Once again, check out one of many problems FAILED KANSAS CITY TAKEOVER OF MAST AMBULANCE SERVICE . . .
What will soon be a class-action lawsuit now filed in U.S. District Court accuses Kansas City of violating federal law in its overtime pay policies for former and current city employees who work or have worked as emergency medical technicians and paramedics.
So . . . A silly decision by old school and CURRENT council members looks like it might cost Kansas City MILLIONS and further erodes confidence in the current ambulance service.
If you ain't fire suppression, you ain't exempt.
ReplyDeleteBetween this situation, and the sexual harassment lawsuits that KCFD WILL lose, the city will be going broke!
ReplyDeleteCan someone help me ? That was a poorly written story in the Star. Who exactly is suing ? Several employees as a group gathered for a lawsuit or a union or ?? If it is individuals, who are they ? Star gets weaker by the day.
ReplyDelete@ 11:14, you are incorrect.
ReplyDeleteParamedics and EMT's who work for a fire department ARE 7K exempt under FLSA rules.
Fair Labor Standards Act Section 203(y) exempts paramedics and EMT's who are "...engaged in the prevention, control, and extinguishment of fires OR (this being the big word here) response to emergency situations where life, property, or the environment is at risk."
GONZALEZ v. CITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH FLORIDA confirmed that interpretation, and that ruling was upheld in the US District Court of Appeals.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-11th-circuit/1312192.html
HUFF v. DEKALB COUNTY GEORGIA
ReplyDeleteUS Court of Appeals also ruled paramedics and EMT's of a fire department exempt:
"The Plaintiffs argue that they do not fall within the ambit of § 203(y) because many of them have never engaged in any type of fire suppression. But, § 203(y) does not require actual engagement in fire suppression, as demonstrated by the disjunctive clause at the end of the statute: “ ‘Employee in fire protection activities' means an employee ․ (2) [who] is engaged in the prevention, control, and extinguishment of fires or response to emergency situations where life, property, or the environment is at risk.” The parties do not dispute that the Plaintiffs are engaged in the “response to emergency situations where life, property, or the environment is at risk.” Since § 203(y) phrases this requirement in the disjunctive, there is no statutory requirement that there be any level of actual engagement in fire suppression."
Your two cited cases don't settle this. There's just as many, if not more, that found in favor of plaintiffs. Every situation is unique, and I don't know anything about the city or the fire department or whatever specifics exist. But don't kid yourself that just because you can find two cases you will see the city prevail.
ReplyDeleteThey may, they may not. That's going to be up to a judge, not an anonymous commenter on this gutter blog.
Well 1:33, let's see...
ReplyDeleteGonzalez case in the US Court of Appeals was handed down in November 2008.
Huff case in the US Court of Appeals was handed down in February 2008.
Can you show even ONE case of fire department based paramedics/EMT's winning an overtime lawsuit under FLSA laws since November 2008?
11:36 If you are going to use my name, PLEASE learn how to spell it. Thank you, Lesa
ReplyDelete1:13~~Philadelphia's fire dept. paramedics who are assigned to ambulances do not have a responsibility for fire suppression activities and are not exempted from the overtime provisions of the FLSA. Lawrence v. City of Philadelphia, #06-4564, 2008 U.S. App. Lexis 11311, 13 WH Cases2d 1089 (3rd Cir.).
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gfoa.org/downloads/FLSA.pdf
ReplyDeleteAnother area of concern to public sector employers is the requirement set forth in the revised regulations relating to “first
responders.” The regulations explain that police, fire, emergency medical services personnel and other similar employees,
regardless of rank or pay level, who perform work such as preventing, controlling or extinguishing fires of any type;
rescuing fire, crime or accident victims; preventing or detecting crimes; or conducting investigations or inspections for
violations of law, or other similar work will be non-exempt employees, and thus eligible for overtime compensation.
http://www.dol.gov/elaws/esa/flsa/overtime/jobs.htm#E
ReplyDeleteEmergency Medical Technician (EMT) - rescues fire, crime or accident victims and may perform life saving activities. Workers who primarily perform such work and/or work involving repetitive operations with their hands, physical skill and energy are not exempt under the Regulations, Part 541. For more information, see Fact Sheet #17J: First Responders and the Part 541 Exemptions Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
God, this is fun.
