Georgia Court of Appeals Rules in Part-Time Firefighter Benefits Case

The Georgia Court of Appeals has ruled that part-time firefighters who regularly worked at least 40 hours per week, were not improperly denied full-time employee benefits by the City of Rosewell.

The suit dates back to 2017, when two longtime members of the Roswell Fire Department, David Bible and Brian Rogers, filed the class action lawsuit. They alleged that although they regularly worked at least 40 hours per week, the City of Roswell classified them as part-time and excluded them from benefits available to full-time employees. The firefighters sought retirement benefits under the City’s pension plans, as well as damages under several legal theories including breach of contract.

The trial court issued a series of rulings between 2023 and 2024, creating a rather complex procedural history. Summarizing those holdings, the trial court ruled that:

• Claims tied to the City’s Defined Benefit Pension Plan were barred by the six-year statute of limitation, since that plan closed to new entrants in 2011.
• The City’s Human Resources Policies and Procedures Manual could potentially be treated as a contract, and whether the City breached that contract was an issue for a fact-finder. This left the firefighters with a possible path forward on their contract claims.
• The court dismissed or granted judgment to the City on several other claims, including quantum meruit, though some issues remained unclear and subject to further proceedings.
• When the firefighters attempted to file a second amended complaint adding new claims based on the City’s agreement with the Georgia Municipal Employees Benefit System, the court dismissed those claims, finding they could not be added after summary judgment had already been entered.

In short, the trial court’s rulings were mixed, rejecting certain claims outright but allowing others to proceed, keeping the case alive for the firefighters. The City and the firefighters each challenged portions of the trial court’s rulings. The Court of Appeals brought more finality to the dispute:

• It held that the Policy Manual was not a contract. All versions since 1983 included disclaimers stating it was not an employment agreement. Even if it could be construed as a contract, the manual expressly excluded part-time employees from benefits, and the plaintiffs were hired into part-time positions.
• Because the contract claims failed, related claims for breach of good faith and fair dealing and declaratory judgment also failed.
• The court vacated the trial court’s ruling on quantum meruit and attorney fees and sent those issues back for reconsideration.
• It affirmed that the claims tied to the Defined Benefit Pension Plan were time-barred under the six-year statute of limitation.
• It also affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ second amended complaint seeking to add the GMEBS contract claims.

As a result, the firefighters’ central claims were dismissed. The only matters remaining are the quantum meruit and attorney fee issues, which the appellate court remanded to the trial court for further consideration. Here is a copy of the complaint.