Measure A Could Transform Labor Negotiations for L.A. County Public Safety Workers

Overview of Measure A and Its Origins

Measure A, appearing on the November 3 ballot, proposes a significant change to labor negotiations between Los Angeles County and its public safety unions. If approved by voters, the measure would bring binding arbitration to collective bargaining talks involving county firefighters, sheriff’s deputies, and other public safety employees. The push for Measure A comes from unions representing workers who are legally barred from striking, and who argue that this process would balance the county supervisors' power in labor negotiations.

The Concept of Binding Arbitration in Labor Disputes

Binding arbitration involves bringing in an independent arbitrator when contract negotiations reach an impasse. The arbitrator’s decision on issues such as wages, benefits, and working conditions becomes final, removing ultimate authority from elected officials. Proponents see this as a pathway to restoring fairness and labor peace, pointing to the original adoption of binding arbitration by Vallejo, California, over 50 years ago after a major police strike. However, Vallejo’s experience later served as a cautionary tale—when a 2007 arbitration ruling prevented fire department cuts despite fiscal distress, the city soon declared bankruptcy and eventually repealed binding arbitration in 2010.

Arguments for and Against Measure A

Supporters—including unions and several county supervisors—say binding arbitration adds transparency and prevents either side from presenting extreme demands. Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, who helped develop the measure, emphasized that the process opens up financial information to both parties and bases decisions on facts. She noted that in California, only a minority of jurisdictions with binding arbitration have actually had to use it.

Critics, while not formally organized, have expressed concerns. Supervisor Holly Mitchell abstained from the vote to put Measure A on the ballot, warning that arbitrators are not elected and may not consider broader county trade-offs, such as funding for homeless services or healthcare. Some progressive groups, including La Defensa and L.A. Forward, oppose the measure due to the inclusion of the Sheriff’s Department, arguing that it could give law enforcement groups more negotiating power and resources.

How Measure A Would Change Labor Negotiations

Currently, if contract negotiations stall, the Board of Supervisors can impose a final contract—though such intervention is rare. Measure A would change this process for 14 bargaining units representing around 16,500 county employees, including lifeguards and deputy medical examiners (but not those who can strike). After failed bargaining and a declared impasse, a three-person arbitration panel would be convened—one member chosen by the county, one by the union, and a jointly selected chair. This panel’s hearings and final binding decision would be made public.

Union leaders like Derek Hsieh, executive director of the Assn. for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, believe binding arbitration would motivate both sides to negotiate more earnestly to avoid surrendering control to an outside panel. Dave Gillotte, president of the International Assn. of Firefighters Local 1014, echoed this sentiment, stating that the mere possibility of arbitration encourages serious efforts to reach agreements.

Historical and Academic Perspectives

Research from institutions such as the UCLA Institute for Research on Labor and Employment suggests that binding arbitration is a routine part of labor-management relations and does not overwhelmingly favor labor or management. A Cornell University study of New York's experience found that, over time, arbitration cases declined as both sides learned to compromise and reach deals without the process. However, independent arbitration has at times contributed to fiscal challenges in municipalities, where elected officials may be unable to reverse costly decisions.

Political and Financial Campaigns Surrounding Measure A

Labor unions have invested heavily in the campaign supporting Measure A, raising $7.7 million in the lead-up to the vote. No campaign finances have been reported in opposition. While the measure enjoys strong support from public safety unions, it faces criticism from some advocacy groups opposed to the inclusion of law enforcement bargaining units.

Ultimately, Measure A represents a potential shift in how Los Angeles County resolves contract disputes with public safety workers. Its passage could impact the balance of power in labor negotiations and serve as a model—or warning—for other jurisdictions considering similar reforms.

Source: latimes.com.