Opinion ID: 629171
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: public agency law enforcement exception

Text: 14 The majority has chosen to affirm the dismissal of the subpoena on completely different grounds stating that the Commission's conservation wardens are in fact a combination of game wardens and policemen and thus, exempt from the FLSA. At 492; see 29 U.S.C. Sec. 207(k) (exempting employees of public agencies engaged in law enforcement activities). The majority relies principally on an ill-advised concession made at oral argument by counsel for the Department of Labor that the difference in treatment between these tribal law enforcement officers and state or local policemen makes no sense. At 493. This reliance is misplaced, however, for the very language of the law enforcement exception in the FLSA requires that law enforcers be employees of a public agency: 15 (k) Employment by public agencies engaged in fire protection or law enforcement activities 16 No public agency shall be deemed to have violated (a) of this section with respect to the employment of any employee in fire protection activities or any employee in law enforcement activities.... 17 29 U.S.C.A. Sec. 207(k) (West Supp.1993) (emphasis added). 2 Congress clearly defined public agency to mean the government of the United States; the government of a state or political subdivision thereof; any agency of the United States (including the U.S. Postal Service and Postal Rate Commission), a state, or political subdivision of a state; or any interstate governmental agency. 29 U.S.C. Sec. 203(x). The majority has not directed us to any statutory provision, much less any case law holding that an Indian tribe in general, or the Commission in this case, fits within the parameters of the statutory definition of a public agency in 29 U.S.C. Sec. 203(x) or 29 U.S.C. Sec. 207(k). In fact, the majority concedes that a literal interpretation of 29 U.S.C. Sec. 207(k) fails to include the Indian conservation wardens in the law enforcement exception, see at 493 (the Commission is not a state or local agency). It is obvious, as the Department of Labor asserted at oral argument, that the plain language of the public agency law enforcement exemption does not include Indians. Not only do the Commission conservation wardens fail to meet the requirement of being employees of a public agency, but I take issue with the majority's description of the Indian special conservation wardens as police officers. It was premature for the Department of Labor's attorney to concede that they were like police when in truth and fact they are not. 3 The majority places far too much emphasis on the attorney's concession for she can hardly concede that which is contrary to the law. 18 It is a misnomer to refer, as the majority does, to the wardens as Indian police for the record is completely lacking of any evidence that these Indian special conservation wardens possess general police powers to arrest violators of state criminal statutes like murder, burglary, robbery, auto theft or local ordinances as police officers do. The limited deputization agreement between the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission and the State of Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources (DNR), to which the majority refers, fails to empower Commission special conservation wardens with the general powers of arrest entrusted to policemen. In fact, by statute, the Commission wardens do not even possess the limited power of arrest that full-time DNR wardens may exercise. See Wis.Stat.Ann. Sec. 29.05(2) ([t]he authority granted in this section [additional arrest powers] does not apply to county conservation wardens or special conservation wardens ) (emphasis added). Moreover, the limited authority to enforce only state conservation laws that the Indian special conservation wardens do possess may only be exercised when in uniform or when they are on duty and upon presentation of proper identification. This is in sharp contrast to the general powers of arrest possessed by duly sworn and trained public police officers who when not on official duty status are bound to take action concerning the enforcement of state laws within their area of jurisdiction twenty-four hours a day if a criminal violation takes place in their presence. To be exempted from the FLSA, the Department of Labor requires that employees engaged in law enforcement activities be 19 empowered by State statute or local ordinance to enforce laws designed to maintain public peace and order and to protect both life and property from accidental or willful injury, and to prevent and detect crimes.... 20