Labor, business square off for Nov. election

Editor’s note: Between now and the Nov. 4 election, the Business Report will be reporting on ballot issues of particular importance to the business community in Northern Colorado. The oil-and-gas severance tax credit issue was examined in our Aug. 15 issue, before it was officially certified by the Secretary of State; it will appear on the ballot as Amendment 58.

Millions of dollars are being spent this election season as labor and business forces line up to oppose each other on proposed amendments to the Colorado constitution, including Amendment 56, which would require employers to provide health insurance for their employees.

The measure, proposed by the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 7 based in Wheat Ridge, would mandate businesses with 20 or more employees to provide major medical coverage to their workers and their dependents.

Union officials say the time has come for employers – who have increasingly offered less coverage to their workers in response to ever-rising health care costs – to step up and make a commitment to a healthy workforce.

“It’s basic human rights, and any responsible employer should want to provide health care for their workers,´ said Manny Gonzalez, Local 7 spokesman.

But business groups say the measure would be devastating, especially to small business.

“That’s a huge cost to business,´ said Holli Baumunk, chair of the Economic Development Council of Colorado. “To make it mandatory will put tons of businesses out of business.”

An escalating fight

Amendment 56 grew out of Initiative 92, for which sponsors gathered 171,331 signatures – far more than the 76,047 needed to place a measure on the Nov. 4 ballot.

The proposed amendment was one of several initiatives filed by union forces after the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry endorsed Amendment 47, which would prohibit forcing any workers to belong to an established union or have union dues deducted from their paychecks if they are not union members. Unions view Amendment 47 as a union-busting move by business in a state already low in union membership.

Supporters of 47 say no one should be forced to join a union or pay union dues as a condition of employment.

According to the most recent campaign finance reports filed Sept. 3 with the Colorado Secretary of State, Coloradans for Middle Class Relief have contributed $1.6 million to the passage of Amendment 56. All of that money came from the UFCW.

Coloradans for Responsible Reform, representing a coalition of business groups, has also raised $1.6 million to oppose Amendment 56 as well as Amendments 53, 55 and 57.

Amendment 53 would establish liability for executives of businesses found guilty of criminal conduct. Amendment 55 would require employers to show just cause for employee discharge or suspension, and Amendment 57 would require employers to maintain a safe and healthy workplace, according to the official ballot language.

Coloradans for Responsible Reform supporters include the Associated General Contractors of Colorado, the Colorado Bankers Association, the Colorado Chapter of the National Federation of Independent Business, Colorado Farm Bureau, Colorado Nonprofit Association and the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce, the biggest single contributor with $314,000 donated.

Todd Vitale, Coloradans for Responsible Reform spokesman, said Amendment 56 poses a grave future for Colorado’s economy. “Like all the (union-backed) measures, we think it will be devastating to Colorado, resulting in lower wages, lost benefits and job cuts in the state,” he said. “It’ll be most hurtful to the people these are supposed to be helping.”

Bad for Northern Colorado

Maury Dobbie, president and CEO of the Northern Colorado Economic Development Corp. in Loveland which promotes job creation in Larimer County, said Amendment 56 is bad for the region.

“We oppose anything that’s going to hurt local business and we feel this will very much do that,” she said. “I think it will create more hardships for companies wanting to do the right thing for their employees but are not able to afford it.”

Dobbie said she’s already heard of some prospective companies considering Colorado as a business location deciding to look elsewhere. “I’m very concerned about businesses considering our state that might decide to pass on locating here or existing businesses (deciding against) expanding,” she said.

That sentiment is shared by EDCC’s Baumunk. “What we’re concerned about is this will be a disincentive to grow, that (small) business will decide to outsource or not expand beyond 19 employees,” she said. “If there’s a choice between expanding in Colorado or to another state, it could be a choice to send those jobs to another state.”

Baumunk said business understands the health-care crisis and sympathizes with employees who are struggling to obtain coverage. “We’re not against health-care coverage because it does need to be fixed, but this is not the way to do it and put most of the burden on small business,” she said.

Economic poison?

UFCW’s Gonzalez said the union could have simply stayed away from trying to get worker health-care coverage for non-union workers in Colorado and focused on its own membership through its collective bargaining agreements.

“But we felt it was in the best interests of all Colorado workers,” he said. “This was designed for all of Colorado’s workers. Our intention is to protect Colorado’s middle-class workers.”

Gonzalez dismisses criticism of Amendment 56 that it will have a dire impact on business. “Obviously, employers are going to say that because they don’t want to provide health care to their workers,” he said. “We feel a healthy workforce equals a healthy company and a healthy economy.”

But Vitale said business sees it a different way. “These measures were advanced by organized labor with the intent of being as punitive as possible to Colorado business,” he said. “They were put forward as a negotiating tactic to get Amendment 47 off the ballot. Since that tactic has failed, Colorado workers are going to be the innocent victims of these punitive, economy-killing poison pills.”

While a compromise is not considered likely, supporters of Amendments 47 and 56 can still remove the ballot measures if they take action by Oct. 2.

on Facebook on LinkedIn