ReplyDeleteEmployees in fire protection activities is defined in the FLSA (§203[y]) as follows:
'Employee in fire protection activities' means an employee, including a firefighter, paramedic, emergency medical technician, rescue worker, ambulance personnel, or hazardous materials worker, who
is trained in fire suppression, has the legal authority and responsibility to engage in fire suppression, and is employed by a fire department of a municipality, county, fire district, or State,
and is engaged in the prevention, control, and extinguishment of fires or response to emergency medical situations where life, property, or the environment is at risk.
Thus, to qualify for 7(k) pay as a fire protection employee, an EMS employee must (a) work for a (government) fire department, (b) be trained in fire suppression, (c) have the legal authority to fight fires, (d) have the responsibility to fight fires, (e) and either actually engage in fire suppression work or non-fire emergency responses.
this would just make it even better!
ReplyDelete10-10-2010, 09:52 PM
http://pafirenews.net/messageboard/index.php?topic=4649.0
Philadelphia Fire Department fire service paramedics recently won their FLSA lawsuit, winning them overtime after 40 hours, as well as some backpay. Sound familiar?
But it's seemed to have backfired. The PA Labor Relations Board has decided that the medics have proven that their role does not include firefighting, and that they therefore should not be allowed to be affiliated with Philadelphia's IAFF Local#22. As a result, their longevity increases have been frozen, they'll be forced to enroll in the city employees health insurance benefits, they'll no longer be represented by IAFF union, and the IAFF Pension is in limbo and doesn't look good.
Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it....
Wow, after reading the filing, and reading the Med-Act document, and reading these comments, my eyes are swimming. I am glad vox dur would keep me off any jury hearing this case.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that the plantiffs have their work cut out for them.
However, the mere fact that this has been filed testifies to the city's FAIL on the MAST/KCFD EMS decision.
SCOTUS Passes on 3rd Circuit Case Regarding FLSA and Paramedics
ReplyDeleteThe Supreme Court of the United States last month denied certiorari in a 3rd Circuit FLSA case entitled Philadelphia v. Lawrence. The issue involved whether paramedics trained in — but found not to be responsible for — fire suppression are exempt from overtime requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Third Circuit Court ruled that the paramedics were not exempt from overtime pay under federal law.
January 09, 2009 in FLSA | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
http://www.californiawagelaw.com/wage_law/flsa/
I think the defendants list should have included Louie Wright and Local 42. They are the ones responsible for this whole fu#king mess.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.labor.mo.gov/DLS/General/overtime.asp
ReplyDeleteOvertime Pay – Employers must pay at least one and one-half times the employee’s regular rate of pay once overtime pay is in effect. Overtime pay begins once an employee works more than 40 hours in a work week rather than more than 8 hours in a work day. State and federal law does not allow employees to voluntarily waive their rights to overtime pay and accept straight time instead. Any employer that asks an employee to do so violates the law and employees should file a wage complaint.
Missouri doesn't even have exceptions for firefighters!
...it is highly recommended to consult the federal Department of Labor website or an individual state’s Wage and Hour website. It is usually a good idea anyways to consult both websites because some states have stricter stipulations regarding exemption classification, which supersede FLSA requirements.
ReplyDeleteRead more: http://www.brighthub.com/office/entrepreneurs/articles/59732.aspx#ixzz1TccuYWNo
@ 3:18. Missouri DOE'S have exemptions for the firefighters. They have to follow the FLSA laws. Missouri hasn't passed any regulations to the contrary.
ReplyDelete@ 2:31, obviously you can't read very well.
ReplyDeleteThe appellate decision I cited was AFTER the Philadelphia judgement.
And how did that work out for the Philly paramedics anyway?
They were focibly removed from the collective bargaining unit of the fire fighter's union by the city and are now non-bargaining civil servants.
You watch. Somewhere in this pile of vipers, Her Highness, Circo will have a great big WAD on her chin....
ReplyDelete4:25, you obviously don't read well, the city did not remove them.
