Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

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

Accord sought on labor-backed ballot issues

Guv holds talks in bid to have groups drop four measures

By Joanne Kelley, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published September 17, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Elections

More stories »

Gov. Bill Ritter convened a high-level meeting Tuesday night to help negotiate a possible deal to have labor groups drop four contentious measures from November's ballot, sources told the Rocky Mountain News.

In exchange for the withdrawal of the proposed amendments, business leaders would provide campaign money to help defeat a trio of anti-union proposals, including a controversial "right-to- work" measure, Amendment 47.

Talks ended without an immediate resolution or deal after the 90-minute meeting at the Governor's Mansion.

Ritter spokesman Evan Dreyer confirmed the meeting took place, but declined to provide details about the negotiations.

"There are many people who are working on this issue and they are going to keep working on this issue," Dreyer said after the meeting ended.

Among the attendees: Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce President Joe Blake, United Food and Commercial Workers Local 7 President Ernest Duran Jr., and Jess Knox, director of a labor coalition called Protect Colorado's Future.

The strategy shift follows months of unsuccessful attempts by labor leaders to use the initiatives as leverage to get right-to- work supporters to pull their amendment from the crowded ballot.

The latest talks centered on providing an incentive for Protect Colorado's Future and the United Food and Commercial Workers to withdraw their ballot proposals, all of which business leaders fear could potentially drive companies away from Colorado.

Among the most disputed: a requirement that employers pay the bulk of health care premiums for workers and their families.

The meeting follows a gathering U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar helped orchestrate Sunday in which many of the same officials, business executives and labor representatives discussed ways to defuse the coming battle at the ballot box.

Salazar, Hickenlooper and other leaders met Sunday at the Wheat Ridge offices of the United Food and Commercials Workers Local 7, while Gov. Bill Ritter participated via telephone, sources told the Rocky.

A spokesman for Salazar confirmed the nature and timing of the meeting, held a day after he and U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter attended a rally at the UFCW to kick off the union's campaign against the right-to-work measure.

Dreyer declined to comment directly about the Sunday meeting, but confirmed there have been a number of conversations in recent weeks involving business, labor and elected leaders.

"The governor is very involved in these discussions and he remains hopeful that we can reach a place where all of these measures come off the ballot," Dreyer said Tuesday morning.

Amendment 47 would outlaw mandatory union dues for workers covered by collective bargaining contracts.

Labor groups fired back with four competing ballot measures, all of which business leaders fear could dampen business interest in Colorado.

So far, right-to-work proponents have said they have no plans to pull their measure from the ballot by the early October deadline.

Backers of the labor measures, however, have indicated a willingness to drop their proposals if right-to-work supporters withdraw their measure.

kelleyj@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5068

Laboring for a deal

Labor and business leaders held talks with elected officials at the Governor's Mansion on Tuesday night to attempt a deal to defuse a ballot box battle this fall. The latest negotiations ended without an immediate resolution but involve a possible withdrawal of four ballot measure by labor groups in return for business support in defeating three anti-union measures.

LABOR-BACKED PROPOSALS OPPOSED BY BUSINESS

* A "corporate fraud" initiative that would make an executive criminally liable for fraudulent activity they know about but fail to report within their businesses.

* Requiring employers with 20 or more employees to provide health insurance, limiting the amount employees would pay to 20 percent or 30 percent for dependent coverage.

* Allowing injured employees to seek additional damages in court beyond workers compensation benefits

* A ban on firing employees without a specific reason and the ability for them to sue if they decide they've been improperly let go.

AMENDMENTS UNIONS ARE FIGHTING

* A "right-to-work" amendment that would do away with the current practice of allowing workers to vote on whether they want an "all-union" agreement that requires employees to pay dues to cover the cost of being represented by a union that negotiates wages and other benefits.

* A measure that would bar governments in Colorado from taking union dues directly out of workers' paychecks.

* A proposed ban on sole-source government contractors contributing to political candidates. Opponents have said that the measure takes aim at unions, which hold exclusive-rights bargaining contracts with some governments.

