Latest news with #AmendmentA
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
What really happened with the bill banning collective bargaining?
A bill banning public sector collective bargaining was one of the most controversial bills of the 2025 session, but the bill sponsor, Rep. Jordan Teuscher shared that this bill has been a work in progress for years. HB267 was signed by Gov. Spencer Cox on Feb. 14, and last week Teuscher, R-South Jordan, had an op-ed published in The Wall Street Journal which described what his negotiations with public labor unions, specifically the Utah Education Association, looked like. After the op-ed ran, Teuscher offered context and background on HB267 and his thoughts on public labor unions to the Deseret News. In the op-ed, Teuscher specifically called out certain actions of the Utah Education Association, one of the biggest advocates against HB267. He said the union went back on promises made and was difficult to work with. In response to what Teuscher wrote, the UEA told the Deseret News they disagreed with Teuscher's characterizations of the negotiations, adding they didn't make the promises he said they did. Teuscher said the path to introducing HB267 started after he worked with the UEA and other unions while running a bill on curriculum transparency in schools. During that time he said he recognized issues with the public labor unions that he wanted to address. 'As I dived into it, learned more about how collective bargaining worked and how you have some districts that have 25% of members of the union that get to speak for 100% of everyone, and they have this monopoly in collective bargaining, I thought, 'this is wrong,'' Teuscher said. During the 2023 session, he introduced HB241, which focused on the financial side of public labor unions. Teuscher said he introduced that bill late in the session to gauge reactions and to see how he could move forward with similar legislation in the future. Teuscher returned in 2024 with HB285, which addressed collective bargaining as well as payroll deductions. 'It had the recertification provision in it that said, in order to collective bargain, you have to have at least 50% of the members of the employee class be members of the union,' Teuscher said. Many unions were against the bill. Teuscher said he had the votes to pass the bill a year ago but after feedback from stakeholders and conversations with leadership, he decided to pull the bill as a measure of good faith. Along with negotiations for pulling HB285, Teuscher said the UEA agreed to stay neutral on Amendment A — a constitutional amendment that would have expanded how the income tax could be used — and he believed collaboration would be better than confrontation. 'We were wrong. The moment the legislative session ended, the UEA reneged. Not only did it oppose the amendment, it also filed a lawsuit to remove it from the November ballot. The union exploited our good faith,' Teuscher wrote for The Wall Street Journal. In a statement to the Deseret News the UEA said they never agreed to be neutral on Amendment A. Over the interim, he worked on preparing a new bill focused on public labor unions and collective bargaining, which became HB267. Teuscher said he told the unions he would be putting together a new bill for 2025, but that it had nothing to do with Amendment A and what happened in 2024. He said one reason he chose to address public sector collective bargaining completely with HB267 is because he heard from teachers who said that even with unions who have a majority of employees as members, there were still people who weren't able to have their voices heard. He said he also decided during the interim that he didn't believe he could work well with the UEA. 'I've tried working with the UEA. ...It doesn't get me anywhere. They're not a good faith actor. We saw what they did at the end of the session. They made promises during the session on Amendment A and completely reneged on that promise,' Teuscher said. In the statement sent to the Deseret News the UEA responded to claims made by Teuscher in his Wall Street Journal piece. 'It was disheartening to see Rep. Jordan Teuscher use a national platform to misrepresent the Utah Education Association's (UEA) positions on Constitutional Amendment A and the 2025 labor bill. Utahns deserve honest discussions, not misleading claims that attempt to undermine those who serve our communities every day,' read the statement from the UEA. As the bill made its way through the Legislature, some referred to HB267 as Teuscher's 'revenge bill' against the UEA. But, Teuscher said, 'I've been working on this issue for a really long time, and trying to get the right policy in place. Just because they've been a bad actor isn't the reason that we're running this bill now.' When HB267 was first introduced at the start of the session there was immediate backlash. Hundreds of public employees opposed to the bill filled multiple overflow rooms. Other lawmakers said they had heard more about HB267 from their constituents than any other bill. Because of this reaction, Teuscher said he worked with the unions to try to come to a compromise. The original version of the bill completely banned collective bargaining, and after negotiations, Teuscher published a substitute to the bill that would allow collective bargaining if a majority of employees were members of the bargaining unit. 'You know, no one worked harder to try to get to that compromise. And I truly believe that. I mean, how many meetings, late night meetings we had with labor unions in this room trying to get to somewhere or phone calls or whatever,' Teuscher said. When the substitute was first decided on, Teuscher said he had eight major public labor unions in the state neutral on the bill, but then after the substitute was introduced some of the unions took back their support. He said he heard some of them reneged because their national parent organizations asked them to. The bill was sitting in the Senate while Teuscher and others were working towards a compromise. After the compromise did not work out, the Senate decided to go ahead and pass the original version of the bill to completely ban public sector collective bargaining. The UEA told the Deseret News that they believe they honored their commitment to be neutral on the changes made to HB267. In his interview with the Deseret News, Teuscher expressed concern that the Republican Party is becoming friendlier with public sector unions, referencing Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, working on legislation to expand unions' powers and the Teamsters speaking at the Republican Convention. This concern is what led him write the piece for The Wall Street Journal. 'I'm like, guys, this is not the direction that we should be going as a party, and so I felt like it was important to share that message nationally,' Teuscher said. HB267 will prohibit public sector collective bargaining. Collective bargaining is when an employer and a union come together to negotiate a contract for employees. The bill also provides professional liability insurance that teachers would be able to opt into. Teuscher also submitted a Request for Appropriations that would give the state government the option to pay for part of these insurance policies for teachers. Now that the bill has been signed it will go into effect on July 1, 2025. 'What it doesn't do is it doesn't affect the relationship between any employer or employee in the state that wants to identify with a union, join a union, pay union dues, participate in a union, do union activity,' Teuscher said.
