Bill would add state mediator and staff attorney to Vermont Labor Relations Board; $250,000 appropriation sought

Sophie Zdatny of the Office of Legislative Council told the Senate committee that the bill would create a permanent classified mediator position at the Vermont Labor Relations Board and add a staff attorney, funded by an appropriation the House set at $250,000.

The proposal responds to recent reductions at the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), which Zdatny said reduced its mediator corps and whose local mediator had taken another job last April, eroding institutional knowledge used in state contract negotiations. "The value of having a neutral third‑party mediator is it's a pretty small cost for the potential disruption of not having that resource available," Zdatny said.

Zdatny explained the state currently requires mediation at an impasse under state statute for several labor relations acts (municipal employees, teachers, state employees and higher education units). Historically, parties often used FMCS mediators; with FMCS capacity uncertain, the bill would ensure a state mediator is available and could, where capacity allows, provide free mediation services for public and private collective bargaining units and unfair labor practice charges.

Committee members asked how often a single full‑time mediator would be needed and what the workload would look like when mediation demand is low. Zdatny said the Vermont Labor Relations Board does not have complete historical caseload data on private‑sector mediation and that some entities (for example, the Vermont State College System) had used mediators in a majority of recent impasses.

Lawmakers also pressed for safeguards to preserve mediator neutrality and protect confidential mediation materials. The bill adds a subsection directing the board to develop procedures that keep confidential mediation information segregated from other board files and limit access by board members and staff to avoid undermining mediator credibility.

The appropriation for the two positions was reported to be in House Appropriations, and sponsors indicated the committee will monitor whether Appropriations supports both positions, only one, or none. No committee vote was recorded at the hearing.

Next steps: staff told the committee the appropriation and staffing proposal remain under consideration in House Appropriations and that additional workload and caseload numbers may be provided by the executive director of the VLRB at a later date.