Gonzales v. Public Employees Retirement Board

I concur in the portion of the opinion which holds that NMSA 1978, Section 10-11-22(C) (Cum.Supp.1986), allows Plaintiffs to do what they did, and in the portion of the opinion which holds that Plaintiffs did not hold temporary or part-time positions as defined by PERA Rule 400.20. I also agree with the discussion of the sham employment issue, and the constitutional issues raised.

I cannot, however, agree that equitable estoppel might be applied against PERB to determine that those Plaintiffs who worked for less than fifteen days can be credited with service despite the requirements of NMSA…