Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

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

Talks to resume to avert labor ballot battle

Businesses, unions seek compromise on right-to-work

By Joanne Kelley, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published September 18, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

Related Links

More Elections

More stories »

Union and business leaders plan to meet again as early as Friday to resume negotiations aimed at diminishing an all-out ballot initiative clash in November, sources told the Rocky Mountain News on Wednesday.

An alliance known as Colorado Concern has emerged as a key player in the latest talks, which involve the terms over which labor groups would pull their four measures if business leaders help them fight three other measures including a controversial "right to work" amendment.

Talks began Sunday but sources said they were suspended Tuesday night at the governor's mansion before a deal could be reached about how much money it would take to mount a concerted campaign to defeat three measures viewed as anti-union.

Sources say the money would come directly from business leaders or their companies rather than directly from Colorado Concern or any other umbrella group such as the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce.

Colorado Concern board members present at the negotiations with elected officials in recent days include: Walter Isenberg of Sage Hospitality Resources, Denver Performing Arts Center Chairman Dan Ritchie and Oakwood Homes' Patrick Hamill.

An e-mail, obtained by the Rocky and addressed to Colorado Concern board members, details some of the terms of the negotiations, including finding ways to get business leaders involved in advocating against the "right-to-work" amendment and the two others.

"We are asking ALL members of the Executive Committee to reach out to your respective networks to secure other individuals from the business community - whether affiliated with Colorado Concern or not - to help with this effort," wrote Colorado Concern Executive Director Janice Sinden in the e-mail.

Business leaders involved with the group raised commitments of $500,000 by Tuesday night's meeting, with that money earmarked toward an issue committee devoted to a "no" campaign on the "anti-union" measures.

Colorado Concern board members Steve Farber, Hamill, and Rick Sapkin were assigned to make phone calls, as was Isenberg, the group's board chairman.

Chamber President Joe Blake attended the two meetings this week and also sits on the Colorado Concern board. But he has emphasized that the Chamber will not spend any of its own resources to fight the three measures opposed by organized labor.

In an address Wednesday at the chamber's annual membership lunch, Blake steered clear of talk about a compromise, instead calling on the audience to defeat the four proposals sought by unions.

Among them: a requirement that employers pay 80 percent of employee health-care premiums and another that would force businesses to give specific reason for letting employees go.

Blake later expressed pessimism that a compromise could be reached that would lead to the withdrawal of the measures.

Others close to the talks remained confident both sides could hammer out a compromise by the Oct. 2 withdrawal deadline: 33 days before the Nov. 4 election.

The "right-to-work" issue has split business leaders, some of whom would prefer to keep the status quo on Colorado labor laws. But even Colorado Concern's Web site shows that 88 percent of its members surveyed last year would support a constitutional "right-to-work" amendment.

Two union groups already have raised several million dollars to fight three ballot measures, especially the "right-to-work" initiative that would ban compulsory union dues even for those workers who are covered by collective bargaining contracts.

Comments

  • September 18, 2008

    12:12 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    gabbahey writes:

    Business leaders raised $500,000 for a no campaign for amendment 47 et al? They must see how dangerous these new constitutional amendments would be to Colorado's economy and uniquely balanced labor business relations.

  • September 18, 2008

    12:24 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    BrianSchwartz writes:

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