After several delays, a new model for arbitrating labor disputes between the City of Memphis and its unionized employees is nearing approval.
City Council members crafted a scaled-down proposal during a Tuesday, March 3, committee session that would limit disputes to a single arbitrator.
A vote was postponed to allow city workers time to review the changes. The amended measure will require only one vote for approval. A vote is scheduled for March 24.
“Whether they read it or not, they have it. They will have it in one week. If it comes back with some changes, we can vote on it then,” said sponsor JB Smiley Jr.
Labor disputes are currently resolved by a panel of three arbitrators, with the council voting on their recommendations. The existing impasse procedures were adopted in 1979.
Smiley’s proposal would allow both sides of a dispute to present a nominee for arbitrator. After reviewing each selection, the council would vote on a nominee. Members could also reject both options and choose a different arbitrator.
The measure would also require the mayor’s office to provide financial information on the city’s ability to fund pay raises and other costs related to a contract settlement. That information is not currently provided to city workers.
“They like the fact that we are requiring the administration to provide them with economic data in advance,” City Attorney Alan Wade said. “They also suggested that they would have preferred if we eliminate the committee meetings and in essence push everything to the end, which is what this amendment does.”
The provision was originally included in an earlier proposal by Wade and was awaiting a third and final vote before the amendment was introduced. The goal is to streamline the process by providing data directly to an arbitrator.
“That arbitrator will hear it on brief. What that means is the employee associations and city administration will present any information they have to the arbitrator. The arbitrator will then make a decision based on the documentation,” Smiley said.
The arbitrator’s findings would then be presented to the council chair, followed by a presentation to the full council. Members would vote to accept or reject the decision based on its contents.
Smiley described the revision as a “cost-effective” solution to future disputes. He worked with Wade on much of the rewrite.
Under the current system, the impasse panel hears from both sides before making a recommendation. A council vote against the recommendation nullifies it. Wade’s edits would leave council members with a single recommendation to accept or reject. The decision would then be incorporated into the following year’s budget proposal.
Council member Chase Carlisle said he was satisfied with the outcome, as did Jeff Warren. Both had wanted to cast an initial vote and make any necessary changes in subsequent votes. Still, some members expressed concern that city workers should have an opportunity to weigh in before a vote.
“I don’t see those people who wanted to speak earlier. I don’t see them here and I don’t want it to be an issue down the line,” Council member Janika White said. “I will say, I do want to see this put into effect this year. I don’t want to see it pushed down the road.”
