Seed Newsvine
A bill that would make clear that state employees are not allowed to strike won Gov. Bill Ritter's approval Thursday.
HB 1189 provides that a state employee or a labor organization commits a misdemeanor by inciting, encouraging, aiding or participating in a "strike, stoppage of work, slowdown or interruption of operations."
Ritter issued an executive order allowing state employees to form collective bargaining organizations for limited purposes last year.
His order purported to prohibit strikes by state employees.
However, Republicans, spurred on by an opinion by Attorney General John Suthers, had argued that Ritter's executive order opened the door to public employee strikes because Colorado had no law prohibiting them.
The measure was sponsored by Rep. Jim Riesberg, D-Greeley, and Sen. Dan Gibbs, D-Silverthorne.
HB 1189 goes into effect immediately because the bill has an "emergency clause."
Showing posts with label Ritter's labor executive order. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ritter's labor executive order. Show all posts
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Senate Passes Strike Ban Bill
The Senate gave initial approval Tuesday to a bill that would prohibit state employees from going on strike, but not without a fight from Republicans.
HB 1189 would make striking a misdemeanor. It also applies to encouragement or incitement of a strike. The measure applies to work slowdowns as well as full-fledged strikes.
The criminal penalty could be imposed both on individuals and a labor organization. Individuals could be fined $50 per day for violating the law, while organizations could be hit with a $1,000 per day fine.
GOP senators offered numerous amendments in an attempt to impose tougher penalties for going on strike. Republicans had offered a separate bill earlier in the session, since killed, that would have made public employee strikes a felony and barred strikes by other public employees including teachers and RTD drivers.
All of the Republican amendments failed, despite GOP arguments that stronger penalties are needed to protect taxpayers from interruptions of vital public functions that Republican senators said might result from Gov. Bill Ritter's autumn 2007 executive order allowing formation of some employee bargaining units in state government.
"We wouldn't be having this debate in the first place if the governor hadn't opened up this can of worms with his executive order," Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, said.
Democratic sponsor Sen. Dan Gibbs, D-Silverthorne, argued that the bill does what is necessary to protect against state employee strikes without interfering with Gov. Bill Ritter's efforts to improve working conditions for state employees and government efficiency.
"This is about ensuring we have decent salaries and we have decent health insurance,” he said. “This is not about striking. This is about quality of life.”
In the end, Republicans supported the bill on grounds that it was a better alternative than having no prohibition against strikes in state law.
"It's not a terribly strong bill, but it's the only bill in front of us to try to accomplish what needs to be done," minority leader Andy McElhany, R-Colorado Springs, said.
The bill faces a final vote in the Senate before going to Ritter.
Evan Dreyer, a spokesperson for Ritter, said the governor is likely to sign the bill.
"He has said repeatedly he would sign it," Dreyer said. "We don't think it's necessary, but if the legislature thinks so, he'll sign it."
Dreyer also said that Ritter does not consider the strike ban bill to be inconsistent with his executive order authorizing some collective bargaining activities by state employees.
"It is in keeping with the executive order," Dreyer said.
Attorney General John Suthers said shortly after Ritter's executive order was issued that it did not and could not prohibit state employees from striking.
HB 1189 would make striking a misdemeanor. It also applies to encouragement or incitement of a strike. The measure applies to work slowdowns as well as full-fledged strikes.
The criminal penalty could be imposed both on individuals and a labor organization. Individuals could be fined $50 per day for violating the law, while organizations could be hit with a $1,000 per day fine.
GOP senators offered numerous amendments in an attempt to impose tougher penalties for going on strike. Republicans had offered a separate bill earlier in the session, since killed, that would have made public employee strikes a felony and barred strikes by other public employees including teachers and RTD drivers.
All of the Republican amendments failed, despite GOP arguments that stronger penalties are needed to protect taxpayers from interruptions of vital public functions that Republican senators said might result from Gov. Bill Ritter's autumn 2007 executive order allowing formation of some employee bargaining units in state government.
