The court stated that ". . . `restoration of all emoluments' includes restoration of health insurance coverage on the same basis that it would have been available had their employment not been interrupted. Lastly, inHebbler v. New Orleans Fire Dept., 310 So.2d 113 (La. 1975) this court held that a reinstated fireman was entitled to state supplemental pay that was withheld during the period of wrongful termination. We reasoned that the state supplemental pay was a "benefit resulting from his (the fireman's) employment" and was therefore compensable under the Civil Service Rules as back wages.

She argues that the purpose of back pay pursuant to La. R.S. 49:113 is to make her whole. In support of this argument, Dr. Perry cites Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Department , 310 So.2d 113 (La. 1975).In Hebbler, the Court held that a reinstated firefighter was entitled to state supplemental pay that was withheld during the period of wrongful termination.

Employees in the state or city civil service, who have been illegally discharged from their employment, as found by the appellate courts, shall be entitled to be paid by the employing agency all salaries and wages withheld during the period of illegal separation . . . In Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Department, 310 So.2d 113 (La. 1975), the Supreme Court relied upon La.Rev.Stat. 49:113 to conclude that an employee is entitled to recover the state supplemental pay portion of his salary and wages withheld during a period of illegal separation from his employer. The Court stated:

When a law or ordinance is clear and free from all ambiguity, it must be given effect as written. La.C.C. art. 13; La.R.S. 1:4; Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Department, 310 So.2d 113 (La. 1975); Roman Catholic Church of Archdiocese of New Orleans v. State, Department of Labor, Office of Employment Security, 387 So.2d 1248 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1980), writ denied, 394 So.2d 607 (La. 1980). Under the ordinance, dismissal upon a positive drug test is mandatory.

"Employees in the state or city civil service, who have been illegally discharged from their employment, as found by the appellate courts, shall be entitled to be paid by the employing agency on all salaries and wages withheld during the period of illegal separation, against which amount shall be credited and set-off all wages and salaries earned by the employee in private employment in the period of separation." In deciding what constitutes "wages and salaries" within the meaning of the above cited statute this Court, in Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Department, 299 So.2d 825 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1974), affirmed in part, reversed in part, 310 So.2d 113, held that phrase to mean overtime and holiday pay that was mandatory. The Supreme Court granted certiorari, and included state supplemental pay as part of "wages and salaries".

When a law is clear and free from all ambiguity, it must be given effect as written. Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Department, 310 So.2d 113 (La. 1975). La.R.S. 18:601 (B) provides:

This court in Firefighters,supra, at 413 (La. 1982), stated that "Our courts have consistently held in a variety of contexts that state supplements are to be considered as part of the overall level of compensation due to employees." In Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Department, 310 So.2d 113, 115 (La. 1975), this Court held that state supplemental pay was part of a fireman's salaries and wages. Also, in Latino v. City of Bogalusa, 9822 (La.App. 1st. Cir. 1974), 295 So.2d 560, the First Circuit Court of Appeal held that city policemen were entitled to have their overtime pay computed not only on the basis of their city salary but also with the inclusion of their supplemental pay. Therefore, "compensation," as identified in LSA-Const.

It is well established that when a statute is clear and free of ambiguity, it must be given effect as written. Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Dept., 310 So.2d 113 (La. 1975). Words and phrases shall be read with their context and shall be construed according to the common and approved usage of the language.

The majority's delving into the constitutional debates is clearly unwarranted in light of the clear text of our constitution. Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Dept., 310 So.2d 113 (La. 1975). Applying the "rational relationship" test to the Act, this writer believes that the limitation of liability on state medical malpractice claims is reasonably related to the legitimate state interest of assuring the availability of affordable public health care to the citizens of this state.

Our courts have consistently held in a variety of contexts that state supplements are to be considered as part of the overall level of compensation due to employees. See e.g., Hebbler v. New Orleans Fire Department, 310 So.2d 113 (La. 1975) (State supplements are part of "salaries and wages" in R.S. 49:113 requiring that salary must be restored by city for period of illegal separation from service); Latino v. City of Bogalusa, 295 So.2d 560 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1974) (state supplement must be included in calculation of overtime wages under R.S. 33:2213); Maes v. City of New Orleans, 97 So.2d 856 (La.App.Orl. 1957) (state supplement is part of "salary" subject to pension deduction under R.S. 33:2218.1 et seq.). For these reasons, we conclude that the City Civil Service Commission is not free to ignore the legislative commandment to include state supplements in calculating overtime pay.