Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/11/1999 08:05 AM House CRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS
STANDING COMMITTEE
March 11, 1999
8:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Andrew Halcro, Co-Chairman
Representative Carl Morgan
Representative Fred Dyson
Representative Albert Kookesh
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative John Harris, Co-Chairman
Representative Lisa Murkowski
Representative Reggie Joule
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 1
"An Act relating to collective bargaining agreements and
arbitration awards of class (a)(1) municipal employees."
- MOVED CSHB 1(CRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 1
SHORT TITLE: MUNICIPAL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING CONTRACTS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) BRICE
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
1/19/99 18 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/99
1/19/99 18 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
1/19/99 18 (H) CRA, LABOR & COMMERCE
2/25/99 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
2/25/99 (H) HEARD AND HELD
3/11/99 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
BONNIE CARROLL, Legislative Secretary
for Representative Brice
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 426
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-3466
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed changes encompassed in the proposed
CS for HB 1.
GAVIN CHARRIER, Firefighter
Ketchikan International Airport
PO Box 8692
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Telephone: (907) 225-3377
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed binding arbitration and the right to
strike.
JERRY CLEWORTH, Member
Fairbanks City Council
907 Park Drive
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Telephone: (907) 452-5551
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 1.
DAVE MAITLEN, Police Officer
Fairbanks Police Department
656 7th Avenue
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Telephone: (907) 459-6500
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 1.
MARK DRYGAS, Business Agent
Fairbanks Firefighters Association
Captain, Fairbanks Fire Department
PO Box 71739
Fairbanks, Alaska 99707
Telephone: (907) 488-6001
POSITION STATEMENT: Supported HB 1.
KEVIN RITCHIE
Alaska Municipal League
217 2nd Street
Juneau, Alaska
Telephone: (907) 586-1325
POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed HB 1.
DON ETHERIDGE
Alaska State District Council of Laborers
Lobbyist, American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations
710 West 9th Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 586-3707
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed arbitration.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 99-14, SIDE A
Number 0001
CO-CHAIRMAN called the House Community and Regional Affairs
Standing Committee meeting to order at 8:05 a.m. Members present
at the call to order were Representatives Halcro, Morgan, Dyson and
Kookesh. Representatives Harris, Murkowski and Joule were absent.
HB 1-MUNICIPAL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING CONTRACTS
Number 0006
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced that the only order of business before
the committee was HOUSE BILL NO. 1, "An Act relating to collective
bargaining agreements and arbitration awards of class (a)(1)
municipal employees."
[Due to a tape malfunction, a few seconds of the meeting was not
recorded.]
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH moved to adopt the proposed CS, Version
LS0020\H, Cramer, 3/10/99, as the working document before the
committee. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
Number 0070
BONNIE CARROLL, Legislative Secretary for Representative Brice,
Alaska State Legislature, informed the committee that
Representative Brice supported the proposed CS. The proposed CS
changes the language from Class (a)(1) employees to refer to only
police and fire employees. She mentioned that Mark Drygas from the
Fairbanks Firefighters Association and Matt Soden of the Fairbanks
Police Department Employees Association were present to testify.
GAVIN CHARRIER, Firefighter, Ketchikan International Airport,
testified via teleconference from Ketchikan. He expressed concern
with getting to arbitration for Class(a)(1) employees although that
has not been achieved because his contract included Class 1, 2, and
3 employees. If the point is reached where the employee and the
employer cannot agree on wages and Class(a)(1) employees do not
have the right to strike, then the deciding factor should be the
arbitrator's decision. Mr. Charrier felt that Class(a)(1) and
Class 2 employees should have the right to strike if the
arbitrator's decision does not have any weight.
Number 0376
JERRY CLEWORTH, Member, Fairbanks City Council, testified via
teleconference from Fairbanks. He informed the committee that he
had been a city councilmen for the last 11 years. Mr. Cleworth
opposed HB 1. The committee should have received a resolution from
the Fairbanks City Council which states unanimous opposition to
HB 1.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO noted that the Fairbanks City Council's
resolution is in the committee packet.
MR. CLEWORTH said that there is another side to this story. Back
in the early 1980s, the City of Fairbanks received a lot of oil
money and not much effort was placed in labor contracts. The city
did not really do its job negotiating and the city joined the
Public Employees Relations Act (PERA) under which the Class(a)(1)
employees exchanged the right to strike for binding arbitration.
