FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 10:30a.m. CST
Contact: Paul Anderson, Metro Correspondent
Phone: (312) 631-ERRI
FAX: (312) 631-4703
Internet: enn@emergency.com
The case, Chicago v. Alex 94-704, had focused on the issue of whether or not EMS personnel were exempted under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Practices Act (FSLA). Firefighters and Law Enforcement officers had been specifically exempted from traditional working hours provisions since 1974, but the suit challenged the concept of EMS personnel working in this "exempt environment" without the benefit of "cross-training" or actual participation in fire suppression or law enforcement activities.
Previously, firefighters were allowed to work a total of 136 hours in an 18 day work cycle by federal exemption. Chicago firefighters and paramedics were working a 24 hours on and 48 hours off cycle with an extra day off after every fourth shift. Beginning Jan. 1st, 1995, paramedics in Chicago are reportedly to begin to work a 24 hours on and 72 hours off shift, in order to reduce the actual number of hours worked. There is some dispute among legal experts as to why EMS workers were not included in the original exemptions for fire and police personnel. Some say it was lobbying by fire and police chiefs that excluded the EMS exemption, others say that it was influenced by the powerful private ambulance industry.
The lawsuit noted that paramedics in Chicago do not actually engage in fire suppression activities, even though they have made numerous requests to both the city and their union to become "cross-trained", and do just that. Cross training programs would have allowed them to participate in firefighting duties a percentage of the time, and when necessary, to enter burning structures to affect rescues and treat the sick and injured.
Several legal experts say that if paramedics had been cross-trained in the past, that they would have probably qualified for exemption under FSLA provisions. A similar cross-training program has been instituted in Los Angeles and several other cities, and upheld by various courts. Most Chicago suburbs only hire cross-trained Fire/EMS personnel.
According to the Associated Press, a "friend of the court" brief was filed by the National League of Cities, The National Association of Counties, and other government groups, in an attempt to persuade the Supreme Court that paying paramedics overtime for all hours worked over forty would be "costly, disruptive, and intrusive". The brief also reportedly said that, "many governments will have to hire, train, and pay additional employees...or pay their Emergency Medical Services workers more in the future...either choice will be costly".
According to EMS experts, the effect of the ruling could mean that EMTs and Paramedics, in many communities, could file for back-pay amounting to tens of thousands of dollars, and that they would receive ongoing overtime payments for all current or future hours worked in excess of forty (40). One veteran Chicago EMS analyst said that the solution to the costly problem is rooted in a "tradition" of treating paramedics unequally, in some fire and police departments.
He said that the original lawsuits could probably have been
prevented had equity in pay and benefits been achieved in years
past. Unfortunately, in all too many departments, EMTs and paramedics
were treated as "second class citizens" and cities and counties
attempted to pay them less than their counter-parts in police and fire
departments. A purposely unidentified Chicago paramedic said;
"This ruling validates the fact that the men and women that work
in EMS are just as valuable as everyone else that responds to
emergencies."
Return to the EMS Operations Page