Exploring Administrators’ Perceptions of Light-Duty Assignment

• Author: Cara E. Rabe-Hemp
• Published date: 01 June 2011
• Date: 01 June 2011
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1098611111404138
• Subject Matter: Articles

P
8 Q
PQX14210.1
X
177/109861111
404
1404138Rabe-HempPolice Quarterly
13
Police Quarterly
14(2) 124 –141
Exploring Administrators’
© The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission: http://www.
Perceptions of Light-Duty
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1098611111404138
http://pqx.sagepub.com
Assignment
Cara E. Rabe-Hemp1
Abstract
Through the lens of organizational justice, this study explored administrators’ perceptions
of light-duty assignment in police agencies in Illinois. The majority consider light-duty
assignment a necessary practice for modern police agencies, although opinions varied
on the need for the formalization of policy, especially for off-duty injury or pregnancy.
Qualitative analyses of administrators’ perceptions suggest financial and organizational
challenges to maintaining light-duty policies, including the costs of overtime pay to
cover injured officers’ shifts, the struggle to meet mandatory strength minimums,
and malingering. The findings have important implications for officer well-being and
morale, departmental administrative rule making, and community safety.
Keywords
light-duty policy, officer injury, American Disabilities Act (ADA), Pregnancy Discrimina-
tion Act (PDA), police organizations
Light-duty policies continue the employment of officers who, because of injury, preg-
nancy, or illness, are temporarily unable to perform their regular assignments but are
capable of performing alternative duty assignments (Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission [EEOC], 2009). The danger often associated with policing has prompted
the creation of light-duty assignments for officers who become injured while on the
job. Research conducted by Brandl and Stroshine (2003) reported that more than half
of injuries sustained by the police were the result of on-the-job accidents. Further-
more, the most recent Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted (LEOKA) data
report that 57,268 law enforcement officers were assaulted in the line of duty and 26%
1Illinois State University, Normal
Corresponding Author:
Cara E. Rabe-Hemp, Criminal Justice Sciences, Illinois State University, Campus Box 5250,
Normal, IL 61790
Email: cerabe@ilstu.edu

---

Rabe-Hemp
125
of those assaults resulted in personal injury (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2010), in
2009. These empirical studies confirm there is a need for departmental response in the
form of light-duty assignment for on-duty injury.
Although it has been suggested that the danger inherent in police work necessitates
a need for light-duty policies for officers injured in the line of duty, little research
attention has been devoted to light-duty assignment for officers injured off duty or
temporarily unable to perform their regular assignment due to pregnancy. There are no
national statistics which differentiate the incidence of light-duty assignment for on-
duty injury, pregnancy, or off-duty illness/injury. The most recent Law Enforcement
Management and Administrative Policies report, published by Bureau of Justice
Statistics, does not even report department use of light-duty policies, and the model
policy written by the International Association of Police Chiefs has not been updated
since 1995. Recent court decisions alleging that light-duty policies have been applied
arbitrarily and unsystematically in off-duty injury and pregnancy situations have made
clear that agencies do offer light-duty assignment for a variety of situations (Lochren
v. Suffolk, 2006; Raine v. City of Burbank, 2006; Tysinger v. Police Department of the
City of Zanesville, 2006). These controversial decisions have brought light-duty policy
making to the forefront as a major legal issue facing American police departments. It
is unclear whether or how agencies are interpreting these laws into practice, as case law
has historically had little immediate impact on police practice (Ross, 2008; Uchida,
Bynum, & Rogan, 1998 ).
Due to the bureaucratic structure of policing, administrative policy is a good place
to begin exploring agency response. In addition to the prevalence and types of light-
duty policies utilized by agencies, the impact of these policies on the agency must also
be explored. Whereas light-duty assignment for on-duty injury is supported by case law
and is fiscally advantageous, the impetus for light-duty assignment for off-duty injury
or pregnancy is less clear. Through the lens of organizational theory, it is speculated
that light-duty policies for off-duty. injury and pregnancy are predicated on main-
taining the morale of the officers and preserving a trained and capable force. Through
semistructured interviews with police administrators, the current research takes the
first step in understanding departmental response to officer injury and illness by
updating the incidence and types of light-duty policies utilized by agencies (i.e., on-
duty injury, off-duty injury, or pregnancy) and exploring police administrators’ views
on the necessity of light-duty policy, obstacles to implementing the policy, and the
expenses of the policy.
Literature Review
The formalization of light-duty policy is legally complicated and mandated by several
federal laws, including Worker’s Compensation, Pregnancy Discrimination Act
(PDA), and American Disabilities Act (ADA). Legal complexity is due to the variety
of situations light-duty assignment encompasses: (a) injuries obtained while in the line