In the late 1980s when the oil money ran low, the city was left
scrambling to meet its budget. The community became upset with the
Class(a)(1) employees and instituted a tax cap on the city.
Therefore, the council tried to regain some fiscal credibility by
producing a more palatable package for the community. The city
negotiated with the Class(a)(1) employees and asked for reductions
in the benefits and some wages while the union wanted cost of
living increases. At the impasse, an arbitrator would come to
town. Mr. Cleworth commented that he had never known an arbitrator
to roll back anything. The city is left to pay whatever the
arbitrator decides which leaves the council to determine how to pay
such when there is a tax cap. The council reviewed cutting staff
in the police and fire departments. The unions then took the city
to court demanding minimum staffing levels with which the judge
agreed. Mr. Cleworth summarized that the judge was determining the
staffing, an arbitrator determining the wage, and the taxpayers
speaking through the tax cap. The only option was to take from
other city departments to pay for Class(a)(1) employees which
created animosity within the city. A few years later, it was
discovered that the city council did not have to fund an
arbitrator's award. "Now this bill doesn't give us a tool to roll
back salaries and wages, but it did give us a tool to hold status
quo."
Number 0670
MR. CLEWORTH informed the committee that in 1997 the average cost
of a police department employee, including all benefits, is $95,053
and for a fire department employee it is $94,907. Mr. Cleworth
said that was the highest in the nation from the research. The
average salary in the North Star Borough including government
employees is only $29,196 while the average base salary in the City
of Fairbanks is $52,768. Mr. Cleworth stated that the benefits are
extremely high and the city council is attempting to control
medical costs now.
MR. CLEWORTH expressed the hope that HB 1 would be defeated and
provide municipalities the right to leave PERA. He emphasized that
every city manager and mayor he had worked with had gone to Juneau
requesting a change in the law allowing municipalities to have
their own personnel code and leave PERA. Mr. Cleworth requested
that the Public Employees Retirement System(PERS) be investigated.
Mr. Cleworth said, "This is a killer for us, is that when the
overtime is pumped in on base time to compute retirement pay we
really get hammered with Class[(a)](1) employees because there is
a lot of overtime in those departments. And the contracts set up
a situation for that overtime to be created, that we don't have the
tools to change." Mr. Cleworth requested that the committee
contact Representative Whitaker, a former city councilman,
regarding this issue. Further, Mr. Cleworth informed the committee
that the starting fireman recruit earns a wage of $11.69 which is
increased to $12.90 after six months, increased to $14.18 after 18
months, and after three years longevity pay begins at three percent
and one percent every year thereafter.
Number 0907
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO understood that there was a window of
opportunity for cities to opt out of PERA; when was that?
MR. CLEWORTH said that he understood the window was within a year
or so of the institution of PERA. At that time, the council did
not opt out. The wall was not hit until the late 1980s.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked if the statements, at the February 25,
1999 meeting, that the Fairbanks Police Department had not received
a pay increase for six years was correct.
MR. CLEWORTH reiterated that those employees would receive
longevity in the amount of three percent after three years and one
percent each year thereafter up to 10 years. He stated, "The long-
timers that have been there have been at the salary levels that
that they are at. But as I testified before you earlier, they are
hardly poverty wages." Mr. Cleworth said that these wages, in his
comparisons, are the highest wages to be found in the nation.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked if the City of Fairbanks could opt out of
PERA would it still embrace binding arbitration for police and fire
employees.
MR. CLEWORTH said binding arbitration was used for Class (2) and
Class (3) in the past. The council wants the option of whether to
approve or disapprove a contract. The only time an arbitrator
should be utilized is when both parties feel that would be in their
best interest.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked if the city would continue to offer
binding arbitration for police and fire employees.
MR. CLEWORTH explained that the city would have its own personnel
code. He indicated that the right to strike would probably be
available. The Class(a)(1) employees should have the right to
strike and the city should have the right not to use binding
arbitration. Mr. Cleworth said that the city would return to its
personnel code that was utilized until the city joined PERA.
Number 1119
DAVE MAITLEN, Police Officer, Fairbanks Police Department,
testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. He informed the
committee that he had been a police officer in Fairbanks for 18
years. Mr. Maitlen supported HB 1. Collective bargaining means to
negotiate in good faith, then mediate if an agreement cannot be
obtained, and finally use arbitration as a last resort. In the 18
years Mr. Maitlen has worked for the Fairbanks Police Department,
only three times has the police union went to contract arbitration.
On two of those occasions, the arbitrator ruled in favor the police
union and on one occasion the arbitrator ruled in the city's favor.
