The Kentucky Court of Appeals recently ruled on a significant case involving the Louisville Metro Police Department’s Special Weapons and Tactical (SWAT) Team. The court's decision, rendered on September 18, 2026, affects current and former SWAT Team members who sought compensation for time spent on-call. The court affirmed the lower court's ruling, denying the officers' claims for compensation under Kentucky's wage and hour laws and their collective bargaining agreement.
This ruling has implications for law enforcement personnel across Kentucky and potentially sets a precedent for how on-call time is compensated in the future. The case, identified as Jason Lainhart v. Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government (docket number 2024-CA-1179), highlights the complexities surrounding employment law and the rights of public employees.
Background
The dispute began when six members of the SWAT Team, collectively referred to as SWAT1, filed a lawsuit against the Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government. They claimed they were entitled to compensation for each hour they spent on-call, arguing that their duties required them to be available for immediate response to emergencies, which restricted their ability to engage in personal activities.
In 2016, the Metro Government transitioned from a part-time SWAT Team to a full-time team, requiring officers to be on-call for two weeks each month. During this time, they were expected to respond to calls within five minutes and arrive at the scene within 45 minutes. The officers contended that this on-call status constituted work time under Kentucky law and the collective bargaining agreement with their union, the River City Fraternal Order of Police Lodge #614.
The case was initially tried in 2021 but resulted in a mistrial. A second trial took place in July 2022, where a jury ruled in favor of the Metro Government. Following this, the officers filed for a new trial, which was granted but later reinstated the original verdict after a motion for reconsideration by Metro.
The Ruling
The Kentucky Court of Appeals, led by Judge L. Jones, reviewed the case and ultimately affirmed the lower court's decision, stating that none of the parties were entitled to summary judgment. The court found that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or in admitting evidence during the trial.
The court ruled, "None of the parties were entitled to summary judgment. Further, the trial court did not commit error with regard to the jury instructions, nor did it abuse its discretion regarding admission of evidence."
The court addressed the arguments made by the SWAT officers regarding the jury instructions related to their wage and hour claims. The officers argued that the jury was not properly instructed on the requirements for determining if they were off-duty while on-call. However, the court found that the instructions provided by the trial court were appropriate and reflected the law regarding on-call work.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for public employees in Kentucky, particularly those in law enforcement. By affirming the trial court's decision, the court clarified that on-call time does not automatically qualify as compensable work time unless specific conditions are met. This decision may influence how other public agencies handle on-call compensation for their employees in the future.
The ruling also underscores the importance of clear agreements and understandings between employers and employees regarding compensation for on-call duties. It highlights the need for public employees to be aware of their rights under state labor laws and collective bargaining agreements.
What's Next
The possibility of an appeal to the Kentucky Supreme Court remains, although details were not available in the court filing. Additionally, related cases involving other members of the SWAT Team, referred to as SWAT2, may arise as they seek similar compensation claims in future trials.