Matthew Grubb Webboard User Reg: 09-27-2002
Posts: 637
Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.
Offline
You could take the name of that department out and replace it with a half dozen others in every state. It’s another example of departments not understanding what they are getting into when they start K9 programs.
Howard Knauf Webboard User Reg: 09-24-2003
Posts: 1555
Loc: Melbourne, Florida
Offline
Dont you just love when big-headed administrators bully the little guy! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />
Matthew Grubb Webboard User Reg: 09-27-2002
Posts: 637
Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.
Offline
I bet in the 11 years I've been on the job I've watched at least 6 K9 programs bite the big one after handlers bring up FLSA / Garcia issues. I'm willing to bet it's the #1 issue for admins dropping their programs.
This link gives a good description ... http://www.k9fleck.org/k9mo.htm
Essentially, if the department doesn't provide a kennel for the dog, the handler must be compensated for the dog's care. This looks like a pretty clear violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the associated case law.
Sometimes those lawyer fellas are useful critters. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />
When I showed my Chief the Police K9 Magazine article on FLSA his exact reply was, "Did you show me this to make me mad?" Administration had no earthly clue what goes into what we do, nor do they care. Sounds like that guy has good grounds for a lawsuit.
this sounds like a tit for tat kind of thing. officer got in trouble for a violation of policy, so he thought he'd stick it to them by submitting a bill for over 600 hours. what did he think was going to happen? he'll get his money (provided he can prove he cared for the dog for all those hours) at the expense of working his dog. not the first time this has happened. FLSA is a touchy thing. chances are if he didn't get 5 days on the beach for his policy violation, he doesn't submit the bill. now he turns in the bill and accuses them of axeing the program in retaliation? he started the retaliation. at least that's what i got from the article. it would be a shame to put down the dog though...
When purchasing any product from Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. it is understood
that any and all products sold by Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. are sold in Dunn
County Wisconsin, USA. Any and all legal action taken against Leerburg Enterprises,
Inc. concerning the purchase or use of these products must take place in Dunn
County, Wisconsin. If customers do not agree with this policy they should not
purchase Leerburg Ent. Inc. products.
Dog Training is never without risk of injury. Do not use any of the products
sold by Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. without consulting a local professional.
The training methods shown in the Leerburg Ent. Inc. DVD’s are meant
to be used with a local instructor or trainer. Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. cannot
be held responsible for accidents or injuries to humans and/or animals.
Copyright 2010 Leerburg® Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved. All photos and content on leerburg.com are part of a registered copyright owned by Leerburg Enterprise, Inc.
By accessing any information within Leerburg.com, you agree to abide by the
Leerburg.com Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
And yet another dog article
Top
Previous Topic
Index
Next Topic
.jpg)
.jpg)