The rulings in favor of the police department were regarding wages;
the ruling in 1990 allowed for a cost of living raise over a two
year period after a wage freeze the first year. Prior to that, the
police union gave back 10 percent of their salary in order to avoid
lay offs, in the early 1980s, and when the city did not have the
money for wages, in the mid 1980s. The second ruling in 1995 was
not funded by the Fairbanks City Council and the starting salary of
a police officer was not increased. A two-year officer gained four
cents an hour, a three-year officer gained four cents an hour, a
four-year officer gained 48 cents an hour, and a five-year officer
gained nine cents an hour. Two pay steps were added to the top end
of this contract, keeping salaries for starting officers low. Mr.
Maitlen did not believe that sounded like a massive pay increase.
The rulings in the city's favor have been not to incur additional
costs, keep starting wages at the status quo. Mr. Maitlen informed
the committee that all the provisions, except the wage provision of
the 1995 contract, have been tentatively agreed to by the city and
the union. When the city failed to fund the arbitrated wage scale,
the time and money spent in collective bargaining was wasted. The
police officers were left without a new contract because one
provision was not funded. The subsequent lawsuit cost even more.
MR. MAITLEN acknowledged that the City of Fairbanks does have a tax
cap, but pointed out that the framers of the tax cap allow six
exceptions. One of those exceptions, allows the city to raise
taxes to fund court judgements and arbitrators' awards. No one
wants to go to arbitration during a labor dispute, but on occasion
an impartial expert needs to hear all the facts and make a
determination. Class(a)(1) employees are told that they are
essential employees who cannot strike, but have binding
arbitration. If the city does not have fund a binding award,
binding arbitration does not truly exist which would be corrected
with HB 1. Mr. Maitlen asked for the committee's support of HB 1.
Number 1380
MARK DRYGAS, Business Agent, Fairbanks Firefighters Association and
Captain, Fairbanks Fire Department. Mr. Drygas supported HB 1. He
said that he wanted to address some of Mr. Cleworth's comments.
During the time before PERA under the personnel code which allowed
the right to strike, the Fairbanks firefighters did strike in the
late 1970s. A court injunction required the firefighters to return
to work. Mr. Drygas believed the court injunction would be a tool
the city would use in order to protect the public. He said that
binding arbitration is available in order to avoid the interruption
in service and is beneficial with the relationship between the
employees and the city. Binding arbitration was intended to be a
manner in which to solve an impasse in bargaining. Mr. Drygas said
that binding arbitration makes both parties want to agree to a
contract and brings finality to bargaining. Without binding
arbitration there is no way to have finality.
MR. DRYGAS said that this issue will effect other communities. In
the situation in Fairbanks, the firefighters contract expired in
1995 and negotiations have occurred for the last three-and-a-half
years. If binding arbitration were binding on both parties, good
faith bargaining would take place. Under PERA, the firefighters do
not have the right to strike to which Mr. Drygas agreed. Further,
PERA called for binding arbitration. Therefore, the firefighters
are subject by law to binding arbitration and the arbitrator's
decision. Mr. Drygas noted that the arguments in Mr. Cleworth's
testimony such as the tax cap, the socioeconomic view of the city,
and comparable wages could all be brought before the arbitrator.
Although the firefighters are bound by the arbitrator's decision,
the city has an option since the decision is subject to legislative
approval. Both sides should be playing by the same rules. In
conclusion, Mr. Drygas mentioned that the Fairbanks firefighters
have not received a wage increase in nine years and the Fairbanks
police officers have not received a wage increase in six years.
Number 1660
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if the firefighters union is involved in
local elections and has the union raised and contributed money to
municipal candidates.
MR. DRYGAS replied yes.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked Mr. Drygas if Mr. Cleworth's figures for
the wages and benefits of Fairbanks' firefighters was accurate.
MR. DRYGAS was not sure what figures Mr. Cleworth was using, but
pointed out that Mr. Cleworth's figures included overtime. If the
fire department was staffed properly much of the overtime would be
eliminated. Mr. Drygas said that he would not dispute Mr.
Cleworth's figures, but without the overtime the figures would be
considerably less.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said that at one point he could say the
Anchorage Police Department was the highest paid police department
in the world. Are there any fire departments that have a better
package than the Fairbanks Fire Department?
