U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet

(D) Phil Weiser

60%↑

50%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Jena Griswold

(D) David Seligman

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) J. Danielson

(R) Sheri Davis
50%

40%

30%
State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(D) Jeff Bridges

(R) Kevin Grantham

40%

40%

30%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Trisha Calvarese

(D) Eileen Laubacher

90%

20%

20%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Manny Rutinel

(D) Yadira Caraveo

45%↓

40%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
November 30, 2007 06:50 PM UTC

GOP Tells State Workers to Get Screwed!

  • 37 Comments
  • by: Go Blue

Reading the Denver Post’s article on the Governor’s Employee Agreement today is very revealing.

The attorney general’s ruling “confirms that employees have a legal right to strike and the governor can’t overrule that unilaterally,” said Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield. “Either he misled Colorado intentionally or ignorantly, but he did mislead.”

What did the AG’s opinion actually state?

Assuming that this provision is enforceable, it would mean that once a Partnership Agreement is agreed upon, the Certified Employee Organization and its dues paying members would be bound by their agreement not to strike. Should they breach that agreement by striking or by engaging in, or threatening to engage in, a behavior that effectuates the same result as a strike, presumably the state entity that agreed to the Partnership Agreement could terminate the agreement and likely pursue legal options for breach of contract.

However, these agreements not to strike may be applicable only to dues paying members of the Certified Employee Organization that have entered into the Partnership Agreement. The agreement to forego an individual’s statutory right to strike may not be binding upon the following three classes of state employees:

1) state employees who are not dues paying members of the union selected as the Certified Employee Organization,

2) state employees who are members of a different union than the Certified Employee Organization, or

3) state employees exempted from the Executive Order and therefore not covered by any provision.

Did you get that? Employees who enter into the Partnership cannot strike, and those who do not enter into the Partnership can strike. If the GOP is so terrified of strikes, wouldn’t they want the State Employees to sign the Agreement and join a union?

But of course silly things such as facts and laws will not stop Republicans from making crazy claims.

“There is absolutely no question that it increases the likelihood of a strike,” said Senate Republican leader Andy McElhany of Colorado Springs, who requested the attorney general’s opinion. “Nobody ever plans to strike until they do.”

Are Republicans really slamming state employees becuase, “GOP lawmakers who say that Ritter’s order has opened the door for unions to eventually bargain for higher wages and benefits.” Or, is it because the Republicans think screwing over public employees is a political fight they can win since they have no other issues to run on?

At least this is an actual opinion, rather than some rift-raft memo which no one asked for.

Is this a winning issue for the GOP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Tweet
Share

Comments

37 thoughts on “GOP Tells State Workers to Get Screwed!”

  1. post headline

    Attorney general: Order allows strike

    implies labor is given a new right

    Rocky headline

    AG rules against ‘no strike’

    Suthers says Ritter can’t preclude walkouts

    Correctly indicates that that the workers currently have the right to walk out.

    Does anybody else remember when the post was on the left and the rocky was on the right. The rocky is still on the right and the post still balances them…on the far right.

    1. Ritter pays off unions and puts union leaders’ power and interests ahead of those of state’s employees and taxpayers.

      Ritter is all about saving sinking, power hungry union leaders desperate for dues revenues.

      The challenge for the GOP is to find leaders who can articulate their position and exploit it in 2008.

      So far, the GOP is blowing it.

      1. Ritter might have an issue on his hands if the R’s coax the business $ away from him.

        Except that they seem to be too inept to tie their own shoes at the moment.

        I think it was Napoleon that said something along the lines of: “If your enemy wants to defeat himself, let him.”  But I can’t find the quote.

        Beuhler? Anyone?

      2. about giving employees the CHOICE to join a state union?

        This piece of bullshit is a typical reponse,

        Ritter pays off unions and puts union leaders’ power and interests ahead of those of state’s employees and taxpayers.

        and one that has (like all conservatives arguments) no fact to back it up.

