County, SEIU submit final offers to arbitrator

Clark County and its largest union have submitted final proposals to an arbitrator in the past week for a final determination about the sticking points for a new contract, which include longevity pay, the level of wage increases and paid union leave.

The proposals are contained within post-hearing briefs filed by the county and Service Employees International Union Local 1107, which represents 4,672 county employees. Both sides made initial arguments before the arbitrator in July. The Review-Journal obtained the filings through a public records request.

The union's proposal calls for a 2.5 percent cost-of-living increase retroactive to July 1, 2014, a subsequent 2.25 percent cost-of-living increase retroactive to July 1, 2015; and reopening the contract for wage negotiations in 2016. The union also offered to lengthen the time it takes for future employees to be eligible for longevity pay from eight years to 11 years.

Under the county's final proposal, there would be a 2.5 percent cost-of-living increase retroactive to July 1, 2014, followed by a 2 percent increase retroactive to July 1, 2015. The county also wants to eliminate longevity pay for future employees, but allow employees already hired to keep longevity and still be eligible after eight years of service. Longevity pay boosts the salaries of employees after they have worked eight years.

"I thought the county put on a very strong case, particularly related to wage increases, longevity and paid union leave under SB 241," County Manager Don Burnette said in an interview.

The union argues that the arbitrator should rule in its favor because there's enough money to support the wage increases. But the county argues that the wages are on par or above raises given to similar agencies in Southern Nevada and that only a handful of agencies in the region still offer longevity pay. That argument is made because under state law, an arbitrator must consider what other government employees are paid, among other factors.

Burnette said he's hopeful the county will receive a favorable decision.

The county and union declared an impasse in 2014. They disagreed this summer over the implementation of Senate Bill 241, a new state law passed this year by the Legislature. The county froze salary increases for SEIU-represented employees in June, saying the contract is expired. They also ordered SEIU Local 1107 president Martin Bassick to report back to his county job, saying he cannot receive paid union leave due to the new law.

The new law requires unions to either reimburse government agencies for paid union leave they receive, or make a concession of equal financial worth. In its filing, the union says the bill doesn't apply to expired contracts that continue year-to-year under an evergreen clause. It also argues its concession to increase the eligibility period for longevity from eight years to 11 years is a "$3 million concession."

But the county argues that converted to an annual amount, the savings is just $64,000 each year, well short of the $259,000 cost for county employees who do union work while on the payroll.

The exact date for when the arbitrator will give a decision isn't known, but it could come in several weeks.

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