ReplyDeleteThe PA Labor Relations Board has decided that the medics have proven that their role does not include firefighting, and that they therefore should not be allowed to be affiliated with Philadelphia's IAFF
That PA stands for Pennsylvania, not Philadelphia. and OMG, would that be terrible if Local 42 lost over $300, 000 a year from the union dues we get screwed for! We didn't want to be in that fucking union anyway! Yet another scare job of what would happen if we did not join 42s. Remember that? We were promised such better representation by local 42 and we are still waiting, you fuckturds! All we got was fucked up the ass without lube!
Oh, and fuckturd, those paramedics were even trained as firefighters, which we aren't
ReplyDelete4:14, show me. State Laws take precedence over Federal Laws. How about states that ban abortions? There is a federal law making it legal. If you look at the Missouri labor law, I do not believe you will find an exemption for firefighters. It says ALL employees.
ReplyDeleteFirefighters. In 2007 http://www.monarchfpd.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=PagEd&file=index&topic_id=0&page_id=16
ReplyDeleteif it has changed since then, show me.
If you cannot find it, then there are a bunch of really stupid firefighters in Kansas City! To save you time, here is part of what it says:
The Missouri Department of Labor has determined that the new Minimum Wage Law changed the manner in which overtime is calculated for firefighters. After the new Minimum Wage Law was approved by voters in November and became effective on January 1st of this year, the Missouri Department of Labor opined that Federal Law no longer applies to firefighters. Instead, the Minimum Wage Law now requires firefighters to be paid overtime after 40 hours per week, instead of after 212 hours in 28 days pursuant to Federal Law.
Hey Lesa, you still sticking it to the city by being on extended psycho leave?
ReplyDeleteMy mistake and apologies. In May 2007 the Missouri senate reinstated the federal guidelines.
ReplyDeleteWhy is Lesa on extended psycho leave? How rude, if she indeed is on a leave for a psychiatric illness, to make fun of her. You should be ashamed of yourself. I thought firemen were better than that.
@ 6:12, there is not one state that ban's abortions before 20 weeks you tool. They can't, it's protected by federal law.
ReplyDeleteAlso 6:12 dipshit, Missouri overtime laws DO exempt firefighters. Missouri Statute 290.505 "... shall not apply to employees who are exempt from federal minimum wage or overtime requirements including, but not limited to, the exemptions or hour calculation formulas specified in 29 U.S.C. Sections 207 and 213, and any regulations promulgated thereunder."
You're a God damn genius 6:12.
@ 6:12, state laws CANNOT supercede Federal Laws enacted by Congress. Where do you get your information?
ReplyDeleteArticle VI of the U.S. Constitution says so: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
@ 5:48, hey stupid, the city of Philadelphia DID remove the paramedics from the firefighters union. Maybe you should do a little research before you open your uneducated mouth.
ReplyDeleteThe Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board upheld their removal after the paramedics appealed the city's decision to the board.
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt?open=514&objID=656946&mode=2
Look at September 2010, "In the Matter of the Employes of the City of Philadelphia" and educate yourself.
@ 5:50, they were NOT trained as firefighters.
ReplyDeleteThat was the basis of them winning their lawsuit.
The judges wrote "It cannot be fairly said that the [fire service paramedics] have a real obligation to fight fires because it is not what they were hired to do. and it is not what they are expected to do as part of their job duties"
You have any more uneducated comments?
and I quote...The issue involved whether paramedics trained in — but found not to be responsible for — fire suppression are exempt from overtime requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
ReplyDeleteTRAINED in but found not to be responsible for...
A real journalist, not some muckracker, would do a little work and post the case filings himself.
ReplyDeletehttp://firelawblog.com/files/2011/07/KansasCity.pdf
Then we don't need to listen to the pointless tit for tat between you whiners, all of you.
@ 10:28, hey thanks for providing Marissa's home address!
ReplyDeleteLesa is on psycho leave because she is milking the system. There is nothing wrong with her except she can't admit that she lost and shut her fat mouth. She is can't live within the hole she's dug so she is hiding. Bet she take's that city pension given the opportunity.
