Barbara J. Barth v. RRRB ( 1998 )


Menu:
  •                            United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 97-2852
    ___________
    Barbara J. Barth,                        *
    *
    Petitioner,                 *
    * Appeal from the Railroad
    v.                                 * Retirement Board.
    *
    Railroad Retirement Board,               *    [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Respondent.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: January 15, 1998
    Filed: February 13, 1998
    ___________
    Before LOKEN, FLOYD R. GIBSON, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    A section of the Railroad Retirement Act, 45 U.S.C. § 231b(f)(1), contains a
    complex formula that limits a retired employee’s annuity benefits to a percentage of
    “final average monthly compensation.” Final average monthly compensation is
    determined “by dividing the total compensation received by such individual in the two
    calendar years, consecutive or otherwise, in which [she] was credited with the highest
    total compensation during the ten-year period ending with December 31 of the year in
    which such individual’s annuity . . . begins to accrue by 24.”
    Barbara J. Barth applied for benefits in 1994. The above formula adversely
    affected her benefits because she stopped working in 1986, when her husband retired,
    which means that she had worked only fourteen months in the ten years prior to her
    annuity beginning to accrue. Barth’s administrative appeals were rejected by a hearing
    officer and the Railroad Retirement Board. She now appeals to this court, as 45 U.S.C.
    § 231g allows. Barth argues that the statutory formula is “flawed” as applied to this
    thirty-year railroad employee. To correct the flaw, she contends that we should change
    the way her “final average monthly compensation” is determined, either by looking
    back ten years and ten months to calculate the “total compensation” numerator, or by
    adjusting the twenty-four-month denominator to fourteen. After careful consideration,
    we agree with the Board’s General Counsel that the statutory formula is unambiguous
    in this regard and was correctly applied in this case. Like the Board, we may not
    rewrite an unambiguous statute.
    Accordingly, the decision of the Railroad Retirement Board is affirmed.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 97-2852

Filed Date: 2/13/1998

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021