Police Officers Must Be Paid for Time Spent Putting On and Taking Off Required Uniform and Equipment

    Police officers must be paid for time spent putting on and taking off required uniform and equipment a federal district court in California has ruled.  Such time is compensable the court ruled in Lemmon_v_City_of_San_Leandro (U.S. District Court, N.Dist. of California, No. 06-07107).
    Patrol officers were required to wear a "Class B" uniform while on duty along with attendant equipment including a gun holster, ammunition, ammunition holders, handcuffs, handcuff case, tear gas canister, taser, taser case, baton ring, radio case, radio and gun, all of which attach to a duty belt.  When not on duty officers were expected to "cover up" their uniforms.  Some officers changed at home but almost all donned and doffed their uniform and equipment at the police station where they were supplied with lockers. 
    Under United States Supreme Court precedent "activities performed either before or after the regular work shift" are compensable "if those activities are an integral and indispensable part of the principal activities for which [the employee is] employed."  This criteria was met, the court reasoned, because the uniform identifies the police officer as an authority figure, "which is essential to the efficient performance of police work."  The officer's equipment is likewise indispensable because it is "necessary for them to perform all their law enforcement activities." 
    The court also analogized a police officer's uniform to safety wear and equipment worn in other jobs, such as in meat=packing plants, observing that although the "uniform itself is not 'specialized' in its protective properties, its color, appearance and component parts provides a gravitas that serve as an effective deterrent against crime, thereby protecting the police officer." 

Robert L. Abell
www.robertabelllaw.com