When the 1998 budget bill restored the cost-of-living raise for state employees with poor performance ratings, did that fix reach backward to give them the 1997 COLA they missed too, or only the 1998 COLA?

Plain-English summary

The State Personnel Director asked the North Carolina AG how Session Law 1998-212 affected state employees who had not received a cost-of-living adjustment because of documented poor performance under N.C.G.S. § 126-7(c)(4b). The surviving text of the opinion explains that the 1998 legislation extended eligibility to employees who otherwise would not receive the increase. It also acknowledges an argument that the legislation might reach back to the 1997 COLA.

The office rejected that reading. It found that neither the effective-date provision nor any other part of the 1998 law showed a clear intent to repeal § 126-7(c)(4b) retroactively or provide back pay. It concluded that affected employees were entitled only to the 1% COLA for 1998. The available text does not address the salary base for calculating that adjustment or whether individual employees had other intervening raises.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did the 1998 law give employees the COLA they missed in 1997?
A: The AG concluded it did not. The opinion said the 1998 legislation showed no clear intention to repeal the earlier exclusion retroactively or give affected employees retroactive pay raises.

Q: What adjustment did the AG say affected employees could receive?
A: The opinion concluded that they were entitled only to the 1% COLA for 1998.

Q: Did the opinion set a salary base for the 1998 adjustment?
A: No salary-calculation method appears in the surviving opinion text. It reaches only the question of retroactive eligibility and entitlement to the 1998 COLA.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion addressed Session Law 1998-212 and the earlier exclusion in N.C.G.S. § 126-7(c)(4b) for employees with documented poor performance. Its stated reason was the absence of a clear legislative expression of retroactive intent in the 1998 law. The stored original has an editorial gap where the opinion described the 1997 rule and the competing interpretations, so that missing discussion has not been reconstructed here.

Citations

• N.C.G.S. § 126-7(c)(4b)
• Session Law 1998-212 (SB 1366)

Source

• Landing page: https://ncdoj.gov/opinions/state-employees-entitlement-to-cola/

Original opinion text

December 3, 1998

Mr. Ronald G. Penny
State Personnel Director
Office of State Personnel
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina

RE: Advisory Opinion: N.C.G.S. 126-7(c)(4b); State Employees; Entitlement to COLA; SB 1366

Dear Ron:

In your letter of November 16, 1998, you request our opinion as to the interpretation and application of certain provisions of Session Law 1998-212 (SB 1366), An Act to Modify the Current Operations and Capital Improvements Appropriations Act of 1997 and to Make Other Changes in the Budget Operation of the State.

[The opinion describes the 1997 COLA exclusion under § 126-7(c)(4b) and the 1998 legislative fix, and considers two competing interpretations of whether the fix is retroactive.]

It is our opinion that the first interpretation is correct. While it may be argued that the language of the 1998 legislation supports extending the entitlement back to the 1997 COLA, we do not believe this argument has merit. Granted the primary purpose of the legislation is to extend the entitlement to the COLA to employees who otherwise would not receive the increase because of documented poor performance. However, neither the effective date provision nor any other provision of the 1998 legislation manifests a clear intention to repeal N.C.G.S. 126-7(c)(4b) retroactively. Likewise the 1998 legislation does not manifest a clear intention to provide retroactive pay raises to the affected employees. Absent a clear expression of legislative intent, we believe the affected employees are entitled to receive only the 1% COLA for 1998.

Ann Reed
Senior Deputy Attorney General

Lars F. Nance
Special Deputy Attorney General