ReplyDeleteA lot of people would like to have the balls that Marissa does. At least she stands by her beliefs and doesn't bow to other people's demands and threats.
ReplyDeleteMarissa is full of shit. She should have been fired years ago because she is a shitty medic who treats her pts like shit. Everytime she fucks up she hides behind the union and then as soon as her job is saved she talks shit on them until her next fuck up.
ReplyDeleteHere's a photo of the cunt from a few years ago.
ReplyDeletehttp://www2.ljworld.com/photos/2008/jun/30/150852/
She lives at 565 Campbell Street, and she's not a nigger?
ReplyDeleteLooks like a lesbian from the photo...
ReplyDeleteI'd eat her pussy any day of the week!
ReplyDeleteShe must not have anything left with all the coke she buys to live in that rat hole.
ReplyDeleteShe sued the City of Kansas City in 2006 over another issue, and lost, guess she felt after 5 years she should take the city to court again...
ReplyDeleteI worked with her for several years while it was still MAST.
ReplyDeleteThe previous comment about her being a poor paramedic is spot on.
I seriously don't know how she still has a paramedic license.
Too many union morons in this room.
ReplyDeleteWhy was this suit filed? The first person named as filing this law suit is looking at getting fired for some actions that should get her jailed or at the very least never ever work as a paramedic again. She has been against the 24 hour shifts from the beginning. Fine. But when she was given the chance to bid off she rebid the 24 hour shift. Then during one of those shifts she just got in her car and went home to feed her dog. Leaving that corner of the city without an ambulance. Can anyone say job abandonment!! She also has several issues coming before the medical director, and a few going to the state bureau of EMS. This gal is a bad human being and a very bad paramedic. I'm sure the response will be one of defending her skills, but it's obvious she has no heart, no honor, no morals. So is this law suit filed to correct a wrong NO. It's already decided law. Is it a smoke screen to make herself a safe from termination. Well that my bet. This issue has been vetted many times, the law is clear. The City had to take the EMS system back under its wing. The costs and liabilities were to high as the quazi governmental agency that was MAST. To the citizens of this city what 24 hour shifts mean to them is we now can deploy more hours of ALS coverage to protect you and your loved ones. It is a stop gap fix to the real problem. EMS is underfunded. The EMS folks will get on here and complain that they are now working more hours, and they are, but the facts is the call volume is up, the economy is broken. There is little choice but to ask a little more of the EMS providers right now. But the other fact is, if we attempted to run this system with the 108 crews we have and work them on a 40 week, we couldn't make all the calls.
ReplyDeleteDon't worry once Jeff Johnson is elected it will be bye bye former MAST employees, and the outside oops smaller shops.
ReplyDeleteChris, your ignorance is quite amazing. No one will be going anywhere except when they shut down 40 and 1 in the next cba. Medics are hard to find. Fire fighters are not. Guess who gets the long bye bye.
ReplyDelete@9:23
ReplyDelete"But when she was given the chance to bid off she rebid the 24 hour shift"
Who given the choice of "You can work this 24 hr shift, OR....some other shift with hours yet to be determined" would pick the unknown?
Thats the City and the Union looking out for their employees and their represented party.
Im looking forward to Jeff Johnson taking over as president of Local 42 and bringing integrity back to the Union and the fire dept as a whole.
Have you heard of private ambulance companies???? AMR ring a bell. Can you name two cities with a population over 300K citizens with a private fire service??? I will answer for you NO and HECK NO
ReplyDeletehttp://www.amr.net/
because they handled the MAST ambulance takeover so well, let's give them the police department too!!! city control...GRAND IDEA....NOT!!!
ReplyDelete9:23 and all of you others who think this was so well researched are in for a BIG surprise! If you don't like having EMS whining, why the fuck did you take it over? to tell people who love their job, but are running 16-20 calls in a 24 hour period, with no sleep to find another job, just shows what real men and women you are and how empathetic you are for your fellow coworkers and union brothers and sisters. I f you don't like the EMS people whining, why don't YOU fucking get on the ambulance and try to do what they do? cowards. If Louie says it is good, then it must be. Louie is going out with SHAME written across his forehead. BIG SURPRISE COMING!
ReplyDelete