The Strike: If it drags on...

Some blog readers will remember a 2003 strike of MTA maintenance workers that halted bus and train service in LA County for over a month.* Both sides were dug in, and a solution seemed unavailable. At the time former LA County supervisor Ed Edelman and I proposed a solution in an op ed that appeared in the LA Times. The Times endorsed the proposal and it was adopted by the parties, settling the strike.**

The proposal, binding-nonbinding arbitration, was itself a compromise. At present, UC is calling for mediation. Under mediation, a neutral outsider is brought in to assist the parties in finding a solution. But the mediator has no authority to impose a new contract. Under conventional arbitration - technically interest arbitration - an arbitrator is brought in with such authority. The arbitrator hears the case from both parties and then announces what the new contract will be, a binding decision.

At the time of the MTA strike, there had been mediation - but no settlement had resulted. Both sides were resistant to having someone brought in with a conventional arbitrator's binding authority. In particular, the MTA's governing board felt that conventional arbitration would be inconsistent with its statutory authority to determine policy, including labor relations policy. 

The Edelman-Mitchell proposal was to have an arbitrator who would suggest a new contract, but that contract suggestion could be rejected with a supermajority vote of both sides. In the case of the MTA, that vote would take place among the governing board. So, the suggestion was binding unless a supermajority rejected it. It was binding and nonbinding, depending on how you looked at it. Both sides accepted the concept and an arbitrator proposed a settlement which was then accepted.***

With the UC student worker strike now only in its second day, it is doubtful that the parties would accept either binding or binding-nonbinding arbitration.  As time goes on, however, the costs of the strike to students, student workers, and UC will build up. If the dispute drags on, and let's hope it doesn't, both parties will get to a point of seeking a respectable way out. Arbitration in a compromise format could then be the solution, as it was back in 2003.

===

*On the MTA strike, see:

Or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6Wt3QtE8qY.

**Edmund D. Edelman and Daniel J.B. Mitchell, “Arbitration Can Be the Key, Despite MTA’s Resistance,” Los Angeles Times, November 6, 2003; “New Voices in MTA Strike,” Los Angeles Times, November 10, 2003. 

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-nov-06-oe-edelman6-story.html and https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-nov-10-ed-mta10-story.html.

***More details can be found at:

https://www.anderson.ucla.edu/documents/areas/fac/hrob/mitchell_edelman.pdf.

===

To hear the text above, click on the link below:

https://ia601402.us.archive.org/25/items/big-ten/compromise.mp3