The Fight on Arbitration

This week, the county council heard public testimony on proposed legislation, sponsored by Council Chairman Dick Ladd (R-5th District) at the request of County Executive John R. Leopold, that would give the council the last say in benefit disputes with public sector employees. Councilman John Grasso (R-2nd District) of Glen Burnie supports the bill.

Currently, public sector unions have binding arbitration in benefit disputes with the county, meaning whatever an independent arbitrator decides is final. This was put into place in 2002 when roughly 80 percent of county voters approved a charter amendment to give public sector workers binding arbitration.

The 2002 referendum was something that a number of the police officers and firefighters pointed to when testifying in front of the council.

"Eighty percent of the population voted for this arbitration," said Sgt. T.J. Smith of the Anne Arundel County Police Department. "You guys are trying to give something away that we need and they voted for."

More than 60 people, including Delegate Pam Beidle (D-Linthicum), testified before the council, with the majority being police officers or firefighters. Opponents of the bill argue that the current system works, and that there is simply no need for it to be altered.

"Your support of this bill is premature," she told the council. "Your voters expect you to represent them, not the county executive."

According to the coalition opposing the bill, arbitration has only been used four times since 2002, when binding arbitration was enacted, and each time the independent arbitrator sided with the county, not the unions.

"It's all about fairness with us," said Sgt. Todd Powell of the county police. "We're the good guys here and we're being made to sound like the bad guys tonight."

Craig Oldershaw, president of the county's fire union, said the bill amounts to a power grab by the county executive.

"Eliminating or altering the charter is not what needs to be done, this is simply about enhancing the county executive's power," Oldershaw said. "This is a shameful period for the county."

This labor fight comes on the heels of protests in Madison, WI, where the state's governor is trying to take away public sector employee benefits and collective bargaining rights.

After listening to more than three hours of testimony, Councilman Jerry Walker (R-7th District) of Gambrills proposed an amendment to make the bill emergency legislation, allowing it to immediately become law upon passage. Usually there is a 45-day waiting period between a bill's passage and when it goes into effect.

This amendment passed on a vote of four to three, with Ladd,  Grasso and Councilman Derek Fink (R-3rd District) of Pasadena voting against the measure. Because the bill has now been amended, it must be re-advertised and will be up for a vote at the next council meeting on March 7.

However, unless the amendment is repealed in further deliberations, making the bill emergency legislation could make passage that much more difficult.

According to section 307 of the Anne Arundel County Code, emergency legislation needs to get the approval of five council members, instead of the four votes needed to pass normal legislation.

O'Brien Atkinson is president of the Anne Arundel County chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police and an Arnold resident. He believes that binding arbitration was provided by the citizens to officers in 2003 as a safety net.

"It serves to make sure that neither side is unreasonable during negotiations. It keeps labor unrest at bay because we have a non-political referee who makes the final call. The County will always have the upper hand because the arbitrators make their rulings based on the County's budget projections," he said.

He added, "We made a commitment to the citizens of Anne Arundel County when they gave us binding arbitration that it would not be abused. We have kept our end of the bargain. The Council needs to recognize that.”

But faced with bleak economic uncertainty, Councilman Ladd believes hard choices are ahead. "In today's fiscal environment and with what we might see in the future, we need to have as many tools as we can," said Ladd. "I would prefer to have something other than raising taxes, cutting services, or adding additional furlough days."

Additional information submitted by Laura Tayman