Clark County, SEIU dispute moves on to next phase

Clark County's dispute with its largest union isn't over yet, despite an arbitrator's award of a new contract.

The next battle is being closely watched by other unions and Nevada government agencies.

The state Employee-Management Relations Board will hear a complaint that the Service Employees International Union Local 1107 filed in June against the county over its actions tied to Senate Bill 241, a new state collective bargaining law that took effect June 1.

The county froze pay raises, and hundreds of employees lost out on their annual merit and longevity increases in the nearly three-month period since the law took effect.

The union disagrees with the county's interpretation of the law, saying the expired contract's so-called "evergreen" clause allowed the agreement to continue from year to year and prevents the new law from applying.

The law is intended to force the bargaining process to move along more quickly, because a government agency cannot give raises if the contract has expired.

The situation has stoked fears among other union members who face conflicts elsewhere over the new law's impact, both on raises and paid leave to conduct union business. The county temporarily revoked paid union leave for SEIU officials because the contract expired and the new law requires union leave to be reimbursed or for the union to make a similar financial concession. Union President Martin Bassick is back on paid union leave instead of his county job because the new contract's in place.

The union filed the complaint seeking to overturn the county's action. The new law took effect June 1, before the arbitrator awarded a contract this week. Citing the new law, the county in June said it could not give raises to employees with an expired contract. The union, meanwhile, argued against that move, citing the evergreen clause.

The ultimate outcome affected about 274 employees each month. That's because merit pay raises, which are about 4 percent of base salaries, are awarded on the anniversary of an employee's hiring date. As a result, roughly 822 employees didn't get scheduled merit raises as the impasse over negotiations — initially declared in 2014 — continued through the summer after the law took effect.

Under the arbitrator's award, all SEIU-affiliated employees will get cost-of-living increases that total 4.5 percent covering 2014 and 2015. That's a separate pay type from merit pay.

The unanswered question now before the EMRB is what will come of the merit and longevity raises for employees who didn't receive them this summer.

Employees with a hiring date later in the year are in better shape. That's because with a new contract, they will be able to get their scheduled raises under SB241.

Ross Runkel, the Portland, Ore.-based arbitrator, said new law applies to the new contract he awarded, noting the county and union had disagreed on whether it applied to the new contract.

"My conclusion is that SB241 will apply to the contract that results from this fact finding," wrote Runkel, an arbitrator since 1976. "So the fact that the expired contract has an evergreen clause does not matter. My view is that the contract that results from this fact finding will be one that is 'entered into on or after the effective date' of SB241."

Pointing to the Runkel's experience and credentials as a law professor, County Manager Don Burnette said the arbitrator "has reaffirmed what the county has said from the beginning: the SEIU contract was expired when the County implemented SB241 this past June and the fact that it had an evergreen clause does not matter. His decision supports the county's position, and I don't know how anyone can reach a different conclusion."

The dispute has attracted the attention of other unions that have filed petitions to intervene in the EMRB case, including the Las Vegas Police Protective Association Civilian Employees; the Peace Officers Research Association of Nevada; the Las Vegas Peace Officers Association for city detention officers; the Henderson Police Supervisors Association; and the county's International Union of Elevator Constructors Local 18.

Combined, the groups represent more than 3,000 employees throughout Nevada. They cite concerns with SB241 and want to weigh in on the EMRB complaint.

Conflicts run deep. The Henderson organization's filing, for example, said it and the city are "now at war over the interpretation of SB241."

Brian Shepherd, chief of staff for the SEIU Local 1107, said other unions feel this is "everybody's fight" for the middle class. SEIU Local 1107 President Martin Bassick was unavailable for comment Thursday.

The EMRB will have a Sept. 3 meeting to review the petitions. The briefs are due by Sept. 8, and a two-day hearing on the case is scheduled for Sept. 14 and Sept. 16.

Contact Ben Botkin at bbotkin@reviewjournal.com or 702-387-2904. Find him on Twitter: @BenBotkin1