        If you think this is a great issue for the GOP, scarying voters into believe lies about about their government, you truly are a Reaganite and you will comfort within the confines of the Independence Institute, as have the Senate Republicans.

        If you think this is nothing more than a red-herring to distract voters from the substantial issues of health care, education, the environment, the economy, and transportation, then you are a realist who will find reassurance and support from 75% of the state who agree with you.

      3. The Governor’s executive order doesn’t affect the private sector.  HB 1072, the union bill that would have impacted them, was vetoed by Governor Ritter last February.  John Brackney, President of the 1600 member South Metro Chamber of Commerce and a former Republican Arapahoe County Commissioner, was quoted in the Denver Business Journal (I believe two weeks ago)stating that only one of his members had called him about the executive order.  He went on to say executive order didn’t affect the private sector so it wasn’t an issue.  Very osund reasoning on Mr. Brackney’s part and the members of the South Metro Chamber of Commerce.

        1. Other business leaders have been quoted in the papers as recognizing what I’ve been saying, Ritter’s move will promote unionizaiton at all levels of government and in the private sector. I think the president of the Denver Metro Chamber wrote an op ed to that point a week or so a go in one of the papers.

          Union members and leaders will never see this point nor concede it. Ritter’s trying to enrich them, and they’re all for screwing taxpayers, employers and non government workers.

          I don’t worry about the state’s workers. They among the best paid in the country and in the region. Their jobs are secure. They will retire comfortably. They can problem solve with their supervisors, assuming elected official appoint managers, not mini dictators.

          If Ritter wants to help state employees, all he has to do is establish a culture of bottom up management, not by making management impossible by bringing in unions that are in the business of creating conflicts.

            2. “It could blow up,” Hoffa told Ritter.

              Look, AS – this is a union website. If you expect a rational discussion on union issues here, I have a bridge to sell you.  The constituency on this site is truly the fringe, especially where it comes to Labor issues.  Remember, thankfully only about 7% of private sector CO workers are in labor unions, and hopefully we can reduce that number further with common sense and economic success (both are antithetical to union thinking – just ask Mike Merrifield).

              Some of what Labor does in this State is good, but unfortunately, the main role they serve is to be a fundraising entity for one political party.  Our State workers are among the safest and highest-paid in the country, as you know. It’s all about power now.

              Ritter’s EO is a bad start, but the backlash is coming.  The first time a group of State workers plays hardball with him, it’s going to wake  lot of folks up to what is really happening with this back-door policy change.

              It’s funny, but you’re very likely on this site to have someone use the Ludlow Massacre as an excuse to enrich the Democrat party through payroll deductions from State workers.  Just watch…

              1. Orthodox Easter Sunday. Corporate America with state sanctioned murder of women and children vs. working stiffs, mostly immigrants.

                A holy day.

                (But we can devolve into Hitler immediately since it’s his birthday!)

                  1. Actually, the income and economic disparity in the country today is quite similar to that era. In addition, it led to a law that is currently on the books and enforcable.

                  2. Sago (sp?) mine disaster.

                    Our mine safety is controlled by the mining companies.  Death rates of miners in Canada and elsewhere are much lower.

                    Just read in today’s paper, an NYT story, I think, about how American business is really ramping up its lobbying efforts to effect changes positive to them before a Dem gets in the WH.  They are trying to further gut what is left of worker protection, including the Family Medical Leave Act.  Costs them nothing.

                    “HOW DARE YOU WANT TO BE WITH YOUR DYING PARENTS?  WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU ARE, A PERSON?”

                    1. It’s a universe away from the Governor of a State ordering National Guard troops to murder striking workers.

                      A million miles away.

                    2. …there is a reason that it is a million miles away.  And like eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, eternal vigilance is the price of decent working conditions.

                      Given their druthers, the corporatists would return to those days.  As the NYT article shows, they ARE chipping away at what has been gained.  

