paid benefits at an employee ’ s retirement .
We will continue to keep the State PBA and its membership advised of any developments in this case , particularly of any request by the employer to appeal . d
Kaitlyn E . Dunphy , Esq ., an associate in the firm of Zazzali , Fagella , Nowak , Kleinbaum & Friedman assisted in the preparation of this article . www . njcopsmagazine . com ■ JULY 2016 11