Comments

  • September 17, 2008

    8:32 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    goodguy writes:

    Governor Ritter is lucky Salazar, Perlmutter and Hickenlooper are trying to help bail him out of what could be a very bad economic outcome for Colorado. I wonder if the Governor and his advisors understood what the fall out of the executive order would be when he signed it last year. The hundreds of thousands of dollars being spent to fight right to work and all the labor initiatives, could have been spent on the SAFE initiative that actually does something beneficial for Colorado. I hope the Governor will now rely more on the expertise of Sen. Salazar and Mayor Hickenlooper before he makes any more rash policy decisions. They both seem to really understand what is good for Colorado.

  • September 17, 2008

    9:09 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Scott writes:

    Oh goody goody, corrupt politicians, big business and the mafia (unions) are colluding. This sounds like a match made in Hell. The anti-business amendments came directly from the mafia's effort to put a "poison pill" into Colorado's business environment if they are forced to play fair. Playing fair means that workers do NOT have to pay protection (union dues) to the mafia for the "privilege" to work.

    Now Tax Ritter, et al, are scrambling to cover their backsides before the election. So who will lose in the end? The guys and gals that want to work at their chosen place of employment. If the afore mentioned hoods force the Amendment 47 backers to pull the measure, then the guys and gals will be forced to pay protection to the mafia. If the mafia's amendments win, then there is a good chance that business will avoid and/or leave Colorado.

    Scott

  • September 17, 2008

    11:08 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    AnarchoCapitalist writes:

    The Rocky gets it wrong on Colorado Amendment 49. It's not anti-union, it's anti-special interest. The government should not be the accountant, collection agency, and bookkeeper for special interests who turn right around and lobby those same governments! Here is the low down on this amendment:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMywac...

  • September 17, 2008

    11:21 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    ObiWan writes:

    Anarcho writes: "The government should not be the accountant, collection agency, and bookkeeper for special interests who turn right around and lobby those same governments!"

    That's exactly right, and couldn't be more clear. It's only unclear when the opponents to the Amendment talk about it. Colorado Amendment 49 is about getting government back to doing the ESSENTIALS....right now they've got so much "unessential" work to do, we wonder why there's so much bureaucratic red tape and delay any time you work with a gvmt agency.

    To get a greater feel of what the Ethical Standards Amendment would do, ask yourself, how would you feel if tax dollars were being used to bundle money for the NRA, the GOP, or the ACLU? As it is now, government uses taxpayer dollars to do free $$ collecting for a *few* special interests....the best thing is to eliminate the practice altogether, and make it constitutional so no governor or assembly can screw it up later.

  • September 17, 2008

    12:28 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    BrianSchwartz writes:

    Forcing employers to buy insurance is immoral and impractical. For why, see here:
    http://www.patientpowernow.org/2008/0...

  • September 17, 2008

    1:48 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Formerjournalist writes:

    What is Jonathan Coors getting out of supporting right-to-work? Doesn't anybody ask? He's not supporting it to "punish" Gov. Ritter. That can't be enough of a reason. Coors is backing this to meet a larger objective, something that has little, if anything, to do with Colorado or what's best for our state. It has to do with what's best for Jonathan Coors' personal, political ambitions. Or it's on behalf of big corporate interests that want to undermine the value of government for the middle class while creating new corporate opportunites for profit at the cost of the middle class. When will Coloradans - and working journalists - start asking why?

  • September 17, 2008

    3:13 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    gabbahey writes:

    @ formerjournalist - I think you hit the problem on the head. 47 is a rich kid's plaything to give him credibility with the far right. He should just pay for grad school and leave Colorado's workers alone.

    Colorado law has worked for 60+ years and created a unique balance between business and labor. Coors wants to destroy this for personal gain.

  • September 18, 2008

    1:03 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    Governor Ritter gave government workers the Right to Work when he unionized them, now he opposes the same Right-to-Work for the rest of Colorado. WTF?

    Now the Chamber wants to pay the union to oppose Right to Work? WTF?

  • September 22, 2008

    8:38 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    momnpop writes:

    As a small business owner of 15 years and Colorado Native, my business is now for sale. Forget about Tabor - We still can't get past the Gallagher Amendment which penalizes our seasonal small business and Coloradoans are still at it - working to put small enterprise out of business.

    Those of you who still have jobs may enjoy shopping at big box franchises and paying more. Big money and Labor Unions are using the ballot amendments to retaliate against one another and the our elected officials haven't done enough to stop it! How about a boycott on Coors, King Sooper's, Safeway & Albertson's!