"We wouldn't be having this debate in the first place if the governor hadn't opened up this can of worms with his executive order," Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, said.
Democratic sponsor Sen. Dan Gibbs, D-Silverthorne, argued that the bill does what is necessary to protect against state employee strikes without interfering with Gov. Bill Ritter's efforts to improve working conditions for state employees and government efficiency.
"This is about ensuring we have decent salaries and we have decent health insurance,” he said. “This is not about striking. This is about quality of life.”
In the end, Republicans supported the bill on grounds that it was a better alternative than having no prohibition against strikes in state law.
"It's not a terribly strong bill, but it's the only bill in front of us to try to accomplish what needs to be done," minority leader Andy McElhany, R-Colorado Springs, said.
The bill faces a final vote in the Senate before going to Ritter.
Evan Dreyer, a spokesperson for Ritter, said the governor is likely to sign the bill.
"He has said repeatedly he would sign it," Dreyer said. "We don't think it's necessary, but if the legislature thinks so, he'll sign it."
Dreyer also said that Ritter does not consider the strike ban bill to be inconsistent with his executive order authorizing some collective bargaining activities by state employees.
"It is in keeping with the executive order," Dreyer said.
Attorney General John Suthers said shortly after Ritter's executive order was issued that it did not and could not prohibit state employees from striking.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Dem Strike Ban Bill Gets Past Senate Committee
A Democratic bill that would forbid state workers from going on strike was approved by a Senate committee Wednesday.
HB 1189 was sent to the full Senate on a 4-1 vote of the State, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee.
The bill does not make the act of going on strike a felony, as Republicans would prefer. Instead, it makes it a misdemeanor.
Sen. Abel Tapia, D-Pueblo, was the sole member of the committee to vote against the bill.
Rep. Jim Riesberg, D-Fort Collins, and Sen. Dan Gibbs, D-Silverthorne, are the sponsors of the bill.
HB 1189 was sent to the full Senate on a 4-1 vote of the State, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee.
The bill does not make the act of going on strike a felony, as Republicans would prefer. Instead, it makes it a misdemeanor.
Sen. Abel Tapia, D-Pueblo, was the sole member of the committee to vote against the bill.
Rep. Jim Riesberg, D-Fort Collins, and Sen. Dan Gibbs, D-Silverthorne, are the sponsors of the bill.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Senate Committee Kills Employee Partnership Ban
A bill by Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, that would have overturned Gov. Bill Ritter's executive order allowing state employees to collectively bargain with the state government was killed in a Senate committee Wednesday.
The State, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee, on a party-line vote, rejected SB 86.
The bill's defeat means that both Republican initiatives aimed at Ritter's effort to improve state employee bargaining power have failed. A bill by Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs, to ban and criminalize strikes by all public employees in Colorado was killed by a House committee earlier in the session.
The State, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee, on a party-line vote, rejected SB 86.
The bill's defeat means that both Republican initiatives aimed at Ritter's effort to improve state employee bargaining power have failed. A bill by Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs, to ban and criminalize strikes by all public employees in Colorado was killed by a House committee earlier in the session.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Dem Strike Bill on Way to Senate
The House gave final approval Wednesday to the Democratic bill aimed at preventing strikes by state employees.
HB 1189, sponsored by Rep. Jim Riesberg, passed over the "no" votes of 10 Democrats and two Republicans.
The bill had received preliminary approval in the House Tuesday.
HB 1189, sponsored by Rep. Jim Riesberg, passed over the "no" votes of 10 Democrats and two Republicans.
The bill had received preliminary approval in the House Tuesday.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Democrats' Anti-Strike Bill Gets Preliminary OK in House
HB 1189, the Democratic majority's bill to ban strikes by state workers, passed the House on second reading this morning.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Jim Riesberg, D-Fort Collins, makes striking by a state worker a misdemeanor. It does not explicitly give state courts the power to enjoin state worker strikes.
That omission is one of the reasons Republicans oppose it. During the debate this morning, Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs, said the bill "does not have any teeth."
