NOISE COSTLY TO L.A.; CITY MIGHT OWE MILLIONS IN BONUSES TO WORKERS IN LOUD PLACES.

Byline: Jesse Hiestand Staff Writer

The city and a city employees union are putting the final touches on an agreement forcing Los Angeles to pay as much as $2 million in back wages to hundreds of workers eligible for bonuses since 1992 because of workplace noise, according to labor sources.

The deal, involving about 300 street-repair workers, is expected to unleash a flood of applications from employees in other city departments, from the airport to tree trimmers, who are subjected to ear-splitting racket on the job.

The city fought to avoid paying the 5.5 percent premium after a San Fernando Valley street-resurfacing employee first filed a claim for it in 1992. But the city lost in court and also lost when an arbitrator issued his final ruling in 1998.

``I found that I was entitled to it,'' said Paul Fowler, who operated street-resurfacing machinery in 1992 when he learned of the bonus provision in city regulations and applied for the extra pay.

``The city just flatly rejected it. They said no, nobody's ever gotten that. I took that as a challenge,'' said Fowler, 43, of Winnetka, who now is a heavy equipment operator for the city.

This week, city officials and representatives of Service Employees International Union, Local 347, will hold another in a series of meetings to finish writing the agreement, already having completed negotiations over who will receive the back pay and how much they will get, according to sources familiar with the talks.

The city anticipates paying half the settlement, or roughly $1 million, to workers in November and making the second and final payout in November 2000.

Julie Butcher, general manager of SEIU Local 347, AFL-CIO, said the union filed a group grievance on behalf of Fowler and other street-service employees which led to the long, drawn-out legal battle.

Extra pay

Workers are eligible for the additional 5.5 percent pay if their work places them in an area where noise exceeds 85 decibels during more than half of the employee's work shift, according to city regulations cited by arbitrator Kenneth N. Silbert.

City officials conducted tests after Fowler made his claim and found that street resurfacing crews routinely were subjected to even more noise than the 85-decibel level while on the job.

But the city insisted it shouldn't have to pay the premium since it provided earplugs and other devices to shield workers' ears and regularly provided hearing tests to find out whether workers were experiencing any problems.

However, the arbitrator concluded that a noisy workplace is, in itself, sufficient to warrant the higher pay, based on the wording of the city regulation.

Also, the workers said that they still suffered adverse effects even with the earplugs, earmuffs, hearing tests and other measures. Some reported sore throats from shouting to make themselves heard over the noise. Some said they had headaches or other problems even with earplugs and earmuffs, and found the workplace still excruciatingly loud.

Butcher said the union's contract required the city to adhere to the provision as it was written in the municipal code. When the city refused to arbitrate the matter, the union took the issue to Superior Court but lost. The union appealed and won, setting the stage for an arbitration.

Arbitration

The arbitration was split into two issues - whether the city was liable for the extra pay and, if so, how much should be owed, to whom and how far back, Butcher said.

Since the union won on the first issue, the city decided to negotiate a settlement on the latter issue - working out the details of the payout.

That is being finalized now between the union and its opponents, the City Attorney's Office and city Chief Administrative Office. The two sides are set to meet this week to work out the details, and it is possible the settlement could be finished this week, she said.

``It's been a frustrating, really protracted struggle,'' Butcher said.

Ultimately, the city is expected to pay out between $1.5 million and $2 million to about 300 city street services workers who work under those noisy conditions, she said.

Future expense

But the two sides still have not agreed on whether the city will now begin paying those workers the extra compensation from this point forward, she said. The city would like to alter the provision that provides for the higher pay.

With this victory behind it, the union is now pushing to have the city give the extra noise pay to workers in other departments, which the city opposes, Butcher said.

Assistant City Attorney Les Brown, who represented the city in Fowler's case, could not be reached for comment, nor could other officials or spokesmen in the City Attorney's Office. The Mayor's Office did not respond to a phone call seeking comment on Saturday.

City Councilman Michael Feuer, chairman of the city's Budget and Finance Committee, said he had not been briefed on the issue and had no immediate comment.

``This is the first I've heard of this,'' he said Saturday. ``I really want to sit down and review this case before I make a judgment on it.''

Fowler, a city employee for 12 years, still works in the Bureau of Street Services where he runs skiploaders, backhoes and other large equipment. He said he hopes his co-workers, former co-workers and the survivors of deceased co-workers will apply for the dollars they are owed.

``This is really exciting,'' he said. ``There were a lot of people who are affected. It's a very big deal. The impact is tremendous.''

Also, there will be a deadline to apply for the money.

``My main concern is making sure others know about this. Once I sign, they will only allow a 60- to 90-day window for people to come forward and file claims against the city. After that window, they won't accept additional claims from people in our department.''

Staff Writer Mike Comeaux contributed to this report.