Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/06/1988, 5 - COMPULSORY AND BINDING ARBITRATION r I�Inll^�I� ��I p MEM DA 4111�� II II �� � city o san lois OBISPO REM N G 8 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT FROM: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer Roger Picquet, City Attorney SUBJECT: Compulsory and Binding Arbitration CAO RECOMMENDATION: By motion continue formal opposition to the concept of compulsory and binding arbitration in public employer-employee relations. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: The issue of compulsory and binding arbitration has arisen recently in connec- tion with two separate matters. One was the request from the League of Cali- fornia Cities for all cities to join in opposition to AB 3341 (Floyd) which would have mandated a statewide system for compulsory and binding arbitration on local governments for resolution of police and fire collective bargaining issues. In response to this request, the City authorized letters to be sent to state legislators setting forth our points in opposition. The other matter is the recent announcement by the local police and fire fighter associations of an intent to circulate an initiative petition to amend the Charter to include a compulsory and binding arbitration procedure to resolve disputes over wages. hours and other terms and conditions of employment. AB 3341 was just defeated in the Senate Appropriations Committee after a concerted and combined effort by city, county and other officials throughout the state. Surprisingly, even a few public safety employee associations joined in opposition arguing that compulsory and binding arbitration would destroy the existing and highly successful collective bargaining process. AB 3341 was similar to previous measures introduced in past years by police and fire organizations. Despite its latest defeat, this concept surely will be back in future legislative sessions (indeed, the proposed Charter amendment is strikingly similar to the defeated AB 3341) . The more that citizens of this community understand the basic issues and the components of compulsory and binding arbitration, the quicker this concept can be put to rest. The League encourages all cities to become very familiar with the primary reasons why compulsory and binding arbitration is a serious threat to effective municipal management. 1. In cities, compulsory and binding arbitration would remove an estimated 50% of the budget from the control of elected officials and give authority to an outside, non-elected arbitrator with no understanding of a city's public services needs or finances to determine this major portion of the budget. 2. Compulsory and binding arbitration is the antithesis of the collective bargaining process. Rather than negotiating in good faith, making compromises and solving problems, the parties' posture in the bargaining process to place themselves in the best possible position for arbitration. s-/ 1 city of san Luis osispo COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT September 1 , 1988 Page 2 3. Compulsory and binding arbitration (as expressed in AB 3341) is a clear, state-mandated local cost. The Legislative Counsel has ruled that not only the cost of the arbitration process but the amount of the award above the employers' last best offer is a state-mandated local cost. The difficulty in getting the state to fully and fairly shoulder the financial burdens it imposes on local jurisdictions is well-known and and has been a source of frustration to local government. 4. Compulsory and binding arbitration is often sold as a means to prevent strikes. In Michigan, and in other places where it has been adopted, the establishment of binding and compulsory arbitration has actually caused an increase in the number of strikes because employee groups have been dissatisfied with the arbitrator's determination. The first two reasons merit further discussion. The state constitution provides that cities may choose to be governed under a "freeholder's charter. " This authority grants the City a great deal of flexi- bility when addressing municipal affairs. Under our Charter, the Council is "vested with all powers of legislation adequate to a complete system of local government" (section 202) . The Charter directs the Council to organize a city government (section 204) , consider and adopt an annual budget (section 802, et seg. ) , and perform other essential functions, including establishment of a personnel system. The Mayor and Councilmembers are elected at large and directly by the elec- torate to carry out the mandates of the Charter and other relevant federal and state laws. Although they are ably assisted by the appointed city officials and other city employees, it is the Council alone which is directly responsible and accountable to the voters. Accordingly, all council members strive to be responsive to the legitimate wants, needs and desires of the community. This obligation means setting priorities and, often times, making difficult choices between competing interests and alternatives. Compulsory and binding arbitra- tion strips the Council of its necessary and inherent ability to control the level of municipal services (and related funding or costs) in a given area or function, such as public safety, and delivers the prerogative over to an arbitrator who bears no legal or official accountability or responsibility to the community