1. September 7, 2017

    Appellate Court Holds That MOU Does Not Provide Vested Interest in Retiree Medical Benefits

    BY: Nate Kowalski, Jorge Luna, Joshua Morrison

    A new California appellate court decision affirmed the denial of retiree medical benefits and reinforced a 2011 California Supreme Court ruling that absent clear contractual language or convincing extrinsic evidence of intent, the presumption is that a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) does not create rights that survive the term of the contract. Specifically, the California […] more

  2. June 14, 2017

    California Court of Appeal Holds That Longevity Performance Bonus Should Be Excluded from Pension Calculations

    BY: Nate Kowalski, Jorge Luna, Joshua Morrison

    On June 5, 2017, the California Court of Appeal published DiCarlo v. County of Monterey, holding that employees’ stipends that depended on both longevity and performance were properly excluded from the calculation of public pension benefits. The Court of Appeal ruled that although the California Code of Regulations separately lists bonus pay and longevity pay […] more

  3. April 21, 2017

    California Supreme Court Agrees to Review Another Appellate Court Ruling Allowing Modification of Public Pensions

    BY: Nate Kowalski, Joshua Morrison, Jorge Luna

    Last week, the California Supreme Court agreed to review the California Court of Appeal’s December 2016 ruling in Cal Fire Local 2881 v. California Public Employees’ Retirement System, 7 Cal.App.5th 115 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016), that the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) lawfully eliminated the right of CalPERS members to purchase up […] more

Upcoming AALRR Events

Complimentary Breakfast Briefing: He Said/She Said/They Said: But Who to Believe?

In workplace investigations, witnesses often contradict each other on key facts or they interpret those facts differently. As an investigator, you must decide whose version or interpretation of those facts you believe. How do you make that determination? Are you confident that your approach for assessing witness credibility results in correct findings?

This breakfast briefing provides an in-depth analysis of credibility factors, including corroboration, plausibility, motivation, consistency, contradictions, and demeanor.

The briefing also explores other factors that may influence an investigator’s decision making process including implicit/unconscious bias and provides steps to reduce those concerns.

Finally, this briefing uses real world examples and fact-based hypotheticals to sharpen your skill in making credibility assessments — an indispensable tool in your investigation tool kit.

May 23, 2017 - Cerritos Sheraton

June 1, 2017 - Costa Mesa Center Club

June 6, 2017 - Los Angeles City Club

Subscribe

Categories

Tags