Collective Bargaining for Public Safety Unions is Changed Under Budget Bill
2011-07/12 Dean R. Dietrich Printer Friendly PDF Version

Collective bargaining for public safety employee unions, generally representing firefighters, police officers and deputy sheriff employees, has been modified by Wisconsin Act 32 (“the Budget Bill”), which became effective July 1, 2011.  Under the Budget Repair Bill (Wisconsin Act 10), collective bargaining was continued for public safety employee unions with little change from past requirements under the Municipal Employment Relations Act.  Public safety employee unions were entitled to proceed to interest arbitration under Section 111.77 of the Wisconsin Statutes, which is the interest arbitration provision for protective service (now public safety employee) unions.  Several changes to Section 111.70 and Section 111.77 will affect future bargaining with public safety employee unions.

The most critical change is to the language in Section 111.70 (mc) of the Wisconsin Statutes entitled “Prohibited Subjects of Bargaining, Public Safety Employees.”  Under the revisions in the Budget Bill, certain language that identified prohibited subjects of bargaining regarding access to arbitration as an alternative to disciplinary procedures under Section 62.13 (5) was removed from the statute.  As a result, local government employers and public safety employee unions are free to negotiate on all provisions relating to the use of arbitration or the police and fire commission hearing process to address discipline involving a public safety employee.  Additional language regarding the just cause standards in the police and fire discipline language and the payment of compensation when an employee is subject to discipline have also been removed as prohibited subjects of bargaining, thereby allowing the employer and the union to negotiate on all aspects of the standard for review of disciplinary proceedings against public safety employees and whether the public safety employee continues to receive compensation during the time the employee is subject to a disciplinary proceeding.  In other words, the restrictive language that prevented the employer from negotiating on these topics has been eliminated, and the topics are open to good faith negotiations between an employer and the public safety employee union. 

The Budget Bill added two prohibited subjects for the negotiations between the employer and the public safety employees union.  The first, in Section 111.70 (4) (mc)5, provides that it is a prohibited subject of bargaining for the municipal employer to negotiate on the payment of the employee’s share of required contributions and the impact of such requirement on the wages, hours and conditions of employment of a newly hired public safety employee (hired after July 1, 2011).  Under this language, a municipal employer may not bargain with the public safety employee union about the requirement in the state statutes that the municipal employer may not pay the employee-required contribution on behalf of the public safety employee.  This means that the municipal employer may not pay the employee-required contribution for the newly hired public safety employee, and the public safety employee union may not present a proposal to the municipal employer that would require the payment of the employee-required contribution by the municipal employer.  Thus, a newly hired public safety employee must pay the employee-required contribution to WRS.  This requirement would not become effective until the expiration of any existing labor agreement between the municipal employer and a public safety employee union because the language would be considered a prohibited subject of bargaining after the expiration of the current labor agreement.

A new provision in Section 111.70 (4) (mc)6 also significantly affects bargaining with public safety employee unions.  It is a prohibited subject of bargaining, and therefore, the employer is not required to bargain over “the design and selection of health care coverage plans by the municipal employer for public safety employees and the impact of the design and selection of the health care coverage plans on the wages, hours and conditions of employment of the public safety employee.”  Under this language, which would again become effective after the expiration of any current labor agreement, the municipal employer has the right to address the “design” and the “selection” of health care coverage plans that affect public safety employees.  The municipal employer would have the flexibility to make changes to the design and the coverage of the health insurance plan for public safety employees just as it has the right to exercise control over the design and coverage of health insurance plans for general municipal employees.  The public safety employee union may no longer insist on bargaining over the design and coverage of the insurance plan although the question of premium contribution by the employees is still a mandatory subject of bargaining. 

The Budget Bill also affected retirement contributions for non-represented (managerial) employees of a public safety department (typically police, fire or sheriff’s department).  Under the Budget Bill, the municipal employer may not require a managerial employee in a public safety department to contribute any more toward the employee-required contribution to WRS than is required of represented employees of the public safety department who are subject to a collective bargaining agreement.  In other words, the managerial employees are to be treated the same as the represented public safety employees, and anything that is negotiated with the public safety employees union would also be applicable to managerial employees in the area of employee-required contributions to WRS.  This provision is effective immediately and eliminates the requirement that management employees in a public safety department pay the employee-required contribution to WRS, unless the represented employees of that public safety department are paying all or a portion of the employee-required contribution.

The issue of WRS employee-required contributions will be a significant issue in bargaining with public safety employee unions.  Under the new legislation, the interests of management in the public safety department are aligned closely with the interests of the represented employees in the department.  This may make it more difficult to negotiate an employee payment toward the WRS contributions. 

Please feel free to contact Dean Dietrich, the author of this article, or any of the attorneys on the Local Governments & Municipalities Focus Team, or the School Districts and Educational Institutions Focus Team of Ruder Ware: Steve Immel, Jeff Jones, Steve Lipowski, Randi Osberg, Ron Rutlin, Mary Ellen Schill, Bryan Symes, or Kevin J.T. Terry, if you have questions in regard to this update.

© 2011 Ruder Ware, L.L.S.C. Accurate reproduction with acknowledgment granted. All rights reserved.
This document provides information of a general nature regarding legislative or other legal developments. None of the information contained herein is intended as legal advice or opinion relative to specific matters, facts, situations, or issues, and additional facts and information or future developments may affect the subjects addressed.