The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an $8.3 million judgment that Malden police officers obtained in a Wage Act suit they brought over a 10-percent “administrative fee” deducted from the pay they received for detail work.
Under the officers’ collective bargaining agreement, the hourly wage for detail work was “one and one half times the maximum patrolman’s rate of pay including night differential.”
Meanwhile, a different CBA provision listed factors that contribute to an officer’s maximum compensation and stated that in addition to base salary, officers could receive various wage augmentations, including night shift differential, hazardous duty pay, longevity pay, and “Quinn Bill” educational incentives.
Interpreting the maximum hourly rate for detail work to include the other wage enhancements in addition to night differential, the officers alleged in their lawsuit that deduction of the 10-percent administrative fee resulted in a lower payout for details than what they bargained for and thus violated the Wage Act.
The city countered that the provision unambiguously did not include the additional wage enhancements, and, accordingly, the officers still received a higher payout than contemplated by the CBA.
A U.S. District Court judge found the relevant provision ambiguous. After considering extrinsic evidence, the judge adopted the officers’ interpretation of the provision and ruled that they were entitled to multiple damages and attorneys’ fees.
He additionally...
Congress leaders Harshwardhan Sapkal and Nana Patole, Nationalist Congress Party (SP) legislator Rohit Pawar, and Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) leader Priyanka Chaturvedi said PM Modi's sp...