Unions support 'just cause' measure
By Joanne Kelley, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published August 22, 2008 at 9:05 p.m.
The Colorado secretary of state's office has certified a ballot initiative that requires employers to provide full-time workers with a reason for being fired and allows firings only for specific reasons such as incompetence or economic circumstances.
The measure was proposed by a labor-backed coalition called Protect Colorado's Future. Unions support the measure because they say it protects workers from being fired without "just" or reasonable cause. It was proposed after another group began pushing for a constitutional amendment that would ban mandatory union dues for workers. That "right-to-work measure will also appear on November's ballot.
Business groups have denounced the "just cause" measure, saying it would put an end to the state's "employment at will" status and could discourage companies from hiring full-time workers if they can't adjust their payrolls as they see fit.
Titled "Just Cause for Employee Discharge or Suspension," it will be referred to as Amendment 55.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Legislature Blog
Read live updates from the opening of the 2009 legislative session.
-
Rocky multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Who's next?
Complete coverage of the Broncos' search for a new coach.
-
Rocky year in photos
View an audio slide show of staff selections from 2008.
-
Winter Escapes
Your insider’s guide to the copious joys of the coolest season.
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Two-man advantage with Avs
-
Shanahan's career
See photos from Mike Shanahan's career as Broncos coach.
-
12 days of Drew
Look back at the year that has been with Drew Litton.
-
A dream fulfilled
A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production
August 23, 2008
2:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
Stop Union control of the ballot box, they are ruining Colorado.
Unions will use $300 million in forced union dues to influence political elections in 2008.
YES on Amendment 47 to avoid forced unionism.
August 24, 2008
2:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
bosunj writes:
jacka sounds like one of those right to starve idiots on his knees before his corporate masters....don't get any on your chin there jacko!
August 24, 2008
4:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
Coffee writes:
I have worked in grocery stores for 19 years, and I see more than one side to these issues. First, we need to get rid of all the stereotypes. Not ALL Management is "greedy" nor "evil", and not ALL workers (especially union ones) "lazy" or "overpaid." That being said, I think that it is a prudent move to put measures in place that will protect those of us who have earned our way into some sort of lower middle class job security to not become victims of zealous business cost cutting and control measures which can tend to be unfair. Its a Dog Eat Dog world, and without worker protection, those of us who are older would eventually get unceremoniously dumped in favor of younger and cheaper labor.
No on 47! Its not about freedom to choose. Why else would it be backed by Corporate Billionaires?
August 24, 2008
5:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Brix57 writes:
What I find interesting of the various comments is the number of people that believe unions are quasi-communist and only seek to pull business down to nothing.
I can certainly see that the propaganda has been out for so very long that many would believe only that. Many of these people think that their employers are such nice guys that they only want what is best for their employee. 40 hour weeks, overtime, benefits, retirement plans, health care and raises are all provided because the employer wants only the best people to work for them. Not realizing that unions got these "perks" for them way before most of them were born. Which is why perhaps many of them think that the propaganda by employers is true. Then again, they may be the pampered children of those that worked in a union in one of the dirty, filthy industries and are living on the proceeds of their parents labor.
August 24, 2008
7:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
This would discourage companies from expanding or even opening a new business in Colorado.
Second : food, gas, clothing ...will be more expensive.
August 25, 2008
2:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
windbourne writes:
Amazing. We are basically an at will state with a little bit more protection. I am saying no to all of these amendments. No to 47 AND 55.
August 25, 2008
5:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
bosunj writes:
Brix57 wrote: "Many of these people think that their employers are such nice guys that they only want what is best for their employee."
Not only do these people believe this, they also believe that an employer is doing them a favor by "giving" them a job. Idiots!
An employee exchanges his time, talents, sweat and health for money.
An employer would not be able to sell his widgets were it not for his employees labor. An employee would not be able to sell his labor were it not for his employers willingness to risk capital.
Neither is above the other!
Contrary to current dogma, this an equal exchange that depends upon both being successful! Who will the employer sell his widgets to, hmm?
Successful(!), what a concept in the IGMFU world we now live in!
BTW, the IGMFU is taken from a license plate I saw on a Mercedes-Benz in the early 80's while driving on Colorado Blvd near Mississippi.....
These are moot topics at best however. Bush can't afford to cede power. He is guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. As are most of his administration. There will likely be a war, market crash, and resultant martial law in the very near future. Life in America is about to change drastically and violently!
