LA PLATA, Md. — County employees and labor advocates spoke in support of a proposed collective bargaining law during a June 9 public hearing before the Charles County Board of Commissioners, arguing it would improve workplace safety, training and employee retention. The proposal also includes a fiscal note outlining potential administrative costs and future budget impacts.
Bill 26-04 would establish collective bargaining rights for many full-time county employees, allowing them to organize and negotiate with county management over wages, benefits, workplace safety and working conditions.
Who Would Be Covered?
County Attorney West Adams said the proposed legislation would apply to full-time merit system employees. It would not apply to emergency services employees, who are already represented by the International Association of Fire Fighters, nor would it cover confidential supervisory employees, appointed full-time employees, reduced-hour employees, part-time employees, on-call employees, seasonal employees, contractual employees, temporary employees or emergency employees.
Adams said the bill establishes employee and management rights, procedures for selecting and certifying an exclusive representative, bargaining unit definitions, dues deductions, collective bargaining procedures and impasse resolution. The legislation also would prohibit strikes and lockouts.
He told commissioners the proposal was modeled after other collective bargaining laws already in place within county government and was drafted to “ensure that there is parity between all of the collective bargaining units that the county has.” Adams noted that some existing bargaining units are governed by state law rather than county law.
Employees Share Workplace Concerns
Nearly a dozen speakers addressed commissioners during the June 9 public hearing, many describing workplace conditions they believe could be improved through collective bargaining.
Charles Marshall, a line maintenance operator with 36 years in the Utilities Division, said county utility workers routinely respond to emergencies at all hours to maintain essential infrastructure.
“In the utilities division, we are responsible for maintaining the county infrastructure every day and often into the night,” Marshall said. “We are the people who keep water and sewer systems running and maintain essential services throughout the county.”
Marshall also urged commissioners to create separate bargaining units for field employees and office workers, arguing each group faces different workplace concerns and priorities.
Sterling Moorhead, an equipment operator at the Mattawoman Wastewater Treatment Plant, described what he called longstanding safety issues involving aging equipment and infrastructure.
Moorhead cited missing railings, gates that fail to latch near elevated areas and equipment he said has not received adequate maintenance in years. He also referenced injuries suffered by employees during winter weather events and called for stronger protections for workers who report safety concerns.
Mike Sweeney, an operator in the Roads Division, said much of his training came from coworkers rather than formal county training programs.
“Without proper training and updated equipment, we are exposing ourselves and our coworkers to risks of getting hurt, of harming equipment and not working efficiently,” Sweeney said.
Labor Leaders Seek Changes To Bill
Representatives from AFSCME Maryland Council 3, which represents more than 55,000 public employees statewide, testified in support of collective bargaining rights while asking commissioners to strengthen the legislation.
Among the proposed changes:
- Include part-time employees
- Allow union certification through card check authorization
- Expand employee information rights
- Add stronger unfair labor practice protections
- Establish binding arbitration for contract disputes
Denise Gilmore, AFSCME Maryland Council 3’s legislative and political director, argued that binding arbitration is necessary to prevent negotiations from stalling indefinitely.
“Collective bargaining without binding arbitration is like meet and confer,” Gilmore said. “We need to have referees.”
Sean Heil, president of the Education Association of Charles County, told commissioners that collective bargaining has helped educators work collaboratively with school leadership to address concerns and improve workplace conditions.
He said county government employees deserve the same opportunity.
“Educators in Charles County have the same collective bargaining rights that county government workers are now seeking, and it’s only made our school system stronger,” Heil said.
Fiscal Note Raises Cost Concerns
Also included in the Bill 26-04 Public Hearing agenda packet was a fiscal note outlining what county officials believe it could cost to administer a new bargaining unit.
According to the document, the county expects collective bargaining would increase workload for Human Resources, the County Attorney’s Office, Fiscal and Administrative Services, the County Administrator’s Office and other departments responsible for labor negotiations, grievances and contract administration.
To support those responsibilities, the county estimates it would need five new positions:
- Deputy County Attorney
- Senior Budget Analyst
- HR Program Manager
- Payroll Analyst
- Administrative Associate
The fiscal note estimates those positions would cost approximately $522,600 annually, including salary, fringe benefits and operating expenses.
Additional projected costs include:
- Outside legal counsel: $50,000
- Potential office space: $57,300
- Office furniture and accommodations: $43,700
Combined, the county estimates an annual administrative impact of approximately $673,600.
Bond Rating And Long-Term Budget Questions
The fiscal note included with Bill 26-04 also outlines what county officials believe could be the long-term financial impact if a union is formed and a collective bargaining agreement is negotiated.
According to the document, the county’s financial adviser warned that an additional bargaining unit could place added pressure on county finances and could be viewed negatively by bond rating agencies. The fiscal note states that Fitch Ratings considers labor agreements as part of its review of local government finances and notes that another union could be viewed as a credit negative.
The document also states that unionized local government employees often receive salaries that are 12% to 18% higher than their non-union counterparts.
Based on those assumptions, the fiscal note estimates the county could eventually see annual salary and benefit costs increase by approximately $12.8 million to $19.2 million if a collective bargaining agreement is reached.
The fiscal note states that if future revenue growth is not enough to cover those costs, the county could eventually be forced to either raise taxes or reduce county services.
Following the public hearing, commissioners unanimously voted to keep the hearing record open for 14 days and indicated they plan to hold a work session later this month to discuss potential amendments to the bill.
Charles County commissioners are accepting public comments on Bill 26-04 through 5 p.m. June 23, 2025.
Submit comments online: Visit the Bill 26-04 public comment page on the Charles County website. Complete the form with your name, full address and comments. Submissions are accepted until the deadline.
Submit by phone: Call 240-776-6709 with questions or for assistance submitting comments.
Submit by mail: Charles County Board of Commissioners 200 Baltimore Street La Plata, MD 20646
Watch the full June 9, 2025 meeting on CCGTV.
Got a tip or photo? Text us at 888-871-NEWS (6397) or email news@thebaynet.com.
Join The BayNet Membership for exclusive perks and zero ads.
Don’t miss a story—sign up for our newsletter!
