Columnist Jeff German: Troubles mount at courthouse

Tuesday, March 22, 2005 | 11:33 a.m.

Daily job stress and mistreatment aren't the only things contributing to low morale among workers in Las Vegas Justice Court.

Now it turns out the employees also have reason to worry about the long-term stability of their jobs -- and once again their right to join a union.

Justice Court and District Court officials, I'm told, are talking about merging the administrative side of the two courts.

They plan to hold a retreat March 31 to discuss the merits of bringing together the staffs.

In a joint letter circulated at the courthouse last week, Chief District Judge Kathy Hardcastle and Chief Justice of the Peace James Bixler said consolidating administrative services has potential to improve the "effectiveness" of Southern Nevada's justice system.

Lord knows the system needs help.

But in Justice Court, so far, the only thing the proposal is doing is creating more job uncertainty for the workers, who last year fended off an attempt by the justices of the peace to void their union contract.

The justices abandoned the union-busting effort after county officials and the Service Employees International Union, which represents the workers, pointed out it violated federal law.

A crisis was averted, but SEIU officials remained bitter over the way the justices treated their members.

And now union leaders suspect the justices once more are trying to undermine the collective bargaining process.

Currently, Justice Court employees have the right under state law to join a union and negotiate a contract because they work for the county, a local government.

But their colleagues in District Court, which receives state funding, are considered state employees and, by law, are prohibited from engaging in collective bargaining.

Union leaders fear that any agreement between the courts to share administrative services could end up eroding the bargaining rights of the Justice Court employees, who have a three-year contract that expires in June 2006.

"We're going to be watching this every step of the way," says Jane McAlevey, executive director of the local SEIU.

Don Burnette, the county's chief administrative officer, says the county will have a say in any new court arrangement and will insist on preserving those rights.

"It's our position that the Justice Court employees are still entitled to collective bargaining even if they end up falling under the supervision of the District Court," Burnette says.

Court officials participating in these discussions, however, couldn't say for sure whether its even legally possible to bring the Justice Court employees under the arm of District Court without an act of the Legislature.

"Those avenues haven't been explored," says Justice Court administrative consultant Christina Chandler. "We don't know yet if we have a consensus to blend administrative services."

In the meantime the feelings of uncertainty among the Justice Court employees probably could be eased with a little more communication from the courts.

So far, McAlevey says, no one in either court has bothered to include the union in the talks. The union isn't invited to next week's retreat.

Says McAlevey:

"They continue to repeat the same disrespectful process -- not listening to the collective voice of the workers."