Get out while you still can!!
Good luck!
August 25, 2008
9:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
mmannino writes:
Unions are legally protected cartels with two purposes: control the supply and price of labor. Unions are the opposite of competition. The absence of labor competition increases prices, decreases quality, and lowers employment levels. The union members (if employed) prosper at everyone else's expense.
To crush competition, unions engage in the political process. The initiatives sponsored by the unions will substantially increase labor costs. The unions want to increase the cost of competitive labor so that companies must deal with the labor cartel.
This just cause initiative is similar to European laws about termination. This initiative will lower employment levels and increase labor costs. Young people entering the workforce and older workers looking for work will bear the costs of this legislation. Companies will stick with their existing workforce and be reluctant to hire.
The choice is simple. If you value economic freedom, oppose unions. If you favor cartels (such as OPEC and the Democratic Oil Blockade), support unions. If unions back an initiative, candidate, or law, oppose it. If unions are against an initiative, candidate, or law, support it.
August 25, 2008
9:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Darwin writes:
bosunj said "These are moot topics at best however. Bush can't afford to cede power. He is guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. As are most of his administration. There will likely be a war, market crash, and resultant martial law in the very near future. Life in America is about to change drastically and violently!
Get out while you still can!!"
Wow! Since you can see the likely future of America, what country and when are you going to? Obviously you don't believe in the American justice system that states a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I'll take my chances here and endeavor to make America a better country in whatever way I can. Looking a how porous our borders are, I will always be able to "get out" if the need arises.
As to the topic of the article, passage of Amendment 55 may have some unintended consequences. One has already been mentioned, that of portraying Colorado as having an unfavorable business climate, and it may also lead to more "outsourcing" to foreign countries or just moving the business operation to another state perceived to be more favorable to business. Be careful what you wish for, you might not like what you get.
August 25, 2008
12:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Logical writes:
Coffee, why do you say to "get rid of all stereotypes", then bash "Corporate Billionaires"? Get rid of the stereotypes only when it suits you? Corporations pay many people, while producing many products that we want. What is wrong with that?
The argument that we should love unions because they initiated the 40-hour work week is weak. Back when unions had a legitimate reason for existing, there were too many workers for too-few jobs, and employers could get people to work in less-than-ideal conditions. Now, there are many more options for most workers, so they can find a job in a better situation for themselves. Unions are no longer needed. Competition for employees has replaced the unions' need to control the workplace.
If you don't like where you work, go somewhere else. If there isn't a better place to work, you must have the best situation available to you. Sometimes we have to accept that we can't have our "ideal" job. Work hard, improve your skills, and move up (or into another line of work).
By the way, health insurance is not a required form of compensation. Businesses should not be required to supply workers with health insurance, any more than they should be required to supply auto or life insurance. That is a benefit companies choose to offer, to attract employees. Why do so many people think that their health care should be paid for by employers? Talk about killing employment opportunities! Thanks, unions! Unions will kill more jobs than they will create.
August 26, 2008
6:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
bosunj writes:
Darwin: damn skippy I don't believe in the American't (in)justice system. Perhaps you shouldn't either...then again, in your heart you truly don't either: "Looking a how porous our borders are, I will always be able to "get out" if the need arises".
BTW, I'm already out. Have been for over a decade! Did have to come to the land of the formerly free last month for a funeral. Became enraged before I got out of the freaking airport, and remained so the entire time in Amerika, as after 22 hours in one or another secure environment from gate to aircraft to transit lounge to aircraft to arrival gate - the first thing I was forced to do was x-ray my bloody shoes? Getting off the plane at my destination? Well, when shoes are outlawed, only outlaws will have shoes!!! Then the idiot that leafed through the 74 pages of visa stamps in my passport for 5 bloody minutes asking multiple inane questions had the er, temerity to say "welcome home"!
Darwin: "As to the topic of the article, passage of Amendment 55 may have some unintended consequences. One has already been mentioned, that of portraying Colorado as having an unfavorable business climate, and it may also lead to more "outsourcing" to foreign countries or just moving the business operation to another state perceived to be more favorable to business. Be careful what you wish for, you might not like what you get".....
Be careful what Coors wants...he just might get it. A paragon of workers rights he is, hmm? My only consolation is that no one will be able to buy his nasty beer soon....not even with a wheelbarrow full of fiat currency!
Be careful what YOU wish for my good Darwin...you are about to get it. Can you say K-Y?