Gov. Jared Polis is once again on a collision course with fellow Democrats in the state Legislature and the Colorado labor movement.
The governor quickly pooh-poohed a piece of legislation unveiled earlier this month that unions say will be their priority when state lawmakers reconvene at the Capitol in January. The bill has the backing of top legislative Democrats, as well as the chairman of the Colorado Democratic Party.
The divide is likely to inflame tensions that flared when Polis vetoed three of the labor movement’s bills passed during the 2024 legislative session. During a May protest on the steps of the Capitol, hundreds of demonstrators, flanked by some of the most prominent Democrats in the state, shouted “Shame on Polis!” Some wore “Polis failed workers” T-shirts as they gathered under a banner that said “Governor Polis turned his back on us.”
Ahead of next year’s legislative session, unions are starting their pressure campaign on the governor early. And they are deploying their most influential supporters.
“I’m very proud to be here with all these Democrats – our brothers and sisters in labor – to make sure that we put our money where our mouth is,” Colorado Democratic Party Chairman Shad Murib said during a Nov. 19 labor rally in the foyer outside Polis’ office at the state Capitol.
He was the closing speaker at the event, emphasizing a point made by other speakers.
“This is where we get a chance to put up or shut up,” state Rep. Javier Mabrey, D-Denver, said at the rally. “Which side are you on, Colorado Democrats? The power is completely in our hands.”
The rally was held to unveil a bill that will be introduced during the legislative session that would make it easier for unions to organize in Colorado.
The bill would eliminate a barrier before unions and employers can negotiate whether all employees should have to pay representation fees to the union, whether they are part of the union or not. That’s known as union security. Right now, those union security negotiations can only happen after a vote of employees, and it requires as much as 75% of eligible workers’ support to pass.
That vote is in addition to the simple majority vote required to form a union in the first place. The requirement is unique to Colorado and is part of the Labor Peace Act, a 1943 state law.
Union supporters say the second-vote requirement is an unfair burden for workers who want to collectively bargain.
“That 75% turnout is insane,” Alejo R. González, political and community coordinator at Service Employees International Union Local 105 in Denver, told The Colorado Sun earlier this year. “It’s hard to get that many people to vote. … And a lot of companies won’t start bargaining until that happens.”
A Sun analysis found that about half of the second-vote elections since the late 1970s have failed.
“Colorado’s required second election is too much, and it’s not right,” Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez of Denver, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, said at the Nov. 19 rally.
Rodriguez said his bill rolling back the requirement will be introduced during the first week of Colorado’s 2025 legislative session, which begins Jan. 9.
The business community is already chafing at the proposed changes to Colorado’s labor laws.
“The Labor Peace Act has been a cornerstone of Colorado’s economic success for decades,” J. J. Ament, president and CEO of the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce, said in a written statement. “To unravel this proven compromise now, while our economy is still recovering, is reckless. This isn’t just bad for businesses – it’s bad for Coloradans. Forcing employees to pay into unions increases costs for workers already struggling to make ends meet.”
Daniel Ryley, vice president of economic competitiveness at the chamber, said the first question businesses looking to relocate to Colorado ask is about the state’s so-called right-to-work status.
In right-to-work states, employees never have to join a union or pay union fees as a condition of their employment. Colorado isn’t a right-to-work state, but the second-vote barrier makes it more difficult for unions to require that employees pay for representation whether they are part of the union or not.
“Between 2018 and 2023, Colorado’s average annual employment growth rate of 1.5% was more than three times that of non-right-to-work states,” he said in a statement. “At its core, the Labor Peace Act supports a thriving environment where businesses, employees and communities can succeed together.”
Assuming the union security bill passes the Legislature, Polis will once again be caught between the wishes of his party and his free-market leanings. The governor expressed early skepticism of the measure in a statement released by his office.
Polis “is leery of the need for a new bill to open the Labor Peace Act that serves the state and workers so well,” said Shelby Wieman, a spokeswoman for the governor. She noted that Colorado’s labor laws “go further than those of the 26 right-to-work states by not only protecting the right to organize, but also providing an avenue to strengthen unions through union-security agreements.”
“Any changes to the Labor Peace Act would need to find common ground with employers and businesses and labor, and the governor is deeply skeptical of this bill without a heavily negotiated, thoughtful and comprehensive process,” she added.
It’s unclear which of the bills Polis vetoed this year may return in 2025. They were:
- House Bill 1008, which would have created new wage theft protections for construction workers, making general contractors liable for wages owed by their subcontractors. Polis argued it would have let subcontractors off the hook for bad behavior, and increased the cost of construction by passing the financial burden on to general contractors.
- House Bill 1307, which would have prohibited school districts from using federal money to hire HVAC contractors who aren’t certified by the state Department of Labor and Employment. Polis said it would have made it harder for rural schools to apply for grants, noting in his veto letter that more than a dozen counties lack state-certified electrical or plumbing contractors in their area. He also told The Sun he would have signed it if lawmakers had agreed to provide waivers to schools that made good-faith efforts to meet the new standards.
- House Bill 1260, which would have prohibited employers from disciplining workers who refuse to attend an employer-sponsored meeting that involves religious or political matters, with some exceptions. Polis said the bill was so broad it would have created a chilling effect on free speech and could have limited even businesses’ basic operational functions and work meetings.
House Bill 1307 was time-sensitive and tied to federal dollars. Meanwhile, the National Labor Relations Board recently ruled that companies cannot force workers to attend meetings where employers express their views on unionization, making House Bill 1260 less relevant.
Negotiations around bringing back House Bill 1008 in a way that could win Polis’ approval are underway.
“We did meet with the governor and the governor’s team over the summer. We talked about a few things – seeing where we could possibly work with the governor’s team,” said Mark Thompson, senior representative for the Western States Regional Council of Carpenters.
Thompson said, however, that the two sides are “not on the same page.”
“This coming session, we’re not going to push a contractor liability piece,” he said. “We’re not going to go there.”
A wage-theft bill is still coming, Thompson said. But it would only allow workers who are victims of wage theft to file larger claims with the state.
