Sparks fly over Elgin police overtime
A car insurance company says it can save you money with a 15-minute phone call.
Elgin police rank-and-file officers hope to make more money -- at least a grand total of $550,000 -- for the 15 minutes beyond eight hours they are required to work each day.
Last August, 142 officers filed suit seeking retroactive overtime pay instead of straight pay for the 75 minutes they are required to work beyond a 40-hour week.
The matter has been moved to federal court because it alleges a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Craig Mielke, a Geneva attorney representing the officers, argues that a Chicago-based firm hired by Elgin is filing routine court motions that it knows will be denied.
"The city of Elgin is wasting taxpayer dollars to defend their indefensible position rather than pay the police to protect the citizens of Elgin," Mielke said.
Bill Cogley, Elgin's corporation counsel, said the city will not back down in the police lawsuit.
"The city and the police union have previously identified a work week in the collective bargaining agreement, and the city's payment practices are in compliance with the collective bargaining agreement and applicable law," he said.
Information obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request shows Chicago-based law firm Seyfarth Shaw LLC has billed the city of Elgin for $22,995.42 as of March 27.
As the case moves forward that number will grow. But it's a far cry from the $4.6 million spent by Elgin Area School District U-46 school officials defending a February 2005 discrimination lawsuit. One firm was paid nearly $970,000 in one year alone.
"We have a number of defenses," Cogley said. "We think we'll prevail in the case. We think we're paying them in accordance with applicable law and we'll defend ourselves."
The collective bargaining agreement with Elgin calls for officers to report for duty 15 minutes before every eight-hour shift for a "training period," the police suit states.
That amounts to a 41.25-hour work week, but instead of being paid time-and-a-half for the extra 75 minutes, the city paid the officers only their regular hourly wage, the suit states.
The officers seek back pay dating back to January 2005 at the overtime rate, damages equal to the amount of back pay, and attorney fees.
The suit does not specify how much in pay and damages the officers are seeking, but Mielke has said it could amount to $550,000 or more.
But a provision in the 2007-2009 collective bargaining agreement, obtained through Freedom of Information Act request, states that overtime is paid for hours worked beyond 41.25 per week.
Who is right could come down to what a jury believes, as judge has set a tentative trial date for December 2008.