Arnett

This case requires us to address a claim for age discrimination in disability benefits in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins, 507 U.S. 604 , 113 S.Ct. 1701 , 123 L.Ed.2d 338 (1993).

Two individuals are hired as police officers on the same day. One is twenty-five, the other forty-five. A year later, they are injured in the same accident. Under the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law, Cal. Gov’t Code § 21417, the younger employee receives 50% of final monthly compensation as a disability benefit, but the older employee receives only 20% the difference due solely to their ages at hire. Does a challenge to such a plan state a claim for disparate treatment or disparate impact under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 ? We hold that it does, and reverse the district court’s grant of motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for judgment on the pleadings.

BACKGROUND

Appellants, former police officers, correctional officers and other “safety employees” 2 of the State of California and local agencies (collectively, the “Employees”), brought this class action to challenge calculation of disability…