MR. DRYGAS informed the committee that a recent study places the
Anchorage Fire Department as number four in the nation and the
Fairbanks Fire Department is below Anchorage. Mr. Drygas
reiterated that these are arguments that can be brought out during
the arbitration proceedings.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if Fairbanks has had difficulties in
attracting qualified people.
MR. DRYGAS replied no, but noted that there have been recent
problems in retaining employees. For example, in Mr. Drygas'
department of 36 firefighters, six members are either on hiring
lists or seeking employment elsewhere. In further response to
Representative Dyson, Mr. Drygas said those employees were not
approaching early retirement age. Mr. Drygas clarified that the
employees that are being lost are those that have been employed by
the fire department for less than six years.
Number 1841
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH requested Mr. Drygas' interpretation of
HB 1 since he does not see anything in the bill regarding the right
to strike.
MR. DRYGAS pointed out that Alaska is the only state that does not
allow Class(a)(1) employees to strike and binding arbitration is
not binding. Binding arbitration and not having the right to
strike go hand-in-hand. Mr. Drygas noted that Mr. Cleworth had
indicated he would prefer the city to be under its old rules and
allow Class(a)(1) employees the right to strike and not have
binding arbitration. Mr. Drygas reiterated the situation when the
Fairbanks firefighters did have the right to strike and did strike;
a court injunction required them to return to work which he felt
would be the case again. He also felt it unfair to place the
firefighters in a position that would allow them to strike; it
would be a tough decision personally.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH interpreted HB 1 as merely making binding
arbitration truly binding. The legislation does not have anything
to do with salaries, wage increases, or striking.
MR. DRYGAS agreed with Representative Kookesh. By law, binding
arbitration is an option. By law, the bargaining units are bound
by the arbitrator's decision while due to the law the municipality
is not bound by the arbitrator's decision.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH said, "My interpretation would be then, if
we can't make binding arbitration binding, then at least give us
the right to strike."
MR. DRYGAS agreed and reiterated placing public safety providers in
that position would be unfair. Further, allowing the right to
strike would be unfair to the public.
Number 2029
MR. DRYGAS, in response to Co-Chairman Halcro, informed the
committee that he had been with the Fairbanks Fire Department for
eight years.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO inquired as to the reason behind the court
injunction during the Fairbanks firefighters' strike before PERA.
MR. DRYGAS noted that strike was before his time. However, in
discussions regarding that strike Mr. Drygas had determined the
court injunction was due to the public safety issue.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO surmised then that before PERA in Fairbanks, the
courts recognized that the fire department is a life, safety
department and the city cannot afford for those employees to
strike.
MR. DRYGAS agreed. In further response to Co-Chairman Halcro, Mr.
Drygas offered the following explanation of how an arbitrator is
chosen. The fire department would write to the Federal Mediation
and Conciliation Service which would provide a list of seven
registered arbitrators and their biographies. The department and
the city would then do research on these arbitrators. Then a coin
would be flipped and whoever loses the flip would strike a name
from the list first and then the other party would strike a name
from the list and so on until only one name is left.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO echoed Representative Kookesh's statement that
this is not about the wages, but rather the basic premise of the
law. The law takes away the right to strike and offers binding
arbitration in lieu of that and the binding arbitration should be
binding.
Number 2151
KEVIN RITCHIE, Alaska Municipal League, thanked the committee for
allowing time to discuss the issue with the legislative committee
and others. There was a meeting of the Educational Government
Committee which discussed this issue at great length on March 5th
during which the committee voted to oppose HB 1. The primary
reason for the opposition is because there are two separate
processes at hand one being labor negotiations and the other is the
appropriation powers of a legislative body. The process must stop
at the state or local level regarding what the community will fund.
The power to appropriate is very basic to the legislative process.
MR. RITCHIE said that binding arbitration is similar to a judicial
proceeding in terms of making a decision that is binding. However,
all court decisions have an appeal process to higher courts. If
one views binding arbitration as an appeal process, "...you've got
the binding arbitrator's decision, which I think both sides, labor
and management, would agree is not a perfect solution, you know,
it's a solution that was chosen. There's an appeal really to the
legislative body for that decision and then ultimately the decision
has to lay with the voters."
MR. RITCHIE, in response to Co-Chairman Halcro's earlier question,
believed that the PERA window closed in 1976. Juneau is a
community that opted out of PERA. During Mr. Ritchie's time as a
city manager in Juneau, Juneau had good relationships with the
police and fire unions under the locally developed ordinance. The
Alaska Municipal League does support, as a policy matter, allowing
municipalities to opt out of PERA.
