You are on page 1of 5

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE

LAW APPEALS
______________________________________
Boston Retirement Board,

|
|
Respondent,
|
v.
|
|
Shelley E. Joyner,
|
|
Petitioner.
|
|
_______________________________________

CRAB DOCKET
NO. CR-14-542

MOTION OF THE RESPONDENT,


BOSTON RETIREMENT BOARD,
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The Boston Retirement Board (the Retirement Board), respondent in the abovecaptioned action, hereby moves, pursuant to 801 C.M.R. 1.01 (7)(g), for summary judgment in
its favor, and against Shelley E. Joyner, the above named petitioner, on the appeal of the
Retirement Boards decision to deny Mrs. Joyners request for two service purchases.
In support of its motion and as grounds therefore, the Retirement Board relies upon its
Memorandum of Law, filed simultaneously herewith.

UNITED STATES APPEALS COURT


DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
______________________________________
Boston Retirement Board,
|
|
Respondent,
|
v.
|
CRAB DOCKET
|
NO. CR-14-542
Shelley E. Joyner,
|
|
Petitioner.
|
|
_______________________________________
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF
RESPONDENTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
INTRODUCTION
Member seeks various service purchases for:
COMPASS School: 1988-1989
1989-1990
1990-1991
1992-1993
Community Center School (CCS): 1994-1997
FACTS
Shelley E. Joyner currently works at Trotter Elementary School within the Boston Public
School system. Prior to her current position she worked at COMPASS School from 1988-1993,
and then at Community Center School (CCS) from 1994-1997. Tuition for students who attend
COMPASS was (and still is) funded by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. There are no
payroll records for Mrs. Joyners time at COMPASS spanning from August 1987 through June
1990. From 1991-1992, she was paid $19,000; and from 1992-1993 she was paid $19,500. Mrs.

Joyner was a caseworker for one year, and then a Clinical Coordinator for the remainder of her
tenure at COMPASS. Her duties as a caseworker included providing transportation, behavior
management, counseling and general case management for students. As the Clinical Coordinator
she was essentially the program director with supervisory responsibilities, clinical/behavior
management oversight & duties, and general day to day program management for significantly
emotionally and behaviorally disturbed adolescents.
CCS (which has been closed for over 12 years now) is a special education school that
also received its funding from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. During her time at CCS,
Mrs. Joyner was employed as a Program Director.

ARGUMENT
Massachusetts law allows teachers to purchase prior non-membership teaching service in
four ways:

[1] out of state public teaching service as specified in 3(4);

[2] non-public school teaching service as specified in 3(4A) and 4(1)(p);

[3] pre-1975 maternity leave as specified in 4(1)(g1/2); and,

[4] service while employed by the Department of Education and paid with Federal
funds as specified in 4(1)(l) and 4(1)(l ).

Mrs. Joyner worked at Massachusetts non-public schools after 1973, therefore only
4(1)(p) is applicable. Section 4(1)(p) states, in pertinent part:
Any member of a contributory retirement system who is engaged in a teaching
position and holds a certificate issued by the department of education or is exempted
from the requirement of certification and who was previously engaged in teaching pupils

in any non-public school in the commonwealth, if the tuition of all such pupils taught was
financed in part or I fully by the commonwealth may, before the date any retirement
allowance becomes effective for him, establish such service as creditable service by
depositing into the annuity savings fund of the system of which he is a member in one
sum, or in installments
(emphasis added).
The issue here is whether or not her job duties as a case worker equate to teaching
pupils. Massachusetts trial courts have held that when determining whether or not a person was
engaged in teaching pupils it is appropriate to note that, [f]irst,an individuals job title does
not determine eligibility for G.L. ch. 32 purposes; rather, the appropriate inquiry involves
comparing the individuals job duties to the requirement of the buyback provision at
issueSecond, the courts decisions suggest that the responsibility of an employee engaged in
teaching pupils must involve substantial teaching or advising of students. Langendorfer v.
Cont. Ret. Appeal Bd., SUCV07-02905 (Supp. Ct. dec. 10/19/2011).
Massachusetts law does not allow the Retirement Board to invoice for Mrs. Joyners
positions as a Clinical Coordinator at COMPASS, and Program Director at CCS because
4(1)(p) does not apply to administrator or supervisory positions, it only applies to those
engaged in teaching pupils, i.e., classroom teaching. The Clinical Director position was
described by Sandra Skinner as, the program director with supervisory responsibilities,
clinical/behavior management oversight & duties, and general day to day program management
for significantly emotionally and behaviorally disturbed adolescents.., see Exhibit C. This
description makes it clear that the Clinical Coordinator position was an administrators
position.

Mrs. Joyner described her position at CCS by stating Program Director was in essence a
principal. The position of principal is also an administrators position, which is excluded from a
4(1)(p) service purchase. See Shields v. Mass. Teachers Retirement System, CR-05-1098
(DALA dec. 10/07/2011) (4(1)(p) does not allow the, purchase of service based on work as an
administrator or in any position with primarily administrative duties). See also Kraskouskas v.
Mass. Teachers Retirement System, CR-09-288 (DALA dec. 09/26/2014).
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Boston Retirement Board respectfully requests that the
Court grant its motion for summary judgment.