ShareThis Page
Pittsburgh firefighters sue for overtime pay |

Pittsburgh firefighters sue for overtime pay

Pittsburgh is facing new claims that it refuses to pay public safety workers overtime.

Three Pittsburgh firefighters sued the city on Monday, alleging that federal labor regulations made fire captains and battalion and deputy chiefs eligible for time-and-a-half pay in 2004.

Nearly a year ago, the cash-strapped city paid more than $900,000 in penalties and attorneys’ fees for not paying police officers their correct overtime.

Joshua Bloom, the lawyer for fire Capt. Edmund J. Farley, Battalion Chief Robert J. Cox and Deputy Chief Harry Scherer, declined comment. City Solicitor Daniel Regan referred questions to mayor’s spokeswoman Joanna Doven, who declined comment.

The firefighters’ lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, Downtown, says the city refuses to pay them overtime when they work past the regular time cap. For firefighters, that limit is 212 hours in a 28-day period, or the equivalent of 53 hours a week.

“Since at least July 1, 2009, the city has been fully aware that firefighter captains, battalion chiefs and deputy chiefs have regularly worked hours in excess of 212,” the lawsuit states.

Except at the scene of a fire, captains, battalion chiefs and deputy chiefs don’t manage employees or carry out other functions that would exempt them from overtime pay, the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit seeks back pay for all current and former captains and chiefs that the city has denied overtime pay since 2009. Three years of recovered pay is the maximum allowed under the law.

Joe King, president of Local 1 of the International Association of Fire Fighters, which represents the city’s firefighters, couldn’t be reached for comment.

Pittsburgh, which the state declared financially distressed in 2004, could pay a steep bill if the firefighters’ lawsuit is successful.

Personnel records show that Pittsburgh employs about 70 fire captains, battalion chiefs and deputy chiefs who could be covered under the lawsuit.

Farley, Cox and Scherer made nearly $125,000 combined in extra pay in 2011. It wasn’t clear how much of that pay came from working extra hours.

In the lawsuit that the Fraternal Order of Police filed on behalf of more than 900 police officers, the city paid $825,000 in damages for waiting more than a year to pay them overtime they were owed for hours worked between 2006 and 2008. The city paid $80,000 in fees for the officers’ lawyers.

Staff writer Bob Bauder contributed to this story. Brian Bowling is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-325-4301 or [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.