Lawmakers aim to clarify definitions for the public sector collective bargaining ban
HB327 is sponsored by Sen. Lincoln Fillmore, R-South Jordan, and would narrow the definition of a union and expand the definition of a public employer for the previously passed public labor unions bill, HB267.
Fillmore's new bill builds onto the provisions of HB267 which bans public sector collective bargaining and was sponsored by Jordan Teuscher, R-South Jordan. Collective bargaining is when an employer and a union come together to negotiate a contract for employees, with the labor union acting as the sole bargaining agent for the employees.
Under HB327, an organization that contracts with government agencies to do internal work would be excluded from the definition of labor organization or union. These groups, such as law firms or human resources films, would not fall under the restrictions set by HB267.
'The issue was that in 267 the labor union definition, which is new, was maybe a little bit broad and had the potential of encompassing contract organizations that were not intended,' said Michael K. Mckell, R-Spanish Fork.
It would also expand the definition of public employees to include charter schools and schools for the deaf and the blind into the collective bargaining ban. This bill does not exclude any union from HB267's collective bargaining ban.
Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, said this bill is essentially a cleanup bill that they decided to run before the end of the session.
The bill also clarifies the definitions for other terms in HB267 such as union activities, labor union members, political purposes and labor organization representatives.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
23 minutes ago
- Politico
If you suddenly got added to Jaime Harrison's Substack, you're not alone
The way he built his Substack list, however, has attracted negative attention online, with several X users expressing outrage that they were added to his Substack without their permission or even knowledge. One user wrote, 'The horrors of giving my email to Democrats never cease. Why tf did I get auto-subscribed to Jaime Harrison's Substack,' while another wrote, 'Just found out I was automatically subscribed to Jaime Harrison's Substack without my knowledge or consent.' The spokesperson for Substack, granted anonymity to speak freely, declined to comment on Harrison's case but said the company's guidelines 'require that any mailing list a publisher imports be made up of people who have explicitly opted in to receive emails from that publication' and that lists purchased or collected without consent (which frequently happens on campaigns) are not permitted. The spokesperson bolded the phrase 'explicitly opted in.' The spokesperson said Substack runs basic checks for issues including invalid addresses but that it doesn't have a way to verify how emails were collected. Harrison said in a brief phone interview that he 'assumed' his team had followed Substack's rules but added, 'For me, knowing email stuff and all that other stuff, I don't follow this stuff.' In a follow-up text message, he said he had abided by all Substack policies and that his team 'worked directly with Substack to upload our list, which was collected from my Senate campaign and other personal activities.' A spokesperson for Harrison declined to give POLITICO the name of the Substack representative they dealt with and said such interactions were done only over the phone. Several other Democratic politicians with Substacks have chosen different ways to build up their newsletter lists. A person familiar with Pete Buttigieg's Substack, granted anonymity to discuss the matter, said the former transportation secretary is only using organic ways to grow his Substack, which has around 600,000 followers, and that his team doesn't pull any lists over. A spokesperson for Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said he's also grown his Substack organically and didn't think it was necessary to pull subscribers from his campaign email list. The person said the video interviews the senator has done with anti-Trump influencers Jim Acosta and Jennifer Rubin, as well as journalist Anand Giridharadas, have been very helpful in adding new subscribers, now totaling more than 65,000.
