Union Paints Grim Picture of a Strike by Sheriff’s Force

Angry, frustrated and weary from weeks of fighting for more pay, the 1,100 members of the union representing the Orange County sheriff’s deputies are talking seriously about a walkout that county officials say would be illegal and might cost them their jobs.

If it happens, they will leave their patrol beats in unincorporated areas unmanned and “put a closed sign on the door” of the County Jail, Robert MacLeod, general manager of the Assn. of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs, said late last week.

Even though they understand that public safety might be jeopardized, MacLeod said, the deputies feel that county labor negotiators have left them little choice. The deputies believe the county has been grossly unfair in its dealings with them, he said.

‘Slither Away . . . or Fight’

“We don’t want anybody hurt,” MacLeod said. “We’re not stupid. We know if we walk out (of the jail) and they haven’t made adequate plans, it would be a real mess, fast.

“If there was any other thing that would get us out of this, we would do it. So now we either cower and slither away, or we stay and fight.”

John Sibley, county director of employee relations, said, however, that he thinks “talk of a strike is premature.” He and other county officials say they are still optimistic about avoiding a walkout.

If there is a strike, it is not expected to happen until after a union membership meeting on Friday, leaving some time to work toward defusing the situation, said Sheriff’s Lt. Richard Olson.

Still, Sibley said the county has prepared a contingency plan in case the deputies leave their jobs. Both he and Olson, however, declined to discuss the plan--in part, they said, because they don’t want to give the union a chance to disrupt it.

In 1982, when sheriff’s deputies in San Diego County walked off their jobs, the governor ordered management personnel from the state Department of Corrections to staff the county jails there. Orange County officials won’t comment on whether they have contacted the governor’s office about help in the event of a strike, but a spokeswoman for the governor’s office said she was unaware of any such request.

The California Correctional Peace Officers Assn., the union for guards in the state prison system, already has written a letter asking its 16,000 members not to volunteer for work in Orange County jails if there is a strike.

No Response to Routine Calls

MacLeod said that if there is a walkout, the union will contact local police unions in Orange County and urge them to respond to any emergency calls in the sheriff’s patrol areas, but not to routine calls.

He said the union does not want to be responsible for anybody being hurt or victimized. But “if Joe has a store, and it gets (burglarized), there won’t be anybody there for a long time--until after the strike,” MacLeod said.

Sibley already has said the county’s first reaction to a deputies strike would be to seek a restraining order from the courts ordering them back to work. Deputy County Counsel Terry C. Andrus said the paper work for that kind of a court action already has been prepared.

County officials say any job action that jeopardizes public health or safety would violate the law. If the sheriff’s deputies walk off their jobs, Sibley and Andrus say, that would be illegal.

The deputies thus would risk being fired, MacLeod said, adding that the deputies might stage a walkout by submitting mass resignations.

“It’s dangerous to sick out; it’s dangerous to strike,” MacLeod said. “We’re going to tell (members) this is dangerous. All kinds of bad things could happen.”

In Madera County last year, 42 sheriff’s deputies were fired when they staged a strike that lasted about 30 days, said Richard Baratta, general manager of the Peace Officers Research Assn. of California. He said the deputies eventually were hired back, but only on a “temporary employee” basis.

Baratta said that situation still is unresolved.

When other law enforcement agencies have staged walkouts, the unions frequently have told their members to leave the state--or at least the county--so they cannot be served with court papers, Baratta said.

Since 1980, he said, there have been strikes by sheriff’s deputies in Mendocino, King, Madera, Calaveras, Riverside and San Diego counties.

Most were resolved in a few days, and the striking workers were granted amnesty as part of the agreements under which they returned to work, he said. Baratta said there has never been an injury or hazardous incident attributed to any of the strikes.

Asked State for Help

Management personnel in the sheriff’s departments were able to cover the deputies’ responsibilities in all but the San Diego County strike, Baratta said. There, the county called upon state correctional officers for help.

San Diego’s strike in July, 1981, lasted eight days and was run from a union headquarters in Yuma, Ariz. About 200 deputies were charged with contempt of court for violating a judge’s restraining order against the strike.

The charges later were dismissed by another judge after the union president apologized in court for ignoring the restraining order.

On some days during that strike, there was a slight increase over normal figures in the numbers of burglaries and robberies, but officials could not directly attribute the crimes to the strike.

Last month, Orange County deputies did conduct a work slowdown that began Aug. 18, one day after negotiations with the county first broke down. More than 300 deputies in the county’s jails who are responsible for transporting prisoners to the courts participated in the slowdown, during which workers performed their jobs precisely by the book.

Caused Court Problems

The slowdown caused serious problems in the courts when some prisoners were delivered up to five hours late for hearings and trials. The deputies’ union called off the slowdown Aug. 27, saying it had served its purpose.

County supervisors and other officials have declined to comment on any labor problem since the sheriff’s deputies began their slowdown. Members of eight county unions, representing about 12,000 of the county’s roughly 14,000 employees, are working without contracts.

In addition to the deputies, members of three other unions have conducted job actions aimed at getting higher wages.

Last Wednesday, the deputies’ union met again with the county in talks that were described as a last effort to reach agreement before a major job action. Union leaders said they left the meeting extremely discouraged, claiming that the county was being deceitful in its negotiations.

Negotiations on Wages

The two sides discussed wage packages of one to three years. The last proposal on the table was for a one-year contract, with the county offering a 2.5% raise and the union demanding 7%. Under the present contract, MacLeod said, maximum monthly salaries for deputies range from $2,824 to $2,913. Maximum monthly salary for sergeants is $3,702, he said.

The sticking point has been the issue of higher pay, but union officials say they have been most upset about the county’s insensitive attitude toward the deputies.

Union officials claim that the county has been falsely telling the public that it is in dire financial trouble, while county officials at the bargaining table have told them there is enough money for raises.

As a result, MacLeod said, the union has tried to force the county to reveal the details of its financial situation.

The union requested that an independent auditor be allowed to examine the county’s finances, offering to drop its wage demands entirely if it is determined that the county is out of money, MacLeod said.

The union also has said it would submit to binding arbitration in which a neutral party would determine what salary rate would be equitable for both sides.

The county has rejected these union proposals.

Contingency Fund Considered

Sibley admits that the county could pay higher wages to the deputies, but he said it would be at the expense of other county services. He said the county also has a contingency fund of $16.5 million that is reserved for unexpected costs but could legally be used for wages.

During recent budget hearings, however, county officials said they were concerned about depleting that fund because it is needed for emergencies, and a lower balance could cause financial institutions to lower the county’s credit rating.

That money might be identified by an outside auditor as being available for wages, Sibley said, but the county has made a policy decision to keep it as a reserve account.

Sibley said the county would “absolutely never” submit to binding arbitration because “it takes the decision on what is going to be paid out of the hands of the elected officials and puts it into the hands of an outside arbitrator.

“It’s a decision that is going to impact the county and the services that we’re going to have for years to come.”