Number 2315
MR. RITCHIE informed the committee that there have been discussions
regarding how to reduce the number of times that a city council
reaches the point where it feels it must not fund a decision of a
labor arbitrator or a portion of that decision by improving the
process. From his discussions with the attorney general's office
and recollections of the processes in general, Mr. Ritchie believed
that Alaska does not have strong standards for what labor
arbitrators do. There is not a state statute or standard that
specifies what the arbitrator has to consider. Certainly, local
financial conditions are very important to the public. Mr. Ritchie
said it would be a good avenue to work on through the state,
municipal governments, and labor organizations in order to
strengthen the language in that statute.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH was not surprised with Mr. Ritchie's
position. He asked Mr. Ritchie if he believed that binding
arbitration is currently binding in Alaska.
MR. RITCHIE replied no.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH inquired as to how binding arbitration could
be fixed.
MR. RITCHIE recognized that binding arbitration does attempt to
arrive at a goal. When going through the court the court's
decision is expected to be binding, but there are appeal processes.
Very few things are ultimately binding. Mr. Ritchie acknowledged
the importance of finality, but pointed out such finality conflicts
with the constitutional and practical duty of the assembly or
council to be the place where the money stops regarding taxes,
services, etcetera.
Number 2454
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH stated that binding arbitration should be
binding and if Mr. Ritchie does not have another solution, HB 1 is
the solution before the committee. Representative Kookesh was
uncomfortable with comparing binding arbitration to a court case
with an appeal process. Even within the courts, there is a U.S.
Supreme Court where there is a final appeal. If binding
arbitration is not truly binding, Representative Kookesh would be
more comfortable with the Alaska Municipal League recognizing the
problem and offering a solution.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked when Juneau opted out of PERA, did the
city give fire and police employees the right to strike.
MR. RITCHIE did not recall. Mr. Ritchie did not know of any
binding arbitration taking place in the City and Borough of Juneau.
In further response to Co-Chairman Halcro, Mr. Ritchie recalled
that municipalities were in PERA unless action was taken to opt
out.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO noted that Mr. Ritchie's letter identified some
constitutional questions regarding the ability to tax out regarding
Section 1, Taxing Power, and Section 9, Local Debt. He asked if
Mr. Ritchie had received a legal opinion on those.
MR. RITCHIE said he had talked with the attorney general's office.
The Fairbanks issue and the police and fire issue in Anchorage went
to court. Although those questions were raised during the suits,
the court did not rule on those issues. The courts did not reach
those decisions. Mr. Ritchie thought that the attorney general's
office felt that it was an issue that could be decided.
Number 2602
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO expressed concern with Mr. Cleworth's testimony
regarding the city's preference to opt out of PERA and develop its
own rules. The concept of binding arbitration is that in exchange
for giving up the right to strike, mediation with a third party
will occur taking into consideration local economies. Police and
fire employees are expected to protect citizens every day. Just as
the court ruled 20 years ago in Fairbanks, firefighters cannot be
striking. Co-Chairman Halcro understood the fiscal concerns of the
Alaska Municipal League, but there was a window to opt out of PERA.
Why has it taken so long to reach this point?
MR. RITCHIE stated that conditions were different during the time
to opt out of PERA. Mr. Ritchie indicated that a number of
communities might take the initiative to create a local ordinance,
if the ability to opt out of PERA was available. The question of
how to weigh an employee's wage with what a taxpayer can pay or the
level of service desired is a question that local communities and
legislative bodies are designed to handle. This is a difficult
decision that is made community by community. Funding a contract
can result in a reduction in service, especially when there is a
tax cap. Both decisions are terrible decisions.
Number 2764
DON ETHERIDGE, Alaska State District Council of Laborers, Lobbyist
for the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial
Organizations (AFL-CIO), informed the committee that recently there
was a conference at which Representative Porter spoke highly of
HB 1. Mr. Etheridge pointed out that many areas of arbitration are
negotiable, rules for the arbitrator can be established. He
mentioned that the Juneau Fire Department does not have the right
to strike, and he did not recall the Juneau Fire Department ever
going to binding arbitration. This issue has not come before the
city personnel board. He reviewed the various duties of fire and
police employees. Mr. Etheridge believed that everyone in the
community believes that fire and police employees should be treated
fairly.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON inquired of Co-Chairman Halcro's intention
with HB 1.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO noted that the next committee of referral is the
House Labor & Commerce Committee. Co-Chairman Halcro said that he
intended to move HB 1 out of committee today.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON directed the committee's attention to the
letter from Tim Rogers with the Municipality of Anchorage.