Gardner introduced several amendments to the bill, including one that would allow state courts to block strikes by state workers and another that would increase existing penalties against striking state workers. Both failed.
"We have laws on the books already to adequately handle the situation," Riesberg said.
The bill faces a third reading vote in the House before moving on to the Senate.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Jim Riesberg, D-Fort Collins, makes striking by a state worker a misdemeanor. It does not explicitly give state courts the power to enjoin state worker strikes.
That omission is one of the reasons Republicans oppose it. During the debate this morning, Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs, said the bill "does not have any teeth."
Gardner introduced several amendments to the bill, including one that would allow state courts to block strikes by state workers and another that would increase existing penalties against striking state workers. Both failed.
"We have laws on the books already to adequately handle the situation," Riesberg said.
The bill faces a third reading vote in the House before moving on to the Senate.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Gardner's Tough Anti-Strike Bill Defeated in Committee
The Republican bill aimed at blocking employees at any level of government in Colorado from going on strike was killed by a House committee Thursday.
HB 1187, which is co-sponsored by virtually all Republican legislators, was defeated, 7-4, by the Business & Labor Committee.
The bill would have permitted state judges to block strikes, by injunction and subjected violators of such court orders to felony criminal liability. It would also have allowed a court to impose fines of up to $10,000 per day on employee organizations involved in strike planning and which are involved in violating anti-strike injunctions.
HB 1187, which is co-sponsored by virtually all Republican legislators, was defeated, 7-4, by the Business & Labor Committee.
The bill would have permitted state judges to block strikes, by injunction and subjected violators of such court orders to felony criminal liability. It would also have allowed a court to impose fines of up to $10,000 per day on employee organizations involved in strike planning and which are involved in violating anti-strike injunctions.
Democratic Anti-Strike Bill Escapes Committee
A bill by Rep. Jim Riesberg to prohibit state workers from going on strike was passed by a House committee Thursday afternoon.
HB 1189, unlike the more expansive ban proposed by the GOP, does not apply to workers for any government entity other than the state. It makes violation a misdemeanor, instead of permitting felony criminal sanctions as would Rep. Bob Gardner's more hard-line measure.
The bill passed 6-5, with all Republicans and Rep. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, opposed.
Carroll said she would not support the bill because she did not think that state workers' right to strike should be taken away.
Rep. John Soper, D-Thornton, indicated that he was not enthusiastic about the bill but nevertheless voted "yes."
Gov. Bill Ritter has argued that his executive order granting state employees the right to collectively bargain on a limited range of issues precludes strikes. But he has also said that he will sign a strike ban bill.
HB 1189, unlike the more expansive ban proposed by the GOP, does not apply to workers for any government entity other than the state. It makes violation a misdemeanor, instead of permitting felony criminal sanctions as would Rep. Bob Gardner's more hard-line measure.
The bill passed 6-5, with all Republicans and Rep. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, opposed.
Carroll said she would not support the bill because she did not think that state workers' right to strike should be taken away.
Rep. John Soper, D-Thornton, indicated that he was not enthusiastic about the bill but nevertheless voted "yes."
Gov. Bill Ritter has argued that his executive order granting state employees the right to collectively bargain on a limited range of issues precludes strikes. But he has also said that he will sign a strike ban bill.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
GOP Attacks on Ritter Union Order Underway
Republican lawmakers, who promised to try to nullify Gov. Bill Ritter's executive order allowing government employees to collectively bargain for certain workplace conditions, have filed bills that would reverse the order and ban strikes by state employees.
SB 86, which is sponsored by Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, would prohibit altogether the "employee partnership agreements" authorized by Ritter's order. That bill has been assigned to the State, Veterans & Military Affairs committee, where the likelihood of it surviving for a trip to the Senate floor is slim. Sen. Abel Tapia, D-Pueblo, chairs the committee, with Chris Romer of Denver and Sue Windels of Arvada the other Democrats.
Mitchell's bill is sponsored in the House by Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma.
