Binding arbitration on ballot: L.A. County voters decide labor dispute process

L.A. County voters will decide whether independent arbitrators have the final say in public safety labor disputes, as Measure A appears on the Nov. 3 ballot. This would mean that when negotiations between the county supervisors and unions reach an impasse, an independent referee would determine wages, benefits, and working conditions. Unions representing firefighters, deputy sheriffs, and others are backing the measure, which could radically alter labor talks in the county. There has been little debate about the measure, and no formal opposition has been submitted.

The measure follows a pattern seen in other jurisdictions, such as Vallejo, where binding arbitration was adopted more than 50 years ago after a bitter police strike. However, Vallejo’s experience showed that binding arbitration can lead to financial strain, as the city declared bankruptcy in 2007 after a mediator ruled it could not reduce its fire department despite budget problems. Voters in Vallejo later repealed binding arbitration in 2010, showing that the process is not without risks.

Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, an architect of Measure A, said the process would allow both sides to base decisions on facts rather than political preferences. She also noted that binding arbitration has been used in only a few cases in California, and that six of the 21 jurisdictions with the system have resorted to it. If approved, binding arbitration would cover 14 bargaining units, representing some 16,500 county workers, including lifeguards and deputy medical examiners. It would not apply to bargaining units whose workers can strike.

The current system allows the supervisors to impose a final offer if negotiations fail, but this has happened only twice since 2001. Under Measure A, if an impasse is declared, a three-member arbitration panel would be formed, with each side selecting one member and the third chosen by both to serve as chair. The panel would hold hearings and make a binding ruling, which would be made public.

Unions say binding arbitration would add balance to negotiations, as the county currently has near-unilateral control over contract terms. However, some progressive groups are opposed to the measure, as they believe it gives law enforcement special interest groups more leverage. Despite this, unions have raised $7.7 million to campaign for Measure A, while no campaign funds have been reported in opposition to it.

The measure appears on the ballot with little debate, and its outcome may depend on how voters view the risks and benefits of binding arbitration in public safety labor disputes.