Representative Dyson informed the committee that he had spent six
years on the Municipal Assembly in Anchorage. There are some
hidden issues. He identified binding arbitration as a politician's
dream because the politician is taken out of the position of making
the hard decision. Representative Dyson said that when the
arbitrator's decisions and the subsequent court decisions took away
some of the local legislative bodies' ability to make decisions
about taxing and appropriations, many of the local governments
began waking up to the situation.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON pointed out that Anchorage has had a long-
standing love affair with its police and fire departments. He
would argue that Anchorage not only has amongst the highest paid
police and fire employees, but also the highest quality in the
world. There have been virtually no cases of police brutality,
cops on the take, and firefighters are cross trained. Those
employees do not want the ability to strike because they do no want
to end the love affair with the citizens of Anchorage. This bill,
HB 1, would take away the legislative body's authority to
appropriate.
TAPE 99-14, SIDE B
Number 3000
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON discussed the situation in Anchorage where
overtime is assigned on the basis of seniority. The highest paid
employees in the city and probably the state are the senior
officers who receive the first cut at overtime which feeds into
their retirement rates. Representative Dyson said, "And it's 20
years and out, and the retirement benefits that accumulate."
Representative Dyson stated that he would not vote in favor of
moving HB 1 out of the House Community & Regional Affairs
Committee. Further, he said he would strenuously argue against
HB 1 because of what the legislation does to the constitutional
responsibilities of the elected representative. When an
arbitration takes place there is someone missing from the table,
the people of the area are not present. There is no accountability
between the arbitrator and the people of the area whose the
decision would feel the effect of the arbitrator's decision in
their taxes, lives and services. A fundamental principle of our
government is aggregated because it is close to appropriation
without representation and arguably taxation without
representation. Representative Dyson said that the system does
work. Police officers and firefighters in Fairbanks and Anchorage
are not receiving welfare which was the case 20 to 25 years ago in
Anchorage. Therefore, police officers and firefighters are not
underpaid and the rate of applications received illustrates that
the remuneration package appears to be attractive. Representative
Dyson encouraged the committee to not take away the constitutional
powers of the local governments to make appropriations for local
services.
CO-CHAIRMAN HALCRO understood Representative Dyson's comments
regarding binding arbitration being a politician's dream, but the
people elect the politicians. Throughout history, bad decisions of
prior administrations have had to be lived with. In Anchorage, one
such example is the Performing Arts Center. Co-Chairman Halcro
asked why does binding arbitration exist.
Number 2811
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON explained that part of the original deal was
if the right to strike was given up, then arbitration is provided.
Subsequent tactics and financial conditions exposed weaknesses in
arbitration. Furthermore, the court decisions which said, "When
you have greatly diminishing--or significantly diminishing income
due to recession and a tax cap, then the money goes down and you
have to live by the arbitrator's decision and you do not have the
option of reducing the number employees. Therefore, you've taken
away a portion of the local legislative body's authority and
responsibility to make appropriations. So, then you're going to
take the money away from something else." That was when people
began to have reservations about the arbitration process. He
guessed that people had learned through the process. He reminded
everyone that public employees have been very active in local
elections and have as good or better opportunity than most citizens
to elect local assembly members sympathetic to the arbitration
process.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH said that the question is not regarding
salaries of police officers and firemen, but whether Class(a)(1)
employees are given the right to strike or arbitration. This bill,
HB 1, does not address the right to strike; HB 1 merely makes
binding arbitration binding. This legislation does not speak to
municipal rights. He believed that the House Labor & Commerce
Committee will have a more in depth review of HB 1. Representative
Kookesh said HB 1 should move to the next committee of referral.
Representative Kookesh supported HB 1 because it provided teeth to
binding arbitration which is currently lacking.
Number 2632
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH moved that HB 1 be reported to the next
committee of referral with attached fiscal notes and individual
recommendations.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON objected.
Upon a roll call vote, Representatives Kookesh, Morgan and Co-
Chairman Halcro voted in favor of reporting HB 1 out of committee.
Representative Dyson voted in opposition to reporting HB 1 out of
committee.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH clarified that he was referring CSHB 1,
Version LS0020\H, Cramer, 3/10/99.
Therefore, CSHB 1(CRA), Version LS0020\H, Cramer, 3/10/99, was
reported out of the House Community & Regional Affairs Standing
Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Community & Regional Affairs Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 9:03 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|