Measure A could radically alter L.A. County labor talks. There's been little debate

This is read by an automated voice.Please report any issues or inconsistencies here.

See more from the L.A.Times in Google Search.

Set us as preferred Voters in the Northern California city of Vallejo passed a ballot measure adopting binding arbitration with its public employee unions more than 50 years ago, following a bitter police strike.The goal was labor peace.Under binding arbitration, an independent referee is brought in when negotiators hit an impasse.

The final decision on wages, benefits and working conditions is taken out of the hands of the local elected officials and placed squarely with the arbitrator.With Measure A on the Nov.3 ballot, Los Angeles County voters have a chance to do much the same thing here.The measure is being pushed by unions representing county firefighters, sheriff’s deputies and other public safety employees who by law cannot go out on strike, and who say binding arbitration adds balance to the negotiation process by taking away the unilateral authority held by the county Board of Supervisors.No formal opposition to Measure A has been submitted.

But in his summary of the potential impact this year, county chief executive Joe Nicchita shared news stories showing how binding arbitration has played out in other jurisdictions, including Vallejo.In 2007, a mediator determined that despite fiscal travails, Vallejo couldn’t reduce the size of its fire department.Eight months later, with little budgetary wiggle room, the city declared bankruptcy.Vallejo had been the first California municipality to adopt binding arbitration.

In 2010, the voters decided to ditch it.Supervisor Holly Mitchell voiced concerns about Measure A when the board discussed placing it on the ballot this year.“Arbitrators aren’t elected,” she said.“They’re not required to weigh countywide trade-offs like homeless services, like healthcare, capital improvements, all those things.”The board voted 4-0 to place binding arbitration on the No...