CLEVELAND — National Guard members must give a high level of commitment and even some sacrifice to serve as a member, which federal law states should be compensated.
David Lam, a major in the Ohio Army National Guard and a lieutenant for the Cleveland Police Department, claims he wasn’t paid during his active duty for most of his civilian career in law enforcement
Lam worked his way up the ranks to become a Major after joining the Ohio Army National Guard after high school.
“Just to get some life experience and also to help pay my way through college,” he said.
Now, almost two decades later, the Akron native is currently on active duty in Iraq.
“Every time you’re overseas, your life essentially gets put on hold, but life back at home just continues on,” Lam said.
His life back home is in Cleveland. He joined the force in 2008.
“Saw a lot of similarities between the two career fields and thought it would be a rewarding career,” Lam said. “Thought it would be fun.”
Permanent public employees who are members of the armed forces are entitled to a leave of absence from their positions without loss of pay for the time they’re performing service, up to one month for each fiscal year, according to the Ohio Revised Code.
But Lam said he wasn’t paid by the City of Cleveland when he was on active duty for most of his career. Court documents show Lam’s military pay has generally been higher than his pay from the city throughout his employment, and he didn’t qualify for a payment from the city. At the time, Cleveland’s city ordinance called for military members to be paid the difference between their pay as a public employee and their military pay, so their income while on active duty matched their civilian salary.
Lam filed a lawsuit in 2016 and said through that judicial process helped bring some change. The City of Cleveland edited its city ordinance in 2019, and he said they began paying all reservists their regular salaries while on active duty.
“So after the modification, the language was more in line with the state statute, so I have been compensated for my paid military leave for the past two years or so,” Lam said.
The issue at hand now is the back pay, the payment he said he didn’t receive while on active duty before the city rule was updated. He estimates he lost out on more than $50,000 during that time.
“You’re committing a lot of time and effort to serve your city and also serve your country,” Lam said. “So, it’s kind of disheartening.”
Daniel Morris is Lam’s attorney. He also served on the Ohio Army National Guard and said he’s helping six clients with similar claims to Lam’s. One case is currently before the Ohio Supreme Court.
“It’s probably as many as 3,000 to 5,000 individuals and their families that have been deprived of this very valuable benefit,” he said, speaking about the number of people in Ohio impacted.
Morris said Cleveland, Cincinnati and Akron are the three biggest cities in the state that didn’t pay military leave to permanent public employees for decades beginning in the 1970s.
So far, Lam lost his case to the City of Cleveland twice during his fight for past compensation.
“The decisions, we think, were wrong,” Morris said.
Morris said he plans to file a motion for relief from judgment on behalf of Lam this month on the basis of fraud upon the court. He said the city made false claims during previous proceedings.
“Wrongfully argued that they never violated USERRA (Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act), all their policies were compliant with USERRA,” he said.
In a 2019 filing, a Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas judge ruled Lam failed to prove USERRA required military leave be paid as a bonus to a reservist’s salary. That ruling was upheld by the Eighth Appellate District Court of Appeals in 2021.
Lam said he plans to continue fighting for his rights.
“It’s kind of ridiculous how they’re treating their employees and how they’re treating the veterans that work for them,” Lam said.
Spectrum News contacted both the City of Cleveland and the division of police, and spokespeople said they’re unable to comment on pending legal matters.