---

126
PoliceQuarterly 14(2)
of duty, (b) off duty-injuries or illnesses, and (c) pregnancy. Each has procedural restric-
tions based on federal law and recent case law.
Line of Duty Injury
Light-duty assignment for employees injured in the line of duty is mandated by the ADA
(1990) and is standard practice for police agencies in the United States. The law man-
dates that a department make a reasonable accommodation for an employee that is dis-
abled but otherwise qualified to perform all of the essential functions of the job.
Reassignment to a vacant position and appropriate modification of an employer’s policy
are forms of reasonable accommodation required by the ADA, absent undue hardship.
Light-duty assignment for officers injured on duty is financially advantageous. Due
to the Federal Employees Compensation Act, officers qualify for compensation benefits
for disability due to personal injury sustained while in the performance of duty or to
employment-related disease (U.S. Department of Labor, 2009b). Light-duty assignment
provides a cost-saving alternative to Worker’s Compensation or employer-funded dis-
ability payments for officers disabled on the job.
Off-Duty Injury
No such savings exists for employees who are injured off duty and are temporarily
unable to perform the essential duties of their functions. The creation of light-duty poli-
cies for officers who become injured or sick while off duty have been much more con-
troversial because the creation of light-duty positions may create a legal expectation of
continued light-duty assignment (Byers, 1997). This practice was recently debated in the
California case, Raine v. City of Burbank (2006). In Raine v. City of Burbank (2006), an
officer for the Burbank Police Department had suffered a knee injury which left him
unable to perform the essential duties of a patrol officer, namely running, jumping,
kneeling, and lifting. Officer Raine was assigned to a temporary light-duty assignment
and remained in the position for 6 years. When the department denied his request to
stay in the civilian position, he filed suit against the department. The courts held that
if a disabled employee cannot be accommodated in their existing position and the
requested accommodation is reassignment, an employer must make efforts to deter-
mine whether a position is available but is not required to create a new position as
accommodation.
Pregnancy
Specific to pregnancy, law enforcement agencies have only just recently begun to discuss
issues that pregnant officers may face, such as requests for light-duty assignment (Kruger,
2006). Despite the fact that national labor statistics suggest that 60% of female employees
become pregnant each year (U.S. Census, 2005), there is no national data quantifying

---

Rabe-Hemp
127
pregnant officers or their requests for light-duty assignment. The courts have gen-
erally held that pregnancy is not a disability for which a reasonable accommodation
is mandated under ADA. Nonetheless, an officer temporarily unable to perform the
essential functions due to pregnancy may be entitled to light duty under the federal
PDA. PDA requires that employers treat employees affected by pregnancy, childbirth,
or related conditions that is same in employment as other persons not so affected but
similar in their ability to work. Only when a law enforcement agency provides light-
duty assignment to temporarily disabled officers does the PDA require that it offer the
same opportunity to officers who are temporarily affected by pregnancy and childbirth
(Grossman & Thomas, 2009). Two recent court decisions affect the rights pregnant
officers have regarding light-duty assignment.
In Lochren v. Suffolk (2006), six female officers employed by the Suffolk County
Police Department challenged their department’s light-duty policy. The Suffolk County
Police Department had changed its policy in April 2000 to disqualify pregnant officers
from light-duty assignments. At this time, the department had awarded light-duty assign-
ments to officers injured off duty. After several...