Colorado Fire Protection District Hit with Unpaid Overtime and FLSA Retaliation Lawsuit

The Rye Fire Protection District, located in Colorado City, Colorado is facing a lawsuit filed by three of its firefighters. The firefighters claim that the district’s pay practices violate both the FLSA and state law. More specifically, the firefighters make several claims related to the FLSA including the District’s failure to pay overtime due to improper usage of the FLSA’s meal and sleep time provisions and failure to adopt a work period. Additionally, according to the complaint, the firefighters intend to include a state law claim that the District has also violated Colorado’s Protected Health/Safety Expression and Whistleblowing Law.

One of the firefighter’s main allegations is that the District has not established a qualifying work period in violation of the FLSA. The FLSA requires any public agency electing to utilize the §207(k) partial overtime exemption establish a work period. The FLSA’s §207(k) partial overtime exemption allows public agency fire departments avoid the FLSA’s basic requirement of overtime pay after working 40 hours in a 7-day work week. Failure to properly establish a qualifying work period can result in the fire department losing the ability to claim the §207(k) partial overtime exemption. Click here, for more on the work periods and here for what can happen when a fire department fails to properly adopt a work period.

Quoting from the complaint:

  • The RFPD scheduled three crews of firefighters pursuant to the 48/96 schedule: the A shift, B shift and C shift.
  • The crew assigned to each shift worked 48 straight hours which was followed by 96 hours off before returning to work for another 48 straight hours.
  • Under the 48/96 schedule the firefighters assigned to two crews would work at least 48 hours in a week, and the firefighters on the third crew would work at least 72 in a week.
  • Under the 48/96 schedule, the RFPD firefighters worked a recurring six-day cycle.
  • The RFPD never adopted an established and regularly recurring work period for the firefighters.
  • The RFPD never expressed an intention to have a specific established and regularly recurring work period for the firefighters.
  • In job offer letters provided to employees, the RFPD stated that employee “regularly scheduled work hours will be as designated” but did not state if there was an established and regularly recurring work period for the firefighters.
  • At all times relevant to this Complaint, RFPD payroll is tallied from the 28th of the month to the following 27th.
  • At all times relevant to this Complaint, the RFPD paid firefighter employees on the first day of the month.
  • At all times relevant to this Complaint, the RFPD’s pay records indicate that firefighter employees were paid on the first day of the month for work performed during the previous calendar month.
  • While using the 48/96 schedule, the RFPD never established a beginning and ending time for the firefighters’ work period.
  • The RFPD did not pay firefighters at one-and-one-half times their regular rate of pay for hours worked over 40 in a single workweek.
  • The RFPD did not pay firefighters at one-and-one-half times their regular rate of pay for hours worked over 212 in a 28-day period.
  • The RFPD did not pay firefighters at one-and-one-half times their regular rate of pay for hours worked which exceeded the number of hours which bears the same relationship to 212 as the number of days in a work period bears to 28.
  • The RFPD simply did not pay overtime compensation to firefighters, regardless of the number of overtime hours the firefighters worked.
  • The pay plan adopted and implemented by the RFPD failed to properly compensate firefighters for the hours they worked.

Additionally, the firefighters also allege that the District improperly deducted both meal and sleep time from their hours’ worked also in violation of the FLSA. The FLSA allows employer deduct time spent on “bona fide” meal periods from an employee’s hours worked. As a general rule, it is extremely difficult for fire departments to meet this requirement for shift personnel working 24- or 48-hour work shifts. The rules that govern sleep time are far too vast to address in this post.

Finally, the firefighters also allege that the District retaliated against them after they complained about their lack of proper overtime pay. The FLSA contains broad anti-retaliation provisions. Employers need to be very careful when dealing with employees that have raised problems or possible complaints related to pay practices and the FLSA. We will be watching this one as it develops.

Coincidently, we will discuss all of these topics—and a few dozen others—at our next FLSA for Fire Departments live in-person seminar being held in Indianapolis, Indiana on February 11-13, 2025. That is only 2 weeks away! Please join us!

FLSA for Fire Departments – Indianapolis, Indiana

Contact  William Maccarone to Discuss The Article