John Zimmerli v. The City of Kansas City, MO, 996 F.3d 857

Background

Plaintiffs are two FLSA collective classes of Kansas City Fire Department employees: (1) Static, single-job EMTs/Paramedics (scheduled on 24-hour shifts with alternating 48/72-hour workweeks) and (2) cross-trained firefighter/paramedics (“Fire Medics”) who rotate between ambulances and fire apparatus.
After a prior district-court ruling (Hermsen) found static EMT/paramedics entitled to overtime, the City and the union adopted a 2015 collective-bargaining formula converting monthly target wages (plus 5%) into an hourly base by dividing annualized pay by an "adjusted hours" figure, then paying time-and-one-half for hours over 40.
Static EMTs receive pay stubs showing hourly pay and overtime at more than 1.5× the computed base rate; plaintiffs contend the conversion formula artificially understates the regular rate and violates the FLSA.
Fire Medics are fully trained and certified in firefighting and emergency medical services; when on ambulances they do not carry full fire gear or enter the hot zone but perform warm-zone fire-support tasks (e.g., throwing ladders, hose deployment, incident command, building evacuation).
The City treats Fire Medics as partially exempt under the FLSA’s 207(k) provision and the statutory definition in §203(y) as employees who are "trained in fire suppression" and have the "responsibility to engage in fire suppression." District court granted summary judgment for the City; plaintiffs appealed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the CBA formula produces a regular hourly rate that violates §207(a) by understating overtime pay	Zimmerli: the mathematical conversion uses an "artificial hour" figure and effectively avoids paying true time-and-one-half (analogous to Asselta)	Kansas City: the CBA formula simply computes an hourly rate from a monthly wage; City actually pays hourly and pays >1.5× for hours over 40, so FLSA satisfied	Court: Held for City — the formula and actual hourly/overtime payments comply with the FLSA; distinguishable from Asselta
Whether Fire Medics have the "responsibility to engage in fire suppression" under §203(y), making them partially exempt under §207(k)	Dietrick: Fire Medics assigned to ambulances primarily provide medical services and do not routinely engage in firefighting, so they lack the required responsibility	Kansas City: Fire Medics are cross-trained, regularly perform fire-support tasks, can be ordered/expected to assist in suppression, and thus possess the statutory responsibility	Court: Held for City — Fire Medics have the responsibility to engage in fire suppression and are partially exempt under §207(k)
Whether the City unlawfully retaliated or contracted to reduce wages after Hermsen	Plaintiffs: the City reduced hourly rates post-Hermsen to preserve prior overall pay, amounting to unlawful retaliation/waiver of FLSA rights	City: the post-Hermsen CBA was a bilateral negotiation with the union that preserved overall pay while complying with FLSA overtime; not retaliatory or an unlawful waiver	Court: Held for City — negotiated adjustment was lawful because it complies with FLSA and was not unilateral retaliation

Key Cases Cited

149 Madison Ave. Corp. v. Asselta, 331 U.S. 199 (1947) (struck down a pay scheme using an artificial-hour divisor that avoided paying overtime for hours over 40)
Walling v. Youngerman-Reynolds Hardwood Co., 325 U.S. 419 (1945) (definition of "regular rate" and requirement to look to actual payment scheme)
Jewell Ridge Coal Corp. v. Local No. 6167, United Mine Workers of Am., 325 U.S. 161 (1945) (FLSA purpose: spread employment and compensate excess hours)
Cleveland v. City of Los Angeles, 420 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2005) (narrow interpretation: "responsibility" means an expected, mandatory duty to fight fires)
Huff v. DeKalb County, 516 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir. 2008) (broader interpretation: cross-trained personnel who are trained, equipped, dispatched to fires, and removable from duty if they refuse, have the responsibility to engage in suppression)
Lawrence v. City of Philadelphia, 527 F.3d 299 (3d Cir. 2008) (endorsed Ninth Circuit’s narrower view where paramedics’ roles were predominantly medical)
McGavock v. City of Water Valley, 452 F.3d 423 (5th Cir. 2006) (dicta suggesting EMTs trained as firefighters and attached to a fire dept. may be considered engaged in fire protection even if they spend most time on medical calls)
Parth v. Pomona Valley Hosp. Med. Ctr., 630 F.3d 794 (9th Cir. 2010) (employer may negotiate wage changes so long as resulting pay meets FLSA minimums)
Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Sys., Inc., 450 U.S. 728 (1981) (FLSA rights cannot be abridged by contract, but negotiated pay that complies with FLSA is permissible)
Grage v. N. States Power Co., 813 F.3d 1051 (8th Cir. 2015) (standard of review for summary judgment and employer burden to prove exemptions)
Spinden v. GS Roofing Prods. Co., 94 F.3d 421 (8th Cir. 1996) (employer bears burden to prove an FLSA exemption applies)