City drafts settlement for firefighters

Signatures are still being gathered for a settlement that could give a group of McKinney firefighters who claim they were owed back pay for performing services that came with a higher pay scale a total of $15,000.

The McKinney City Council discussed the settlement at a special workshop Monday at McKinney City Hall.

Forty-three McKinney firefighters filed a lawsuit against the city in February 2004 in 416th District Court claiming they violated a section of the Texas Local Government Code by “failing and refusing to pay [them] the salary prescribed for higher classified positions during the time [they] temporarily have performed the duties of such positions” also known as “step-up pay.” The plaintiffs asked the court for back pay and benefits as they relate to the statute as well as injunctive and mandamus relief to prevent future violations of the code. The city of McKinney stated that the plaintiffs’ claims were “barred by governmental immunity,” and the court ruled in favor of the city, according to the judgment.

The plaintiffs brought their case to the Dallas appeals court, where they claimed the court’s order lacked “subject matter jurisdiction” under the Texas Local Government Code, and that their claim can’t be considered as financial damages since it is for “equitable” back pay for services rendered. The appeals court called their argument “forceful,” but the lack of an immunity waiver forced them to rule in favor of upholding the decision, according to the judgment.

The appeals court, however, also overturned part of the previous court’s ruling that dismissed the plaintiffs’ requests for “declaratory, injunctive and mandamus relief and remand appellants’ claims to the extent those forms of relief are sought,” according to the judgment.

The settlement would prevent the appeal case from going back to the Collin County courthouse, according to the agreement.

“The Parties acknowledge that bona fide disputes and controversies exist between them regarding the allegations contained in the Lawsuit, the trial court’s order dismissing the Firefighters’ claims and the judgment of the court of appeals,” the agreement read. “The Parties desire to avoid the further annoyance, cost, delay and uncertainly associated with litigation.”

The agreement would provide the 43 firefighters with a total of $15,000 paid through their attorney’s firm, Deats, Durst, Owen & Levy of Austin. Once the agreement is reached, both sides agree to dismiss their respective suits. They also agree that the agreement is “a compromise of disputed claims” and “nothing in this settlement agreement is an admission of liability by any party,” according to the agreement.

City spokeswoman Anna Folmnsbee said the agreement still needs signatures from some of the 43 firefighters included in the original lawsuit.

Craig Deats, of Austin, the attorney for the firefighters who also represents the Texas Association of Firefighters, said the ultimate goal of this lawsuit was not money.

“The point of the suit always was for the city to conform to the law in the future,” Deats said. “Ultimately, they compromised and we commend the city for seeking a compromise. We think it’s a win-win.”

City Attorney Mark Houser declined to comment.

Contact Danny Gallagher at dgallagher@acnpapers.com. To post comments online, access this story on the Web at www.scntx.com.

Current Rating: 0 of 0 votes!

Rate File: Select Rating: * ** *** ****

 Plano Apartments
 Plano Attorneys
 Plano Auto Dealers
 Plano Auto Parts
 Plano Auto Repair
 Plano Beauty Salons
 Plano Car Rental
 Plano Dentists
 Plano Doctors
 Plano Flowers
 Plano Hotels
 Plano Insurance
 Plano Loans
 Plano Mortgages
 Plano Movers
 Plano Pizza
 Plano Realtors
 Plano Restaurants
 Plano Storage
 Plano Tax Preparation
 Plano Travel
 Featured
 More...