23 minutes ago
Texas, California legislatures gear up for major redistricting face off
Texas Republicans are triumphant Thursday morning after a success in their efforts to redraw the state's congressional maps – but California Democrats are set to make their move, in a redistricting battle that has become a proxy war between President Donald Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. After a long day of debate on Wednesday, the Texas House of Representatives passed a bill with new congressional maps that could flip five congressional districts red by making them more favorable for Republicans. Democrats, who had fled the state to deny a quorum in the legislature for weeks, now say they are ready to take on the maps in court. "Big WIN for the Great State of Texas!!! Everything Passed, on our way to FIVE more Congressional seats and saving your Rights, your Freedoms, and your Country, itself. Texas never lets us down," Trump, who pushed Texas to redraw maps, wrote on his social media platform late Wednesday. The state Senate is set to consider the maps bill on Thursday, and the bill is likely on a glide path to the desk of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott. "While Democrats shirked their duty, in futility, and ran away to other states, Republicans stayed the course, stayed at work and stayed true to Texas. I will sign this bill once it passes the Senate and gets to my desk," Abbott wrote on Wednesday. In California, both bodies of the state legislature meet on Thursday and are set to take on and potentially pass legislation that would put new maps on the ballot in a November special election. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been pushing the initiative and says new maps in California would only take effect if other states redraw lines, wrote on X late Wednesday, "Congratulations to @GregAbbott_TX -- you will now go down in history as one of Donald Trump's most loyal lapdogs. Shredding our nation's founding principles. What a legacy." And in another post, he simply wrote, "It's on, Texas." Former President Barack Obama weighed in on the situation Tuesday evening, backing Newsom. "Given that Texas is taking direction from a partisan White House that is effectively saying: gerrymander for partisan purposes so we can maintain the House despite our unpopular policies, redistrict right in the middle of a decade between censuses – which is not how the system was designed; I have tremendous respect for how Governor Newsom has approached this," Obama said at a fundraiser in Martha's Vinyard. "Because what he has said is, I would prefer not to do it. If we were to redraw our maps, we could obviously gain more Democratic seats. That is not my preference, but we cannot unilaterally allow one of the two major parties to rig the game. And California is one of the states that has the capacity to offset a large state like Texas," he added. Trump, on his own platform, criticized Newsom early Thursday, claiming the governor was "way down in the polls." "He is viewed as the man who is destroying the once Great State of California," the president posted. Republican legislators in California have said the endeavor to get new maps on the ballot is overly costly and subverts the will of the voters in California, who they say support independent redistricting.
UPI
an hour ago
- UPI
California Democrats to pass redistricting map to offset Texas
California Governor Gavin Newsom and Democrats in the state's legislature have begin the process of redistricting the state's election maps to give the state more Democratic seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. File Photo by Jonathan Alcorn/UPI | License Photo Aug. 21 (UPI) -- California is preparing to counter with a redistricting plan to add five likely Democratic seats to the U.S. House of Representatives after Texas approved its own redistricting map favoring Republicans. The California state Assembly and Senate will consider three bills that will allow for a special election to pass a constitutional amendment to replace the state's existing congressional maps through 2030. Then Democrats must convince Californians to vote to overturn the congressional maps drafted by the independent redistricting commission voters that were first empowered to draw the lines in 2010. Texas approved its redistricting map Thursday night, despite weeks of protest. The Texas Senate is expected to approve the measure Friday and pass the bill along to Gov. Greg Abbott, R, who will certainly sign. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, D, has vowed to create more seats for Democrats in Congress by creating a new map in its own state, the most populous in the nation. "It's on, Texas," Newsom tweeted Wednesday night. The orders for the special election must be transmitted to California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, a Democrat, by Friday to get the measure on the November ballot. California Democrats have said their redistricting push is a reaction to the Texas plan and President Donald Trump's effort to create a more favorable 2026 midterm election map. The California legislation includes a trigger clause that says the state will only redistrict if other states like Texas seek to implement their own mid-decade redistricting. The package of bills was advanced by the Assembly and Senate's appropriations committees on Wednesday. The state Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a challenge from state Republicans who filed a lawsuit earlier this week requesting an emergency injunction to stop the redistricting effort on the grounds that the legislature didn't give voters enough notice. California has an independent redistricting committee process that is popular with voters, and Newsom and his allies insist that they still support that. But they argue that their partisan response to Texas is necessary to check the power of Trump. During a call with reporters organized by the Democratic National Committee on Wednesday, Newsom said the fight is "the rule of Don versus the rule of law." "This is a different person. This is a different presidency," Newsom said of Trump's second term. "It requires a different approach than we've seen in the past. And so I think this is the ultimate wake-up call -- trying to rig this election before one vote is even cast before 2026."
