top of page
Search
Writer's pictureThe San Juan Daily Star

Ex-Supreme Court justices demand pension adjustments



The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, in San Juan, Aug. 6, 2019. (Erika P. Rodríguez/The New York Times)

By The Star Staff


Five former Supreme Court justices have sued the Government and Judiciary Employees’ Retirement System seeking to have their pensions adjusted to match the salary hikes obtained under the recent review of the judicial branch’s salary scales.


Despite the fact that Act 101-2024 provided salary hikes to the chief justice and associate justices, retired Supreme Court justices have not yet seen any adjustment reflected in their pensions nor have they received the retroactive salary increase provided for by the aforementioned law, the former justices said in a request for mandamus (order) filed Tuesday in San Juan Superior Court.


The increase, the first since 2003, came after a court ordered it upon finding that the increase was already authorized in the approved budget.


The retired justices contend that, by virtue of a 1986 Superior Court ruling that was never appealed, pensions must be adjusted to match the salary received by active Supreme Court justices.


The former justices in September demanded that the retirement system make the adjustment in accordance with the increase that went into effect retroactive to 2023, but the system has ignored the plea.


“The pension of these retired justices continues to be the one that corresponds to the entire salary for the respective positions of the incumbents, so it is not subject to a lower calculation or percentage for defined benefit as the one that applies to the other active and retired judges of the Judicial Branch,” the lawsuit says.


Only retired Supreme Court justices receive a pension equal to the salary of the active justices, a benefit that other judges do not receive.


The increase approved this year brought the salary of the chief justice to $164,275 and that of the associate justices to $153,519. The claimants’ pensions, therefore, would be those same amounts depending on whether their retirement occurred as an associate or chief justice.

27 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page