Over in the House Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs, introduced HB 1187, which would ban strikes by public employees. Moreover, it would prohibit any public employee, which includes people working for cities and towns, counties, school districts, special district or municipal, quasi-municipal or public corporation, from "directly or indirectly inducing, instigating, encouraging, authorizing, ratifying or participating in a strike."
The bill also provides that any public employer, which includes the above-listed entities, is not to "authorize, consent to or condone" a strike or "pay or agree to pay any public employee during any day in which a public employee participates in a strike."
The bill grants district courts the authority to enjoin strikes or "threatened" strikes and subjects employees who violate the court order to punishment for felony contempt of court, including a period in which they would be banned from public employment. It also directs school boards to move immediately to fire teachers who continue striking, or planning for a strike, in defiance of a court order.
HB 1187 has drawn co-sponsorship from 22 other House Republicans. It is sponsored in the Senate by Nancy Spence of Centennial, with co-sponsorship from every other GOP Senator except Steve Ward of Littleton, who is serving on activy duty with the U.S. Marine Corps in Iraq.
Gardner's bill is not the only one on the subject.
Rep. Jim Riesberg, D-Fort Collins, has a competing measure that imposes less severe consequences on public employees who involve themselves in a work stoppage.
HB 1189 applies only to employees in the state personnel system. It forbids them from inciting, encouraging or participating in a strike, work stoppage, slowdown or interruption. The bill does not change current law that forbids state government from locking out employees while a labor dispute is ongoing. HB 1189 does not specify penalties for a violation of its prohibition or indicate whether a violation would be criminal in nature and, if so, whether it would be a felony or misdemeanor.
The bills introduced by Gardner and Riesberg have been assigned to the House Business Affairs & Labor committee. Hearings will be held on both bills Thursday, Jan. 24 at 1:30 pm.
SB 86, which is sponsored by Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, would prohibit altogether the "employee partnership agreements" authorized by Ritter's order. That bill has been assigned to the State, Veterans & Military Affairs committee, where the likelihood of it surviving for a trip to the Senate floor is slim. Sen. Abel Tapia, D-Pueblo, chairs the committee, with Chris Romer of Denver and Sue Windels of Arvada the other Democrats.
Mitchell's bill is sponsored in the House by Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma.
Over in the House Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs, introduced HB 1187, which would ban strikes by public employees. Moreover, it would prohibit any public employee, which includes people working for cities and towns, counties, school districts, special district or municipal, quasi-municipal or public corporation, from "directly or indirectly inducing, instigating, encouraging, authorizing, ratifying or participating in a strike."
The bill also provides that any public employer, which includes the above-listed entities, is not to "authorize, consent to or condone" a strike or "pay or agree to pay any public employee during any day in which a public employee participates in a strike."
The bill grants district courts the authority to enjoin strikes or "threatened" strikes and subjects employees who violate the court order to punishment for felony contempt of court, including a period in which they would be banned from public employment. It also directs school boards to move immediately to fire teachers who continue striking, or planning for a strike, in defiance of a court order.
HB 1187 has drawn co-sponsorship from 22 other House Republicans. It is sponsored in the Senate by Nancy Spence of Centennial, with co-sponsorship from every other GOP Senator except Steve Ward of Littleton, who is serving on activy duty with the U.S. Marine Corps in Iraq.
Gardner's bill is not the only one on the subject.
Rep. Jim Riesberg, D-Fort Collins, has a competing measure that imposes less severe consequences on public employees who involve themselves in a work stoppage.
HB 1189 applies only to employees in the state personnel system. It forbids them from inciting, encouraging or participating in a strike, work stoppage, slowdown or interruption. The bill does not change current law that forbids state government from locking out employees while a labor dispute is ongoing. HB 1189 does not specify penalties for a violation of its prohibition or indicate whether a violation would be criminal in nature and, if so, whether it would be a felony or misdemeanor.
The bills introduced by Gardner and Riesberg have been assigned to the House Business Affairs & Labor committee. Hearings will be held on both bills Thursday, Jan. 24 at 1:30 pm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)