or electorate. Regardless of the arbitrator's intent or motivation, his or her decision may not accurately reflect the community's choices or priorities to address community needs. By definition this form of arbitration is binding, meaning further administrative review would be impossible and judicial review extremely unlikely. mn�►�>II►VllllllllpC' ���ll city of San LUIS OBISPO ONZO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT September 1 , 1988 Page 3 Government Code section 3500 et sec . is known as the "Meyers-Mitis-Brown Act" or MMB. It regulates the current legal framework of public, employer-employer relations. The heart and soul of MMB is the requirement that the governing body of a government meet and confer in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with the employee organizations. The governing body (Council) must fully consider the positions and presentations of the employee organization prior to arriving at a determination of policy or particular course of action (Govt. Code section 3505) . The duty to "meet and confer in good faith" is a mutual obligation to meet personally and promptly in order to exchange freely information, opinions and proposals and to try to reach agreement on matters within dispute. The meet and confer sessions do not impinge on the legislative power vested by law in the Council , but, rather, they provide a useful channel by which employees may provide suggestions as to how the Council 's discretion in salary matters should be exercised and help promote open communication between employer and employees (Civil Service Assoc. v. S.F. (1977) 141 Cal . Rptr. 922) . This is what is referred to as "collective bargaining. " Over the years that MMB has been in effect it has operated very successfully and contributed significantly to an overall positive environment for public sector employer-employee relationships. However, although the statutory framework encourages binding agreements resulting from collective bargaining, the Council retains the ultimate power to refuse an agreement and to make its own decision (Seal Beach P.O.A. v. City of Seal Beach (1984) 205 Cal . Rptr. 794) . This authority reflects the basic premise that the Council alone is held to answer to the electorate for the policy directions and fiscal soundness of the City. If arbitration is made compulsory, the incentive to bargain in good faith and to fully consider the merits of the other side is greatly reduced. Under the scheme envisioned by the current proposed Charter amendment, as with the recently deceased AB 3341 , the role of the Council , the elected representatives of the people, is reduced, in effect, to a mere advisory role to an arbitrator. Reduced to its essentials compulsory and binding arbitration is a "power grab" which removes necessary discretion from a Council to determine the direction and policy of a city in the critically important area of internal employee relations. There are many other related issues which could be addressed at great length. These include (at a minimum) the following: 1 . Political divisiveness and costs involved with compulsory and binding arbitration; 2. Experience of other jurisdictions (e.g. , Michigan and other California cities) which has shown that public employee strikes and work actions increase, not decrease with compulsory and binding arbitration; ��,w�� �;;dIIIII�P� IIdl11 city Of san LUIS OBISPO =IS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT September 1 , 1988 Page 4 3. Negative morale among other employees when public safety employees are treated differently: 4 . Inability of departments to be efficiently managed without interference of outside arbitrator: and 5. Binding and compulsory arbitration also effects "other terms and conditions of employment, " meaning that certain management prerogatives allowed by MMB and court decisions could be removed from us, decreasing the ability of the Police Chief and the Fire Chief to effectively run their own departments. 6. Litigation and related costs. SUMMARY: Compulsory and binding arbitration is a concept which is inherently incom- patible with the purposes and functions of a municipal government. The ability of an elected body to make appropriate and balanced policy decisions in the area of wages, hours and other terms of employment for public employees would be effectively lost. More significantly, the ability and obligation of the Council to be responsive and accountable to the voters is eliminated. This concept is really an attempt to alter the fundamental relationship and roles of the Council and employee associations. There is no corresponding benefit to be obtained by the City. Staff recommends this Council continue to support the League on this matter and express its opposition to compulsory and binding arbitration whenever and wherever appropriate. �- y MEETING AGENDA T0: ROGER PIEOUET, CITY ATTORNEY DATE si P 2 � M # FROM: BOB WILKINSON, FIREMAN'S ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT SUBJECT: COUNCIL MEETING, SEPT. 6TH In response to your meeting with Engineer Mike Ward and myself on August 25th, I would like to submit this letter as part of your report to the City Council or a copy of this letter to be presented separately to the Council at the September 6th meeting. The first misconception I would like to clear up Is the reason the Fireman's Association and the Police Officer's Association formed The Citizens for Public Safety . The alliance with the Police Officer's Association is created upon the Issue of the need for an equitable negotiation environment . The Fireman's Association is currently neutral regarding the impass that the POA and the City are engaged In. The Issues surrounding the impass have nothing to do with our alliance. If the impass was to be settled today, we would still pursue the charter amendment . The big question is why? 1 . During the negotiating period, the City holds all the cards (one city official Indicated that the city holds all the trump cards) . In past negotiations, It has been reported by our representatives that a statement was made at the beginning of the negotiating period to the effect that "The Council has limited any pay negotiation to three quarters of the CPI . " With statements like this, It sets the tone for a very one-sided negotiating period. The point is that our current system of collective bargaining is in reality collective begging. 2. The second point deals with recognition . It is a fact that not one Council person came to the Fire Department's Open House last year in October. It is a fact that the members of the rank and file recommended the Chief request two firefighter/ Inspectors to man the Brush Rlg. . (Council denied the two positions) . It is a fact that the Fire Prevention Captain's position was eliminated by Council before a formal Meet and Confer session was held with the Fireman's Association which is basically Illegal . My point is that the Association membership has been taken for granted. Chief Dolder and myself have been working hard to create and maintain a high level of communication . But even with this, a general feeling of being taken for granted has not been dispelled. Our efforts to address the above problems have heen based on resolutions rather than attacking a group or individuals. Our current MOU has established monthly meetings withfAO sactionbyLeadPers__ Dolder creating a good basis for communication . The by: RECEIVED ��ppp ty. SEP Z1788 orig. CITY CLERK ❑ SAM LUIS 09VSP0.CA ❑ l Association has also recognized the need to become more assertive in giving Input to matters that have an effect on the membership. One of the shifts has Invited one member of the City Council for dinner recently at the Fire Station to provide an opportunity to learn more about the Council person, their values, and perception of service to the commmunity. We hope that the visit provided an opportunity for the Council person to identify the personal value of service the Fire Department members hold to the community. Our goal is to maintain this friendly and open form with all Council members. Our efforts in dealing with the non-equitable system of negotiations is the establishment of binding arbitration. Establishment of the Charter Amendment will dissapate the growing feeling of a negative climate in employer-employee relations as a result of unfair negotiations. Binding arbitration is a last-resort measure to resolve contract negotiation conflicts. The reports I have, Indicate those cities with binding arbitration have had to use it very little if at all because of a more reasonable bargaining effort on both sides. When binding arbitration has been used, It Is because an element of on-going conflict has existed between the city and the employee group. We view binding arbitration as a tool for both employer and employee groups to bargain in good faith from the very start of the negotiation period. A citizen asked the question , ° If the city is negotiating in a reasonable and fair manner, what are they afraid of ?" I hope you see that our efforts are addressing problems Identified by the Fireman's Association. Our efforts are preventative and not vindictive. The general make-up of the the Fireman's Association has not been assertive or overbearing. An instructor at the California State Fire Academy recently acknowledged to his class that the San Luis Obispo Fire Department is one of the most progressive Fire Departments in the state of California. Our progressiveness Is to be of service to the community of an Luis Obispo and our hope is to be treated fairly. cc: Chief Dolder r . • ��MEETING AGENDA 5 Lll1 SEP E11 EM # o TO: THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL FROM: GARY NEMETH, PRESIDENT, SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1988 SUBJECT: BINDING ARBITRATION HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL: I HAVE REVIEWED THE MATERIAL FROM JOHN DUNN, CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, AND ROGER PICQUET, CITY ATTORNEY, THAT WILL BE PRESENTED TO YOU AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. I HOPE THAT BEFORE YOU MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON FORMAL OPPOSITION TO THE CONCEPT OF COMPULSORY AND BINDING ARBITRATION IN PUBLIC EMPLOYER—EMPLOYEE RELATIONS, YOU WILL CONSIDER THE MATERIAL I AM PRESENTING. IF YOU WISH ANY FURTHER INFORMATION ON ANY OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED, OR IF YOU WISH TO DISCUSS THE MATTER FURTHER, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME AT YOUR CONVIENCE. SINCERELY: Y t rs PRESIDENT .l Denotes action by Lead Peon SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Respond by. P.O. BOX 1251 Council\ N AIMM SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIF. 93406 CAO 549-7312 C%,Any. Clerk-odg. N.�•1a�Q r A.0 Qast F y RECEIl/ E ® SEP b 1988 CITY CLERK SAN LUIS OBISPO.CA