Yahoo
04-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
No elimination of Utah's social security tax, says state budget chair
SALT LAKE CITY () — The puzzle over tax cuts during the 2025 legislative session is , and one of Utah's top budget chairs is now solidifying that the legislature will not eliminate the state portion of income tax on social security benefits — but will cut it some. 'There will be a tax cut on Social Security, but it will not be an elimination of the social security tax,' Sen. Jerry Stevensen, who chairs the powerful Executive Appropriations Committee (EAC) told reporters Monday. A bill run by Republican Sen. Wayne Harper (R – West Jordan) that would eliminate that tax for seniors passed out of committee earlier in the day, but it was agreed upon that there weren't enough funds (about $144 million) to cut the tax altogether. The sponsor said ultimately, the cut would be made at whatever level the EAC budgeted for. Legal professionals protest against bills that seek to reshape Utah's judicial branch Sen. President J. Stuart Adams (R – Kaysville) said the threshold for exempting people from the tax would be $80,000 to $100,000. During the committee, Sen. Lincoln Fillmore (R – South Jordan) argued that the majority of retirees already don't pay the tax, and its elimination would only help about 20% of the state's seniors. He took issue with the fact that the wealthiest seniors would get the most help. 'Why would you prefer that the small minority of your most wealthy members get a very large tax cut instead of everybody in your coalition getting a tax cut — instead of leaving the vast majority with no help at all?' he said, pushing back on the AARP who spoke in favor of eliminating it. Fillmore noted that if the legislature can raise this social security income cap and cut the income tax like they plan to do, that would help everyone. Sen. Dan McCay took a harsher tone, saying the committee was moving forward a bill that consolidated wealth for people over 65, and he found it 'morally wrong.' Gov. Spencer Cox wanted the full repeal of the social security tax and called for it in his proposed 2025 budget. In a lean fiscal year, the EAC had already set aside a total of $165 million for some sort of tax cut (which was supposed to go toward the cuts from Amendment A). So far, a proposed income tax rate cut, expanding the child tax credit, and enacting a nonrefundable corporate and individual tax credit for businesses to provide child care would cost the state around $103 million. That means there's roughly $62 million left over for this social security tax cut. 'My commitment is whatever we get this funded at, that's what the bill will run as,' Harper said, arguing that the committee should pass the bill, but it will be changed later. On Friday, the EAC outlined the state's roughly , but tweaks are still possible through Wednesday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
30-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Too ‘politically active?' Senate committee narrowly advances public union bargaining restrictions
SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — A hotly contested bill that would block public labor unions from engaging in collective bargaining in Utah squeaked through a Senate committee Wednesday, passing by only one vote. Sen. Dan McCay (R – Bluffdale), who also chairs the Senate Tax and Revenue where the bill was heard, urged continued compromise as he cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of moving to the full Senate, 4-3. PREVIOUS STORY: Bill to block public unions from collectively bargaining passes Utah House The committee room was packed with teachers, firefighters, and police — all public workers that could be impacted by the bill's passage. However, one of the more tense moments centered around whether the bill was being run because Utah's public unions — and more specifically, their leaders or national organizers — have been too 'politically active.' 'I think there's a lot of support for the members of the various unions with a lot of skepticism toward the union organizations because of their political activities that particularly only go one direction where their members do not,' said Sen. Brady Brammer (R – Pleasant Grove) while questioning a local president of the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees on whether his union fees were going toward his union's political work. Critics have argued that the bill is a retaliation for the state's largest teacher's union, the , for being involved in a lawsuit over Amendment A, which was voided from last year's ballot. However, Sen. Luz Escamilla (D – Salt Lake City) pushed for clarification on whether the bill was about the political contributions of public labor unions, insisting that political action committees sometimes with the same name are often behind a union's political activity. The bill's sponsor, Jordan Teuscher (R – South Jordan), said his bill changes nothing about political activity and has nothing to do with that. Sen. Brammer, however, was more blunt. 'One of the concerns that I have is when the unions get involved in campaign finance and then they're negotiating against the very people that they're oftentimes donating to,' Brammer said. Brammer also pushed the local union president, Jerry Philpott, on whether he supported his union's political activity and argued the group spent $13 million in campaign donations. Philpott pushed back against this, saying the dues of union members don't go toward union political activities: 'As a private citizen, I should be able to donate to any political candidate that I want.' Escamilla also expressed concern that a ban on collective bargaining could impact the 'livelihood' of many union members who she says won't have anyone to protect them. She said she worries that unions provide an opportunity to have 'access' to members who wouldn't otherwise get that access. 'Even if there is good faith on what the sponsors are trying to fix, it may be causing more problems than what they're going to be fixing,' Escamilla said. The local vice president of the Communication Workers of America agreed with this, pointing out in the public comment period that if public employers are prohibited from interacting with unions, it doesn't stop unions from organizing and striking. 'Utah organized labor is much happier to resolve things with a contract than on the picket lines,' he began. 'But we understand that we are the people who [make] this state run, and our desire for a dignified life, for dignified conditions, for a voice are not going away because of this bill.' In the end, Teuscher reiterated that the bill is about banning collective bargaining so the union leaders aren't the sole voice in negotiations. 'The definition of a bargain is an agreement between two or more parties as to what each party will do for them, that's what we're prohibiting,' Teuscher said. 'It doesn't mean they can't continue to talk, advocate, discuss, present priorities, and represent their people in any way possible. ' With its passage in committee, H.B. 267 inches closer to being passed as it goes for a vote on the Senate floor. If it passes — and if changes made by the Senate are approved by the House — the bill will go to Gov. Cox for signing. Stay up-to-date with the 2025 General Session by visiting Inside Utah Politics. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
