Bill to remove Colorado requirement for second vote to unionize passes House committee

Yahoo

14-03-2025

Kaiser Permanente workers with the SEIU Local 105 union strike on Oct. 4, 2023, at the Lakewood Medical Offices in Colorado. (Lindsey Toomer/ Colorado Newsline)
A Colorado House of Representatives committee approved a bill Thursday that would make it easier to form unions in Colorado by removing the state's requirement for a second vote.
Senate Bill 25-5, dubbed the Worker Protection Act, would eliminate a second election mandated by Colorado's Labor Peace Act to form a union, a requirement unique to Colorado that passed in the 1940s. Federal law allows employees to unionize with a simple majority vote, but Colorado workers must participate in a second vote with 75% approval to determine if workers who don't support the union have to pay representation fees.
'Strong worker protections and thriving business go hand in hand,' said Rep. Javier Mabrey, a Denver Democrat who sponsored the bill. 'All of us want business to thrive, but businesses thriving should not be on the backs of workers. It shouldn't be based on paying workers wages where they can't afford to live in the communities that they serve.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The House Business Affairs and Labor Committee, meeting at the Colorado Capitol in Denver, voted 7-5 to pass the bill along party lines, with Republicans voting against it after witness testimony ran late into the night. One Democrat on the committee, Rep. Bob Marshall of Highlands Ranch, was excused during the vote. He offered an amendment the committee ultimately did not vote on because it was determined to be outside the scope of the bill's title, and bill sponsors said neither workers nor business asked for the changes the amendment proposed.
In his opening remarks, Mabrey emphasized the fact that five former U.S. secretaries of Labor wrote to Colorado Gov. Jared Polis in support of the bill in early February, saying the requirement for a second vote creates 'an unnecessary barrier' to unionization. Polis has suggested that he will not support the legislation unless a compromise arises.
At a press conference Thursday, Polis told reporters the bill is about 'the right of workers to have a say on whether they're forced to pay union dues,' and that a second election provides that. He said he will support a solution that presents 'a way of organizing that's more stable,' though he would not state directly whether he would sign the bill as is.
'I'm optimistic that labor and business are talking. I hope that those conversations are fruitful,' Polis said. 'I encourage both sides to come to an agreement that is good for business and good for labor.'
Strong worker protections and thriving business go hand in hand.
– State Rep. Javier Mabrey, a Denver Democrat
Rep. Max Brooks, a Castle Rock Republican on the business committee, asked if the second vote was a 'barrier' as bill sponsors described it, or more of an additional step. Assistant House Majority Leader Jennifer Bacon, a Denver Democrat who also sponsored the bill, said the requirement for a second election adds more time that businesses and employers can dissuade workers from voting in favor of a union.
'If we know that a community of workers believes they want to work together, they should be able to make that decision once and not be challenged to have to do it again,' Bacon said. 'If we want to call it step, I'd be OK with that, but I do want to recognize that the step is much more rigorous than the first.'
Terri Monley, who owns a 'family-owned and operated' moving company in Denver that opened in the 1970s, said the requirement for a second vote is 'an antiquated law that serves no common good.' She told the committee the decision on whether a contract should include union security should be between the workers and their employer.
'For far too long, the state Legislature has put the economic desires and the wants of the wealthiest above the rest of us,' Monley said. 'Putting arbitrary and onerous laws on people who are trying to form a union only delays and lengthens the process. There is no point to this tactic, except in helping businesses wear down their employees. And Colorado should have no role in this tactic.'
Jeremy Ross, who spoke on behalf of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, said 'not a single worker' has testified in opposition to the bill. He said workers have 'choice' throughout the whole process of unionizing and what the union will do for them.
'Not a single worker (came) up here and said, 'I am in a position where I was forced to pay union dues and I have no voice in where those union dues go,'' he said. 'The union process is a Democratic process from the very beginning, from the very second that you elect a union or if you're getting employment at a union employer.'
Leaders with various business associations, chambers of commerce and companies testified against the bill. Sonia Riggs, president and CEO of the Colorado Restaurant Association, said the restaurant industry is 'being directly targeted by unions,' listing businesses in the state that have unionized in recent years.
'This bill is extremely burdensome for Colorado restaurant workers,' Riggs said. 'Any employee who isn't able to be there for the proposed one and only union vote for any reason — a school exam, a sick child or parent, bad weather or simply working a different shift — is denied a voice in an important decision that impacts whether or not they are forced to pay union dues or quit their jobs.'
The bill passed the Colorado Senate in a 22-12 vote along party lines in February, with Republicans in opposition. It will now move to the House Appropriations Committee before it is heard on the House floor.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE