Stephen: Prior to coming here I was a Finance Director in Michigan.
Michigan has binding labor arbitration for Public Safety units. It is an
extremely expensive process for cities. In fact there were two studies done
on the effects of binding labor arbitration on the cost of public safety in
Michigan. Both studies concluded that Public Safety costs had increased by
over 50% as a result of the binding arbitration (Act 312 in MI).
The reasons are simple.
1) Employers are required to hire specialized labor attorneys and expert
witnesses to prove their case before the arbitrator.
2) Unions are no longer obligated to bargain in "good faith." They simply
need only to bargain to impasse and then they are able to file for binding
labor arbitration.
3) Arbitrators will tend to "split the issues" between union and management.
For example, if there are twenty issues before the arbitrator each side is
awarded ten. Arbitrators will do this so that they will continue to be
considered by both union and management for future arbitration proceedings
(the arbitrator selection process usually requires each side to submit three
names from the AAA then strike one on an alternating basis until an
arbitrator is chosen). As a result, union takes the position that the more
issues before the arbitrator the better and "if we don't get it this time we
will get it next time" because they know they will be awarded half of the
issues arbitrated. During the proceedings I was involved in, the number of
issues before the arbitrator ranged from 14-22.
4) Arbitration proceedings are very long and protracted. I have been
involved in four binding labor arbitration proceedings and in three of four
of the proceedings the contract period in arbitration expired prior to the
end of the arbitration proceedings. Therefore, as soon as arbitration ended
we were right back in the collective bargaining process (This just happened
to the City of Anaheim).
In all four instances I was involved in, we spent over $100,000 in legal
costs alone, not including costs for expert witnesses, preparation of
exhibits, testifying at the hearing, etc.
In one instance, the City spent over $300,000 for the arbitration
proceeding.
On average, I prepared over 200 exhibits which took over 400 hours each time
to support the statutory criteria of ability to pay, comparability, and
economic issues in each proceeding.
SB402 is clearly a bad deal for cities. It is clearly an unfunded mandate
and will significantly increase costs to local units for public safety. I
strongly urge you to contact the governor's office and urge him to veto this
bad legislation.
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen P. Compton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 7:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [CSMFO Members] SB 402
As a general questions what are you feeling on this subject I know how I
feel about binding arbitration for law enforcement and fire (Was a Law
Enforcement Officer for 12 years)
Your comments would be appreciated.
In the Coachella Valley I have several concerns!!
Stephen P. Compton
City of Indio
Finance Director/Assistant City Manager
