The Butler County commissioners on Wednesday deferred accepting an arbitration award for a union contract with the county’s 35 probation officers because the award is being challenged.

The Butler County Probation Officers Association, the stand-alone union representing the officers, filed an appeal Friday in county court, alleging the award is contrary to law and unenforceable.

County solicitor Mike English said the award can’t be accepted following the appeal.

“We’ll wait for the court to decide how this will be resolved,” English said.

In the appeal, the union argues the county can’t eliminate an extra 2 percent longevity pay hike.

Under prior contracts with another union, the probation officers were automatically bumped from a probation officer I post to a probation officer II post after 12 years of service, which carried the 2 percent pay increase.

The automatic job title switch is dependent on a post being vacant.

The county wants to restrict that title change to the county president judge’s discretion for workers hired after July 1, 2009.

The union maintains the county salary board would have to remove the 2 percent clause.

English said in an interview the union’s argument is incorrect because the 2 percent isn’t part of the base salary, which is what the salary board sets.

The county commissioners set additional compensation.

The appeal also argues the county infringed on the president judge’s authority by setting the number of probation officer II posts.

English said the union does not even have the legal standing to argue that point. He explained President Judge Thomas Doerr would be the appropriate party to make such an assertion.

“Not the association,” English said.

However, he stressed the issue is moot as nothing was done wrong in the arbitration process.

“We obviously think the arbitrator has the authority,” English said.

Butler attorney Leo Stepanian Sr., who represents the union, said Tuesday the arbitrator did not have the authority to issue the award.

Tom Holman, deputy court administrator, declined to comment on the case.

“The court does not comment on pending litigation,” Holman said.