Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

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

MILSTEAD: Banking groups differ on Amendment 47

By David Milstead, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published July 15, 2008 at 9:05 p.m.

Text size  

More Business Columns & Blogs

More stories »

Much has been made over how the two major chambers of commerce have taken differing positions on this fall's right-to-work ballot initiative.

Less known is that the state's two major banking trade groups have similarly diverged in their positions.

To recap: Amendment 47, sponsored primarily by brewery heir Jonathan Coors, would ban "union shop" arrangements. At a union shop, workers must either join the union or pay fees to cover the cost of representation.

The right-to- work sponsors seem motivated by the creeping unionism of Gov. Bill Ritter's administration. Although the governor vetoed a bill in 2007 that would have made it easier to establish union shops, he subsequently ordered a watered-down form of collective bargaining for state employees.

Amendment 47 prompted its own backlash, however, in the form of a wave of labor-backed ballot initiatives that would expand businesses' legal liability or raise their costs through higher wages or health-insurance mandates.

Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce President Joe Blake calls this ballot war "mutually assured destruction." That helps explain why his group has voted to oppose not only the labor issues, but Amendment 47 as well.

The Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry, or CACI, is known as the statewide chamber. It took a different tack, endorsing right-to-work.

Now, the Colorado Bankers Association and the Independent Bankers of Colorado have mirrored the two chambers in taking separate paths.

The Colorado Bankers Association, which represents commercial banks from big to small, voted to take a "no" position on right-to-work while also opposing the labor-backed issues. President Don Childears said the group's board actually took that vote a couple of days before the Denver chamber did, but waited rather than disclose it.

"We didn't want to be the sole group stepping out," Childears said.

Childears echoes the Denver chamber when he says that while right-to-work makes sense, "we figure we're so close to it under Colorado law, you gain an inch but you lose a mile with the labor issues on the ballot."

The Independent Bankers of Colorado took a position similar to CACI. "IBC's support of Amendment 47 is consistent with the long-held belief by our community bank members that right-to-work states consistently show better job growth and economic performance," said Barbara Walker, the group's executive director.

That assertion - which the Denver Metro Chamber disputes, interestingly - must be the explanation. After all, no one seems able to name a bank in Colorado with a unionized work force, making the issue of right-to-work an academic one for the two differing bankers' groups.

David Milstead and James Paton take turns writing Up and Down 17th Street. Contact Milstead at 303-954-2648 or milstead@RockyMountainNews.com.

Comments

  • July 16, 2008

    7:19 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    So big out of state corporate bankers association, headed by some guy, s_cks up to democrat state leaders thus assuring they won't target them.

    But smaller Indy Bankers of Colorado, headed by woman, stand up for business values and real employee free choice.

    Hummm, I say YES on Amendment 47.

    Shouldn't all Coloradans have real employee free choice like the recently unionized Colorado state employees.

  • July 16, 2008

    12:23 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Lara writes:

    "Right-to-work states consistently show better job growth and economic performance," said Barbara Walker, the group's executive director.

    Yep.

    A *non-partisan* group agrees:
    http://www.cfpa.org/issues/issue.cfm/...

    Right-to-work laws do not guarantee any rights.

    Right-to-Work laws are designed to financially cripple the union movement.

    Right-to-Work laws decrease wages for everyone.

    Right-to-Work laws especially harm people of color.

    Right-to-Work states have more poverty, higher infant mortality rates and poorer schools.

    Right-to-Work laws endanger workers’ physical security.

    And finally...

    It is in states’ economic interest to keep unions strong.

    After considering all that, how can anyone think Amendment 47 is a good idea?

  • July 16, 2008

    10:16 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    reeeeble writes:

    Why can't we just leave things the way they are? Haven't business and labor been able to get along okay up until now? Are unions really that big of a problem to make Coors and his friends set their sights on them? It makes me suspicious of their intentions.

  • July 19, 2008

    1:25 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    YES on 47 to stop corrupt labor unions and corrupt politicians.

  • July 26, 2008

    12:35 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    coloradoworker writes:

    What 47 will really do......
    1. Lower wages
    2. Strip health insurance
    3. Destroy our middleclass
    4. Create a less safe like workplace
    5. Benefit those who already are wealthly
    6. Cripple Coloradians quality of life

    Who the heck wants this? I have a family.....I'm voting NO!!

  • August 13, 2008

    10:02 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    Amendment 47 affirms employees can't be forced to join the union and pay forced union due just to keep their job. Its simple and its fair.

    Amendment 47 text from State website reads:

    Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado:
    SECTION 1. Article XVIII of the constitution of the state of Colorado is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION to read:

    Section 16. Right to work.

    (1) THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE KNOWN AND MAY BE CITED AS THE "COLORADO RIGHT TO WORK AMENDMENT".

    (2)(a) NO PERSON SHALL, AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT, BE REQUIRED TO:
    (I) BE A MEMBER OF A LABOR UNION; AND
    (II) PAY ANY DUES, FEES, ASSESSMENTS, OR OTHER CHARGES OF ANY KIND TO A LABOR UNION OR TO ANY CHARITY OR OTHER THIRD PARTY, IN LIEU OF SUCH PAYMENTS.

    (2)(b) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL PREVENT ANY PERSON FROM VOLUNTARILY BELONGING OR VOLUNTARILY PROVIDING FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO A LABOR UNION.

    (3) ANY PERSON WHO DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY VIOLATES ANY PROVISION OF THIS SECTION COMMITS A MISDEMEANOR AND UPON CONVICTION THEREOF SHALL BE PUNISHED BY A FINE IN AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO THE MOST STRINGENT MISDEMEANOR CLASSIFICATION PROVIDED BY LAW.

    (4) THIS SECTION SHALL APPLY TO ALL UNION EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS ENTERED INTO AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION AND SHALL APPLY TO ANY RENEWAL OR EXTENSION OF ANY EXISTING UNION CONTRACT.

    (5) AS USED IN THIS SECTION, "LABOR UNION" MEANS ANY ORGANIZATION OF ANY KIND, OR AGENCY OR EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATION COMMITTEE OR ORGANIZATION, THAT EXISTS FOR THE PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, OF DEALING WITH EMPLOYERS CONCERNING WAGES, RATES OF PAY, HOURS OF WORK, OTHER CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT, OR OTHER FORMS OF COMPENSATION; ANY ORGANIZATION THAT EXISTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING OR OF DEALING WITH EMPLOYERS CONCERNING GRIEVANCES; AND ANY ORGANIZATION PROVIDING OTHER MUTUAL AID OR PROTECTION IN CONNECTION WITH EMPLOYMENT.

    SECTION 2. Effective date. This amendment shall take effect upon proclamation of the vote by the governor.

    YES on Amendment 47 for all Coloradans.