Hranicka Vs Chesapeake Surgical

The crux of this case hinges on the construction of the provision of the HCGPP that, between 2007 and the spring of 2013, provided:
A Police Services Supervisor I who is called in to work hours which are not contiguous to their regular shift shall receive a minimum of 4 hours pay at the overtime rate.The HCGPP is promulgated and revised by the Personnel Officer and enacted upon a vote of the County Council pursuant to Article VII, § 706 of the Howard County Charter. Although the HCGPP is a hybrid between a local government ordinance and an administrative regulation, “[w]hen we construe an agency’s rule or regulation, ‘the principles governing our interpretation of a statute apply.’” Hranicka v. Chesapeake Surgical, Ltd., 443 Md. 289, 298 (2015) (quoting Christopher, supra, 381 Md. at 209). Accordingly, as we set out to construe the HCGPP, our analysis begins by …show more content…
[We] have aptly summarized this quest, based on [the Court of Appeals’] past decisions, as one that requires an examination of the statutory text in context, a review of legislative history to confirm conclusions or resolve questions from that examination, and a consideration of the consequences of alternative readings. “Text is the plain language of the relevant provision, typically given its ordinary meaning, viewed in context, considered in light of the whole statute, and generally evaluated for ambiguity. Legislative purpose, either apparent from the text or gathered from external sources, often informs, if not controls, our reading of the statute. An examination of interpretive consequences, either as a comparison of the results of each proffered construction, or as a principle of avoidance of an absurd or unreasonable reading, grounds the court’s interpretation in reality.” Town of Oxford v. Koste, 204 Md. App. 578, 585–86, 42 A.3d 637 (2012), aff'd, 431 Md. 14, 63 A.3d 582 (2013) (citations