The New York Court of Claims has ruled in favor of K-9 handlers employed by the state, addressing their claims for unpaid overtime wages. The court's decision affects four claimants who allege that the New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services (DHSES) violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by not compensating them for time spent caring for their assigned dogs outside of work hours. This ruling is significant as it clarifies the responsibilities of state employees regarding overtime pay and the treatment of K-9 handlers under federal law.
The case, titled Gould v. State of New York, was filed on July 11, 2025, under docket number 135530. The claimants, Gregory R. Gould, Brook Rowley, Brian Girard, and Adam Leckonby, are K-9 handlers who assert that they worked additional hours beyond their regular shifts without receiving the appropriate overtime compensation. The court's ruling highlights the ongoing debate over how much time employees should be compensated for work that is integral to their job responsibilities.
The dispute arose after the claimants began their employment as K-9 handlers in DHSES's Urban Search and Rescue program, which requires them to care for their dogs 24/7. They claim that they routinely spend significant time outside their scheduled work hours feeding, training, grooming, and exercising their dogs, which they argue is essential for their job performance. The claimants sought damages for these alleged violations, leading to their motions for partial summary judgment and the state's cross-motions to dismiss their claims.
In her opinion, Judge Zainab A. Chaudhry ruled on the various motions presented by both parties. The court denied the claimants' motions for partial summary judgment, stating that while the significant off-duty time spent by K-9 handlers is compensable under the FLSA, there are material questions of fact that prevent a judgment as a matter of law regarding the state’s liability. The court also granted the state's motion to dismiss Rowley's claim due to a jurisdictional defect, while denying the state's motions to dismiss the claims of Girard, Gould, and Leckonby.
The court stated, "The significant off-duty time spent by K-9 handlers caring for and training their partners is compensable as work under the FLSA." This ruling affirms the court's stance that the responsibilities of K-9 handlers extend beyond their scheduled shifts and that they should be compensated accordingly. However, the court acknowledged that there are still factual disputes regarding the extent of the claimants' work and whether the state is liable for overtime pay.
The impact of this ruling is substantial for K-9 handlers and other state employees who may find themselves in similar situations. It sets a precedent that off-duty care for working animals is considered compensable work under the FLSA, which could lead to further claims by other K-9 handlers or employees in similar roles. The decision emphasizes the importance of recognizing the time employees dedicate to their jobs, even when that work occurs outside of traditional hours.
Moving forward, the claimants may pursue their claims for unpaid overtime, as the court's ruling allows their cases to continue. The state may also need to reevaluate its compensation policies for K-9 handlers to ensure compliance with federal labor laws. The court's decision underscores the necessity for employers to be aware of their obligations under the FLSA and the implications of failing to compensate employees for all hours worked.
As for what’s next, the state may appeal the court's decision regarding the claims of Girard, Gould, and Leckonby. The case could also lead to further legal challenges as other K-9 handlers or state employees seek to assert their rights under the FLSA. The ruling may prompt discussions about possible changes to state policies regarding overtime pay and the treatment of employees who have unique job responsibilities.