Hemphill v. City of Bogalusa

417 So. 2d 462
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedJune 29, 1982
Docket14968
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 417 So. 2d 462 (Hemphill v. City of Bogalusa) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hemphill v. City of Bogalusa, 417 So. 2d 462 (La. Ct. App. 1982).

Opinion

417 So.2d 462 (1982)

Michael HEMPHILL and Bogalusa Professional Firefighters Association, Local No. IAFF 687, et al.
v.
The CITY OF BOGALUSA, Louisiana.

No. 14968.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

June 29, 1982.

*463 Dale E. Branch, Bogalusa, for plaintiffs.

John N. Gallaspy, Bogalusa, for defendant-appellant.

Before LOTTINGER, EDWARDS and SHORTESS, JJ.

SHORTESS, Judge.

The Bogalusa Firefighters Association, Local 687 (plaintiffs-appellees) filed suit against the City of Bogalusa (defendant-appellant) seeking to have their state supplement pay included within the computation of certain pay differentials. They further sought enforcement of an addendum to their labor contract, which provided that if any City employee received a raise, the firemen would also receive same.

The trial judge found in favor of plaintiffs on the pay differential issue, but held that the addendum had never become legally effective, because it had not been ratified by the City Council, as required by the Bogalusa City Charter. From this judgment, *464 the City appeals, alleging the trial judge was incorrect in concluding that the State supplement was part of a fireman's salary and also in holding that the differential percentages should be applied to the minimum actually paid the highest ranked firefighter. Plaintiffs answered the appeal maintaining that the trial court erred in not enforcing the addendum to their contract.

ISSUE ONE

The first issue is whether the State supplemental pay should be considered part of the "salary" of a fireman and be used in computing the pay differentials outlined for the different ranks in the Firefighters Association.

The City and the firemen entered into a labor contract on August 21, 1978, which requires that pay differentials be maintained among the different ranks of firemen; namely, firefighters, drivers, captains, and assistant chiefs. The contract basically tracks the provisions set forth in La.R.S. 33:1992[1], and indicates that the percentage differentials listed in the contract were to be kept in accord with those in the statute. La.R.S. 33:1992, entitled,

"Minimum salaries," provides in pertinent part:

The minimum monthly salaries of firemen in municipalities having a population of twelve thousand or more and of all parish and fire protection district paid firemen, ... shall be paid in accordance with the following schedule, ...:
(1) A fireman shall receive a minimum monthly salary of four hundred dollars per month.
(2) Engineers shall receive a minimum monthly salary of not less than ten percent above that of a fireman.
(3) Lieutenants shall receive a minimum monthly salary of not less than fifteen percent above that of a fireman.
(4) Captains shall receive a minimum monthly salary of not less than twenty-five percent above that of a fireman.
(5) Battalion chiefs and district chiefs shall receive a minimum monthly salary of not less than forty percent above that of a fireman.
(6) Assistant chiefs and deputy chiefs shall receive a minimum monthly salary of not less than fifty percent above that of a fireman.

The statute further provides for differentials among various other ranks and then states:

From and after the first day of August, 1962, each member of the fire department who has had three years continuous service shall receive an increase in salary of two percent and shall thereafter receive an increase of two percent for each year of additional service up to and including twenty years. Both the base pay and accrued longevity shall be used in computing such longevity pay.

The basis of the State supplemental pay is found in La.R.S. 33:2002:

In addition to compensation now paid by any municipality, parish, or fire protection district maintaining a fire department to any employee of such department (the employee) ... shall be paid extra compensation by the State....

and La.R.S. 33:2004(D) states:

The additional compensation paid by the state to municipal or parish fire department employees as provided by this Sub-Part shall be included in the calculation and computation of the total wages paid to the employee in the determination of employer contributions to any retirement system or pension fund of which such employee may be a member as well as in the determination of retirement eligibility and benefits which may accrue to the employee under any retirement system or pension fund, as well as in the determination of any other employee benefits, sick leave, or disability pay to which the employee might be entitled.

*465 We agree with the trial judge that this statutory language "clearly indicates that the State supplement is to be considered a part of the total salary," of a fireman.

Mrs. Carolyn Miller, the payroll computer operator for the City, testified that the State supplement checks are sent to the various departments of City employees and then disbursed to the firemen. She stated that the City withholds pension and withholding tax from the State supplement; that the supplement is used in computing retirement benefits, income tax benefits, and overtime pay; and that the supplement is used determining the 2% annual raise, provided in R.S. 33:1992.

In Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Department, 310 So.2d 113 (La.1975), the Supreme Court held that the State supplemental pay was part of the salary due to a fireman who was reinstated after an illegal discharge.

We find that the State supplemental pay is part of a fireman's salary for purposes of determining pay differentials.

A secondary question concerns how the differential percentages are to be applied. The City argues that the differentials should be applied to the $400.00 per month minimum salary, provided in La.R.S. 33:1992. Its language has not been changed since its effective date in 1969. In most cases, it no longer represents the minimum salary actually paid a fireman.

The trial judge stated:

Even though the percentage differentials are for minimum salaries, the differentials are applicable from the minimum actually paid firemen by the municipality where that minimum exceeds the $400.00 minimum established by the statute. The statute clearly intends to establish percentage differentials between the minimum wages of different classes of firefighters. If the percentage differential were applied only to the $400.00 figure of R.S. 33:1992(1), which has not been amended since 1969, clearly in every fire department in the state the differential would be eliminated by the increase of the minimum salary paid firemen.

The minimum salary actually paid is the correct base. We find this conclusion in accord with the intent of the statute, and support the trial judge's determination.

The contract provides for the minimum salary of firefighters in seven different classifications, the highest being a firefighter with three years' service. The rank ahead of a firefighter with three years' service is driver. In an effort to keep the contract in line with the percentages outlined in La.R.S. 33:1992, the contract states:

If the span between ranks develops in such a manner to be out of line with the percentages set forth in the Fire and Police Civil Service Law, the salaries which are out of line will be adjusted upward to bring them in line: (a) Fire Driver: 15% above

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

West Monroe Firefighters Local 1385 v. City of West Monroe
111 So. 3d 330 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2013)
Smith v. CITY OF RUSTON
7 So. 3d 44 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2009)
Opinion Number
Louisiana Attorney General Reports, 2005
Boneski v. City of Abbeville
745 So. 2d 1229 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1999)
Haskin v. City of Lafayette
613 So. 2d 1015 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1993)
Levy v. Civil Service Commission of New Orleans
538 So. 2d 674 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1989)
Achord v. City of Baton Rouge
489 So. 2d 1373 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
417 So. 2d 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hemphill-v-city-of-bogalusa-lactapp-1982.