A ‘strategic decision’

Can the county negotiate away what is written in state law?

That's the $4 million question.

When the arbitrator earlier this month accepted Clark County's final and best offer over that of the firefighters' union, the county manager said the new contract will take effect after the county commissioners approve it Tuesday, and the 2 percent pay reduction aspect of the contract will not be retroactive to the expiration date of the old contract, June 30, 2010.

Firefighters won't have to write a check to the county refunding some of the pay they received in the past seven months, according to County Manager Don Burnette.

Mr. Burnette says the decision to not press for making the pay cuts retroactive was a "strategic decision."

The arbitrator, by law, had to choose either the county offer or the firefighter option, no splitting the baby. It was like the final hand of poker with both sides all in.

The county manager feared demanding a give back might've increased the risk of the arbitrator taking the firefighters' offer, which included zero pay cuts and automatic pay raises to cover increased pension costs -- a proposition that would have cost $1.7 million this year and more in years to come. Not worth the risk, Mr. Burnette says.

But state law, specifically NRS 288, states, "The arbitrator shall, within 10 days after the final offers are submitted, accept one of the written statements ... and shall report the decision to the parties. The decision of the arbitrator is final and binding on the parties. Any award of the arbitrator is retroactive to the expiration date of the last contract."

But in arbitrator Norman Brand's ruling, he reports, "In their final offers the parties agree on a 2 percent decrease in salary on the date of the new agreement."

So, is the effective date July 1, 2010, as the law says, or Feb. 1, 2011, as the county negotiators agreed to?

Obviously that language was written into state law so public employee unions, which have enjoyed lucrative pay raises in every new contract since the dawn of the Wobblies, would be able to get those raises retroactive to the date the new contract was supposed to take effect, regardless of how long the negotiations dragged on. No urgency to settle.

But now that the arbitrator has accepted a cut in pay, the onus would be on the union members instead of the taxpayers were the contract to be retroactively applied.

The county says the new lower pay will save taxpayers $7.4 million annually. So, a later start date for the contract means a one-time difference in excess of $4 million.

In early 2007, when the 2006-10 contract with the International Association of Firefighters Local 1908 was agreed upon, it was retroactive to July 1, 2006. That contract included a 4.25 percent pay increase.

The taxpayers picked up retroactive costs then, but get no reciprocity now that the firefighters are on the losing end.

Does a strict reading of the law permit the arbitrator to change the start date of the contract, even if both parties are amenable?

Come Tuesday, will any of the county commissioners ask the $4 million question?