Resolving nearly three years of litigation, the County of Sacramento has agreed to a $900,000 settlement of a class action lawsuit filed by Mastagni, Holstedt, Amick, Miller, Johnsen & Uhrhammer on behalf of Sacramento County deputy sheriffs for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The suit sought recovery of overtime wages for work performed as uniformed “ride-alongs” on patrol by deputies assigned to the jail.

The County of Sacramento had a program referred to as "20 Free Rides," in which deputies were strongly encouraged to "volunteer" to complete 20 ten hour ride-alongs on patrol with a training officer. The participants would be in uniform and perform the normal law enforcement duties of a deputy assigned to patrol. The 20 Free Rides program was nearly identical to Phase One of formal patrol training. Participants were evaluated for their performance on each ride-along.

Before the implementation of 20 Free Rides, the Department operated a "Patrol First" training program for all new deputies hired directly out of the academy. The trainees and training officer were compensated full pay for the hours spent on training.

The County pressured the deputies to "volunteer" to participate in the 20 Free Ridges program. Deputies who completed the 20 Free Rides were permitted to work off-duty jobs. The Department’s command staff would frequently advise deputies in the jail and the courts that participation in the “20 Rides” was highly encouraged and looked upon favorably for promotions. Deputies also were warned that failure to complete the program could contribute to their failing formal patrol training and that training officers would be harder on deputies who did not participate in 20 Free Rides. The County also required participation in 20 Rides before allowing them to work off-duty.

The FLSA requires the County to compensate the deputies for participating in the 20 Free Rides program, as they were performing work which would otherwise be performed by other deputies assigned to patrol. The deputies' duties included conducting traffic stops; conducting searches or inspection of suspects, their vehicles and their residences; issuing citations; responding to calls; providing cover to other units; making arrests; executing warrants; participating in physical altercations; transporting arrestees to county jail; preparing reports; and even conducting criminal investigations.

The County asserted the work performed during the 20 Free Rides program was not compensable because it constituted training not directly related to the deputies' job. The deputies were "assigned" to the jail, not to patrol. However, we were able to show the defense asserted by the County was not applicable. Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations §785.27, provides:

Attendance at lectures, meetings, training programs and similar activities need not be counted as working time if the following four criteria are met:

1. Attendance is outside of the employee’s regular working hours;
2. Attendance is in fact voluntary;
3. The course, lecture or meeting is not directly related to the employee’s job; and
4. The employee does not perform any productive work during such attendance.

Participation in 20 Free Rides Was Not Voluntary

We were able to present compelling evidence participation in the program was not voluntary because the County coerced deputies to participate. At the Rio Consumnes Correctional Facility, for example, the County had a written policy requiring sergeants to encourage deputies to participate in the 20 Rides program. Since participation was not actually voluntary, the time spent in the program must be compensated. Federal case law has found that work is not voluntary where there is an implication "that their employment would be adversely affected if they did not participate in the particular off-duty activities." (Dade v. Alvarez (11th Cir. 1997) 124 F.3d 1380, 1385.)

The Work Performed on 20 Free Rides Directly Related to the Work in the Jails and Courts

The evidence established the deputies' participation in the 20 Rides program directly related to their work in the jails and the courts. Part of the duties of a deputy in the jails and courts included conducting searches, seizures, arrests, writing reports, conducting investigations, interacting with the public and transporting inmates. The deputies did the same work while participating in the 20 Free Rides. During deposition testimony, department managers acknowledged as much. Further, the Department of Labor has issued several opinion letters finding work compensable where the training was similar to the normal work duties.

Participants in the 20 Free Rides Performed the Same Work as Deputies Assigned to Patrol

The work performed by deputies on ride-alongs was identical to the work performed by deputies who are assigned to patrol. Moreover, the work performed by deputies in the 20 Rides Program is functionally identical to the work they perform when the deputies are assigned to Formal Patrol Training. The only distinction between the programs is that patrol training is compensated.

Further, the County reaped substantial benefits from the work performed by the plaintiffs in the 20 Rides. These participants increased the work force out on patrol. Deputies on a 20 Ride would log on as two officer units as opposed to one officer units. Participants did not just ride along with a training officer to observe and learn, but performed all the work expected of a patrol officer. In Farmer v. Ottawa (6th Cir. 2000) 211 F.3d 1268 the Court found the work performed by a deputy sheriff in a voluntary training program constituted similarly productive work.

After the close of discovery, the County agreed to participate in mediation. Ultimately, the County agreed to compensate 86 deputies back-wages, liquidated damages, attorney fees and costs in the amount of $900,000.00.