Charles County Commissioners Advance Collective Bargaining Proposal, Keep Arbitration Nonbinding

LA PLATA, Md. — The Charles County Board of County Commissioners reached consensus on several major revisions to Proposed Bill 2026-04, Charles County Employees Collective Bargaining, during a work session Tuesday, July 7, before voting 3-1 to keep arbitration decisions nonbinding when negotiations between the county and a future employee union reach an impasse.

The work session allowed commissioners to review the draft legislation line by line, resolving several outstanding issues ahead of a public hearing later this month. By the end of the meeting, the board had agreed on the structure of the bargaining unit, the makeup of negotiating teams, a sunset provision for organizing efforts and the arbitration process.

Board Keeps Arbitration Advisory

The meeting’s longest discussion centered on whether an outside arbitrator’s decision should be binding if contract negotiations reach an impasse.

In baseball-style arbitration, both the county and the union submit their final contract offers, and the arbitrator must choose one proposal in its entirety rather than crafting a compromise. The debate centered on whether that decision should be final and binding or serve only as a recommendation to the commissioners.

County officials recommended keeping arbitration nonbinding, arguing elected officials should retain the final authority over county finances and employment agreements. Outside labor counsel Eric Paltell illustrated the concern with a hypothetical example, explaining that if the county determined it could afford a 3% salary increase while a union sought 7%, a binding arbitrator could require the county to adopt the higher proposal.

County Administrator Deborah Hall and Director of Fiscal and Administrative Services Jake Dyer said binding arbitration could limit the county’s financial flexibility, complicate the annual budget process and raise concerns with bond rating agencies.

Commissioner Thomasina Coates questioned whether arbitration serves its intended purpose if commissioners can ultimately reject the recommendation, arguing that a decision reached after arbitration should carry greater weight.

Commissioner Gilbert “BJ” Bowling also voiced support for binding arbitration, citing his experience participating in collective bargaining negotiations while serving in law enforcement. However, he ultimately voted with the majority to move the ordinance forward, saying he plans to introduce legislation in August seeking binding arbitration for the Fraternal Order of Police and the firefighters’ union.

The board voted 3-1 to remove the proposed “final and binding” language from the ordinance, leaving arbitration advisory. Commission President Ruben Collins was not present for the work session.

Single Bargaining Unit Approved

Commissioners also reached consensus on how county employees would be organized for bargaining purposes.

Rather than creating separate bargaining units for office employees and trade employees, the board agreed to establish a single countywide bargaining unit divided into two classifications. Officials said the approach simplifies administration while allowing contract provisions to address the unique needs of each classification within one negotiated agreement.

Negotiating Team Rules Revised

Another significant change involved the makeup of bargaining teams.

The original draft limited both the county and employee union to five representatives during negotiations. Commissioners agreed to remove that cap, allowing each side to determine the size of its bargaining team.

The board also revised language governing county representation. Commissioner Stewart initially advocated for ensuring every department had a voice during negotiations. After discussion with staff, commissioners agreed that representation should instead be based on the ordinance’s two employee classifications, rather than individual departments, reflecting how collective bargaining is structured.

County staff will revise the ordinance to require representation from both classifications while giving both sides flexibility in selecting their negotiating teams.

Two-Year Organizing Window

Commissioners also approved a two-year sunset provision for the ordinance.

Under the proposal, if no labor organization is certified as the exclusive bargaining representative within two years after the legislation takes effect, the bargaining designation would expire and the organizing process would have to begin again.

County attorneys explained the provision was originally included to prevent the legislation from remaining open indefinitely if no union successfully organized county employees. Commissioners agreed two years provides sufficient time while allowing the board to revisit the issue if necessary.

During discussion of information-sharing provisions in the ordinance, county officials noted that any records shared with a certified union would remain subject to the limitations of the Maryland Public Information Act, which governs public access to government records statewide.

Next Steps

Staff will incorporate the revisions approved during the work session ahead of a public hearing scheduled for Tuesday, July 21, at 6 p.m., in a hybrid format at the Charles County Government Building, 200 Baltimore Street, La Plata.

---