PENSION AND LABOR

Unemployment, workers compensation, minimum wage, prevailing wage, pension plans and labor relations are all policies adopted by the state that have a direct impact on county personnel costs. Personnel costs amount to as much as 80% of the total cost of some counties’ budgets. In addition to their cost implications, many state policies tie the hands of locally elected officials. For example, the state requires counties to enter into binding interest arbitration with police officers and sets the standards arbiters must follow. Many times, these same requirements are not imposed upon the state because the state has neither the time nor the resources to meet them, setting a double standard. These and other requirements add complications to the difficult task of labor negotiations, causing counties to devote more time and resources to personnel management.

All public employees are required to belong to one of the state pension plans. Counties have employees in the Law Enforcement Officers & Firefighters (LEOFF) plan and Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) plan. The state sets the rate of contributions and level of benefits. The state pays 20% of the cost of the LEOFF 2 plan and none of the cost of PERS for county employees. In recent years, actuarial analysis has found that current contribution rates or funding levels exceed the amounts needed to meet the prudent funding goals set in statute.

WSAC Policy: While the state sets most labor policy and all pension policy for counties, counties will continue to work toward legislation that will minimize fiscal impacts on limited local resources and provide maximum flexibility to direct the workforce. Binding interest arbitration should be limited to LEOFF members and standards of arbitration should be flexible enough to consider a county’s ability to pay. The state should not mandate any stricter standards for local government than it does for the state. Pension funding should not exceed the level needed to meet pension obligations. Should there be a surplus, the Legislature should use LEOFF system surpluses to fund local governments’ costs for LEOFF retiree medical coverage.