Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

COUNTERPOINT: In the clenches

Business climate in state would instantly worsen

By Dan Pilcher

Published April 19, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

Related Stories

More Speakout

More stories »

Two proposed ballot initiatives would, if placed on the November ballot and approved by the voters, profoundly damage Colorado's business climate, which is the last thing the state needs as the nation's economy teeters on the brink of recession.

These proposals would make it more difficult for Colorado to recruit and retain companies. They also would increase costs for existing firms, which would make them less competitive in a fiercely competitive world.

Because of this, the Board of Directors of the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry has voted to strenuously oppose the measures.

The first measure, which comes in two variations and would amend the Colorado Constitution, mandates that employers show "just cause" before suspending or terminating a worker.

Targeting corporate fraud, the second proposal comes in four versions and is statutory in nature.

The "just cause" measure applies only to companies with 20 or more employees and defines "just cause" in a variety of ways, including "incompetence" and "substandard" performance.

Putting aside the fact that "incompetence" and the other reasons are not further defined, which would precipitate decades of expensive legal warfare, an employer could not terminate or suspend a worker for any other reason.

This initiative would clearly explode Colorado's long-standing "employment-at will" doctrine for employers and workers and wreak havoc with state employment law.

Only one other state in the country has apparently chosen to modify the employment-at-will concept with a statute similar to this proposed amendment: Montana, which in 1987 enacted the "Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act."

Placing Colorado into such a restrictive labor-law category can only harm our state's economic competitiveness.

Dealing with such a massive earthquake in Colorado's labor law would substantially drive up business costs.

In addition, the labor market in Colorado would simply function much less efficiently, again driving up costs for businesses and limiting workers' opportunities.

The second proposal, targeting corporate fraud, contains two major, troubling components.

First, it extends criminal and civil liability to corporate executives who know of wrongdoing within the company but do not report it or stop it. In plain terms, this provision would criminalize witnesses to a crime - a horrible precedent.

Common sense tells us that here are many legitimate, personal reasons why individuals don't stop or report crimes.

Second, but more pernicious for the state's economy, the proposal would grant a "private right-of-action" to Colorado citizens to allow them to sue the executives and the corporation for civil damages. The damages would be awarded to state or local governments, depending on which jurisdiction's law was broken.

This provision would likely result in a plethora of civil lawsuits, which would further degrade and clog Colorado's civil justice system.

Taken together, these two proposed initiatives would deliver one-two body blows to Colorado at a fragile economic time.

Dan Pilcher is senior vice president of the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry.

Comments

  • April 19, 2008

    3:18 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    p_myers661 writes:

    Well said. Expect the union thugs and drones to have a hissy fit. I volunteer to do what ever you need me to do to help defeat this extortion threat.

  • April 19, 2008

    9:02 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    BikerChick writes:

    ..
    The comments above are from mean and vicious people who hate Communist Ritter's progressive multicultural entitlement society approach.

    Why should we care about the business approach ? Those selfish and greedy people just provide our jobs and help us to put food on the table for our families.

    We are better off ignoring these private interests and praying for more socialist government benefits. Meanwhile, unions for our government slaves is a just concept.

    Or... just maybe... the total failures in the Soviet Union are useful for us to study ? Why repeat a doomed, old-paradigm concept ? Maybe, just maybe... the editor is correct here ?

    Maybe self-sufficiency and reasonable approaches are meritorious ?
    ..

  • April 19, 2008

    9:31 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    tmsloan writes:

    Hey Sasquatch, look to New England or Detroit, ot Pittsburgh if you need an answer to what Unions bring to your town. Union memebership is down to around 9% nationwide in the private sector and over 30% in the public sector. Voting Democratic may be good in the shortterm for some workers, but in the end it will ruin your Cities and Towns. The teachers union doesn't care about students, the care about their memebrship and the dues they bring in, and in the end the union doesn't care about their membership, they only care about the dues they pay. Why do you think the fight for a closed shop?

  • April 21, 2008

    11:13 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    CACI's Pilcher hits the points. These Union backed proposals will lower Colorado's competitiveness.

    More importantly these efforts are Big Labor's strategic response to the Right-to-Work ballot item. Let's keep it real and honest.

    These are the tired old union MO -- come to your place of business and use pressure tactics to organize you/break your company. In this case they use it as the threat to get RTW off the ballot. Will Big Labor back off, who knows. Do I care, nope.

    I trust that the conspiring group of governor, CEO's (you know who you are), chambers (sans CACI), mayor, etc... will use a No-No campaign to try and stop these anti-Colorado messures and the pro-worker RTW messure.

    Why stop RTW? It is part of the Big Labor compact with elected leaders to keep a lid on the truth.

    The peoples Right-to-Work is about choice and stopping the fleecing of workers in the name of corrupt monopoly unions.

    Big Labor was given the keys to organize state workers; and we'll all pay for it when the state comes round asking for more taxes to pay off already well compensated state employees.

    They never recognize that the governor gave the Right-to-Work to state employees. Shouldn't all Coloradans have the Right-to-Work?

    Now its time for Big Labor and their conspirators to own-up to the deal they cut at the state; Right-to-Work means A BETTER COLORADO.

  • April 21, 2008

    12:26 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    courtneym writes:

    compaines need to pay up when they do wrong.

  • April 21, 2008

    3:28 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    mytwosense writes:

    SASQUATCH: "The business climate in Colorado has turned decidedly hostile to attracting capital, new jobs and growing income. The liberal Salazar/Ritter regime is anti-growth and anti-business; just look at the anti-energy story in today's business section."

    Why should Colorado be pro-growth and pro-business? Let me tell you something obvious about growth: eventually, it outgrows its surroundings.

    This state is known for its grand physical surroundings - and its why most people live here. True Coloradoans don't WANT non-stop growth (i.e, sprawl, big box stores and office "parks" everywhere) and thus, we aren't clamoring for huge industries to "pick us! pick us!"

    If that's what you want, you're living in the wrong state.

    Colorado is friendly for small businesses, entreprenuers, mom and pop shops, and hopefully, it will stay that way instead of whoring itself out to the highest bidding corporate conglomerates. If it does the latter, Colorado will cease to be Colorado.