FEDERAL COURT CLARIFIES COMP TIME USE

Keith A. Karlson

Attorney at Law

Richard J. Reimer & Associates LLC

Hinsdale, Illinois

kkarlson@rjrlaborlaw.com

            On September 11, 2007, public safety officers won a key victory in federal court.  In Heitmann v. City of Chicago, 2007 WL 2739559 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 11, 2007), Federal Magistrate Judge, Sidney I. Schenkier, held the City of Chicago violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) by refusing to grant police officers compensatory time (“comp time”) because of financial concerns. 

The FLSA governs the substance and procedures of how workers are compensated for overtime.  The FLSA has several special rules for police officers and firefighters.  Compensatory time is one of the areas of the law where police officers are treated differently than other American workers.  It is important to note, the FLSA sets minimum standards for how employees will be compensated for overtime.  Generally, collective bargaining agreements can add more protections than the minimal safeguards afforded by federal and state law. 

            A review of the FLSA’s history and purpose is helpful.  In 1938 Congress, to address concerns of workers working long hours, enacted the FLSA.  The FLSA requires employers to pay workers time and half for any time worked over forty hours.  Some courts considering the FLSA have concluded Congress, by enacting FLSA, intended “to create the incentive to hire more workers, not overwork the existing workforce.”  In 1985 the U.S. Supreme Court made this rule applicable to state and local entities.  See Garcia v. San Antonia Metropolitan Transit Auth., 469 U.S. 528 (1985).  On the heels of Garcia, Congress amended the FLSA to ease its impact on state and local government.  One way they did so was by allowing local and state government to award comp time “in lieu of overtime compensation.”  29 U.S.C. §207(o) is the statute authorizing such schemes.  Since 1985 the arguments about comp time have become common fodder for labor-management disagreement.

Heitmann v. City of Chicago, was the latest salvo in an ongoing struggle public safgety officers have waged over how comp time is administered.  The case centered on whether it was legal for the City of Chicago to refuse its police officers, sergeants, lieutenants, and captains leave to use comp time when doing so would force the city to incur additional overtime liability.  The court held, in part, financial hardship is not a suitable reason for denying overtime.  The case hinged on the interpretation of Section 207(o)(5) of the FLSA.  Section 207(o)(5) states:

An employee of a public agency which is a State, political subdivision of a State, or an interstate governmental agency-- (A) who has accrued compensatory time off authorized to be provided under paragraph (1), and (B) who has requested the use of such compensatory time, shall be permitted by the employee's employer to use such time within a reasonable period after making the request if the use of the compensatory time does not unduly disrupt the operations of the public agency.  42 U.S.C. 207(o)(5).

            In Heitmann, officers argued they were entitled to use comp time on dates in the future selected by them.  The officers also argued financial cost is not an undue disruption of the department’s operations.    The city argued the dates the officers requested off is irrelevant to when comp time is granted.  The city claimed it complied with the law if they granted comp time on any date reasonably after the employee requested it. 

In his opinion, Judge Schenkier explained why the city’s argument was unpersuasive.  “First, the regulations say that financial concerns are not a legitimate basis to deny a request for compensatory time. Second, there is no evidence that awarding the specific dates requested would require paying replacements overtime more often than awarding time off on amorphous dates chosen by the City.”  The judge further held, “Finally, we find our interpretation of the statute to be the most consistent with common sense. In the real world, people do not ask for time off in a vacuum. They ask for specific dates for specific reasons: such as birthday, a wedding, a funeral, a party, or a vacation.” 

It is important to remember, the employee still has an obligation to give the employer reasonable notice of the day when he/she wants to use his/her comp time.  “For example, people who ask for the day off on the very day they want to take time run the very reasonable risk that such a request will be denied, because it was not presented with reasonable notice.”  The court held a collective bargaining agreement can define the amount of notice needed prior to comp time being used. 

The applicability of Heitmann to IAFF members depends on several factors.  One important factor to consider is the language in the Local’s collective bargaining agreement, if it has one, regarding comp time and how it is to be requested (e.g. timing of request, timing of response, etc.).  If your Local’s members are unreasonably being denied dates they have requested off, they should contact their Union leadership to discuss her/his options.  Our firm is hopeful this decision will prove to be a helpful tool in resolving the ongoing struggle public safety officers face when they seek to use the comp time they have rightfully earned.