E-mail Story
Print Friendly
Send E-mail
Reprint story
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Chavez OKs Union Deal on Way Out
By Dan McKay
Journal Staff Writer
Just 10 days after losing the election, executives under Mayor Martin Chávez handed city unions a quiet victory — an open-ended agreement to participate in binding arbitration for some disputes.
It was an abrupt reversal for Chávez, who vetoed similar legislation last year, arguing it would limit the city's ability to provide services by strengthening union efforts to decide such things as where and when employees work.
It also drew criticism from Mayor-elect Richard Berry.
"It is troublesome that after an eight-year administration, an agreement of this magnitude was made days after the election," he said in a written statement. "I believe on an issue of this scale the taxpayers and citizens of Albuquerque deserved input from the incoming administration, and they didn't get it."
The two-page agreement says the city will enter binding arbitration to resolve "noneconomic" disputes with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
The agreement has no expiration date. It will remain in effect until "the parties jointly agree to repudiate it" or until the city's labor ordinance is changed in a way that makes the MOU moot.
Chávez administration officials say the earlier proposal had legal problems, which the new agreement avoids because it's in the form of a memorandum of understanding, not an amendment to the city ordinance.
AFSCME leadership endorsed Chávez in his re-election bid.
Paul Broome, a labor-relations consultant for Chávez, said the mayor was never opposed to binding arbitration itself and that it had been under discussion for months. Chávez just wanted arbitration handled in an agreement that wouldn't jeopardize the city's labor ordinance.
But at the time, Chávez also said he wanted to protect the city's ability to manage employees without having to go before an arbitrator. The city needs to be able to "tell someone when to work," he said at the time.
A spokeswoman for Chávez said he's simply "working in good faith" to resolve as many grievances with the union as he can — an effort to clear the deck for the new administration.
Broome said the agreement wasn't subject to council approval because it's an executive function that doesn't affect the city budget.
Chávez's term ends next week. He lost the election Oct. 6, and his staff signed the arbitration MOU on Oct. 16.
How it works
Here's how it would work: If the city reached an impasse with the union over, say, scheduling or break times, the issue would go to an arbitrator, assuming one side requests it.
Each side, then, would make a proposal, and the arbitrator would pick one. It's a process known as baseball arbitration because Major League Baseball has a similar system. Both sides have an incentive to make a reasonable proposal or fear having the arbitrator pick the other side's proposal.
Some disputes, however, will be excluded from the process. The union can't try to arbitrate economic or "management rights" issues.
"This doesn't affect the budget," Broome said. "We made sure of that, and so did the unions."
Andrew Padilla, president of AFSCME-Council 18, said he doesn't expect the city and its unions to actually end up in arbitration. There's a process involving a mediator and other steps before a dispute would go to arbitration, he said.
It would come into play only if the sides reached "impasse" — something that's rare, Padilla said.
"It probably won't ever be used," he said.
City Councilor Brad Winter said the outgoing administration shouldn't be making substantial policy decisions on its own during the transition period before Berry assumes office.
"I don't agree with it at all," Winter said Monday. "I think something like that should come to the council. It's something the new administration should weigh in on also."
Councilors Debbie O'Malley and Rey Garduño sponsored an ordinance for binding arbitration last year. Chávez vetoed the bill Aug. 22, 2008.
City employees can't strike, so arbitration provides a good incentive for the parties to settle their differences, supporters say. They also contend it ensures that the city negotiates fairly with the unions, supporters say.
You also can send comments via our comment form
|
|
