Campbell v. US Air Force, CV-F-90-400.
| Decision Date | 18 December 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. CV-F-90-400.,CV-F-90-400. |
| Citation | 755 F. Supp. 893 |
| Parties | Rex CAMPBELL, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES AIR FORCE, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California |
Rex Campbell, in pro. per.
Mark E. Cullers, Asst. U.S. Atty, Fresno, Cal., for defendants.
DECISION AND ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On October 29, 1990 the court heard plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment. Upon due consideration of the written and oral arguments of the parties, the court now enters its order denying the motion as set forth herein.
Plaintiffs in this case are air traffic controllers at Edwards Air Force Base. Prior to May 24, 1988 plaintiffs' positions were classified as GS-301-11, Mission Controllers. On May 24, 1988 plaintiffs filed with the Office of Personnel Management ("OPM") a classification appeal, requesting that their positions be reclassified as GS-2152-12, Air Traffic Controllers. Following an analysis of plaintiffs' duties, plaintiffs' positions were reclassified on July 11, 1988 as GS-2152-12, Air Traffic Control Specialists. The positions were also identified as exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") overtime provisions. The classification was again reviewed in June of 1989. By letter dated July 7, 1989, Ms. Jo Ann Barnicki, Principal Classifier, Civilian Personnel at Edwards Air Force Base, determined that the positions should remain exempt.
This Complaint focuses on the identification of plaintiffs' positions as exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA.1 Section 207 of Title 29 of the United States Code provides as follows:
(a)(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, no employer shall employ any of his employees who in any workweek is engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, or is employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, for a workweek longer than forty hours unless such employee receives compensation for his employment in excess of the hours above specified at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at which he is employed.
Section 213 provides that the above provision shall not apply to "any employee employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity, ... or in the capacity of outside salesman."
The plaintiffs contend that they do not perform any administrative duties, but only technical work. The plaintiffs accordingly assert that they should not be exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA. The plaintiffs request that the court order the Department of the Air Force to reclassify the GS-2152 Air Traffic Controllers at Edwards Air Force Base as nonexempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA. In addition, plaintiffs request that they be awarded back pay from June 1987 to the present.
Plaintiffs move, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for summary judgment on their request that the court reclassify plaintiffs' positions as nonexempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA.
In July of 1988, plaintiffs' positions were reclassified as Air Traffic Control Specialists, GS-2152-12. According to the classification report, the purpose of this position is to provide air traffic control and mission control services for aircraft operating within a particular area. The aircraft include military test aircraft, other military aircraft, and civilian aircraft passing through the designated area.
Plaintiffs perform both air traffic control and mission control duties. The air traffic control duties include (1) issuing clearances for aircraft to enter low-level routes; (2) providing individual instructions to aircraft operating in "special use" airspaces such as high altitude and "spin" areas; (3) issue traffic and boundary advisories to assist aircraft in avoiding collisions; and (4) coordinate radar transmission with other areas in which aircraft are flying.
Plaintiffs mission control duties are expansive. These duties include the following:
(1) Conduct pre-mission studies of support requirements and safety factors;
(2) Operate, test, and repair computer equipment used in processing flight test data obtained from surveillance;
(3) Participate in test plan working groups, safety review boards, and other forums that determine the validity of proposed flight tests;
(4) Study mission requirements to ensure that they will be adequately supported and within safety constraints;
(5) Interpret charts, graphs, and tables to provide data for missions;
(6) Provide test guidance instructions to airborne vehicles;
(7) Exercise operational control of aircraft within particular area;
(8) Serve as area control officer to direct or monitor missions engaged in the release of weapons or supplies;
(9) Provide airspace surveillance of aircraft engaged in flight testing, issue traffic information, issue significant weather information, and provide "chase and target" positioning;
(10) Serve as program manager for certain missions and as operational technical representative at conferences concerning daily range projects;
(11) Review test requirements submitted by the range user and determine the type and amount of support required.
In addition to the above specified duties, the position description states that the Air Traffic Control Specialists work independently and are responsible for "making real time decisions while accomplishing their assigned duties." In addition, the report notes that the complexity of the full-performance Air Traffic Control Specialist position is intensified by the two distinct specialties of which it is comprised: air traffic control and test mission control.
On July 1, 1975, the United States Civil Service Commission published Federal Personnel Manual (FPM) System Letter 551-7. The body of the Letter sets forth the criteria to be applied in determining whether a federal employee is exempt or nonexempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA. In addition, an Attachment to the Letter establishes guidelines for applying this criteria.
In 1985, the OPM, successor to the United States Civil Service Commission, promulgated regulations to control pay administration under the FLSA. See 5 C.F.R. part 551. Section 551.205 sets forth the criteria to determine administrative exemptions from the overtime provisions of the FLSA. The criteria are the same as those provided in FPM Letter 551-7.
Section 551.205 provides in pertinent part as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Poole v. Rourke
...v. Urbach, 651 F.2d 1278, 1280 (9th Cir.1981); United States v. Johnson, 153 F.2d 846, 848 (9th Cir.1946); Campbell v. United States Air Force, 755 F.Supp. 893, 899 (E.D.Cal.1990). It is important to note that "it is not the nature of the cause of action which determines whether jurisdictio......
-
Roney v. US, Civ. A. No. 90-2813-LFO.
...(8th Cir.1982) (postal inspector is an administrative employee and exempt form overtime provisions of FLSA); Campbell v. United States Air Force, 755 F.Supp. 893 (E.D.Cal.1990) (air traffic controllers exercise sufficient discretion and independent judgment under the FLSA exemption criteria......
-
US v. Spires
... ... that has as an element of the offense the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another; or ... "(B) any other offense that is a felony and that, ... ...