                    3. It’s a gray area – I think the unions have too much now, and you are on the other side of the gray area.

                      If you’re on right now – Rosen and Ritter are having it out about his EO. Good intelligent radio.

  2. Jeez I think this is nothing more than a losing issue to R’s  They are trying to find something to save them this election cycle and this so not it.

  3. for the next hysterical front page editorial in the Post.  Maybe this time they’ll print it in red to symbolize bloody mayhem and compare Ritter to Hitler or to Bin Laden. Pol Pot? Stalin?  The Grinch who stole Christmas?  In any case we’re clearly all doomed and I’m sure this must be helping the terrorists, too!  

  4. I find it funny that the folks on this blog have once again conveniently allowed a Union-loving liberal to talk about the ‘Ritter Raw Deal’ issue instead of reporting about it themselves in their “non-partisan” (laughing) tradition…

    Could it be because the proprietor of this blog is in fact a member of the SEIU?

    I won’t wait for the BS-pols answer. I already know it is yes.

    “I worked at CNN. It’s not a liberal network” – Bill Press

    1. …show me wher Pols claims that it is neutral or unbiased. It’s a private enterprise.  They can do what they want.  

      Why do you cons keep bringing this up?

      Don’t like it, go elsewhere or start your own blog.  

    2. Pols didn’t author this diary. Someone who uses the handle “Go Blue” did. Said handle indicates author’s Democratic (and not non-partisan) tendencies. So it’s not a surprise that said diary exhibits a Democratic viewpoint.

      Let me know if I can help out with anything else.

  5. I actually find this helpful – I had no idea that the Governor’s proposal actually had the effect of removing an existing right to strike.  If you were to read the news articles and the quotes, you would certainly never come to that conclusion.  

    Sounds like it was a wise policy move by the Governor.

    Which means the Rs will probably attack it viciously.  

    And then lose.

      1. They might have the exact same law on the books, or a similar EO, I’m just asking you to back up your point with something substantive. Your “thinking” process hasn’t ever garnished a whole lot of confidence here.

      2. They might have the exact same law on the books, or a similar EO, I’m just asking you to back up your point with something substantive. Your “thinking” process hasn’t ever garnished a whole lot of confidence here.

        1. It’s illegal for New York State workers to strike, yet they strike all the time.  That is what makes the provision in Colorado’s EO making strikes illegal irrelevant.  They can strike anyway, because the first thing that will be negotiated for them is an amnesty from their illegal strike.

          Honestly, is it possible for you to debate a single point without personally attacking someone?

          Geez!

            1. Can you demonstrate how New York state employee laws are relevant?

              Yes.

              It’s illegal for New York State workers to strike, yet they strike all the time.  That is what makes the provision in Colorado’s EO making strikes illegal irrelevant.  They can strike anyway, because the first thing that will be negotiated for them is an amnesty from their illegal strike.

              1. are a million miles away, to borrow your turn of phrase, when it comes to culture. So, just because they strike all the time there doesn’t mean that will happen here.

                1. But I think I made my point that just because a State worker is not legally allowed to strike doesn’t mean that they won’t.

                  Ja?

                  BTW, Ari, I really dig talking to you.  You’re really respectful.

                  1. At least to those who deserve respect. And yes, I’ll concede the point that state workers might anyway. I just don’t think they’ll do it often, or without good reason. I think you already got that…

  6. 5 people voted to screw over state workers. This is truly distrubring, the hatred, many of you have for your own Colorado employees.

    You truly are the blame Americans first crowd.

    1. Why some choose to side with the State or the with corporate interests over the working men and women. Clearly the State and the Employer have power and rights, I’m not arguing otherwise. My point is that there has to be equitable representation at the negotiating table…it’s the democratic way. If there are unsafe working conditions, gender or other work place discrimination, or unfaor wages, workers should have the right to redress in order that wrongs are set right.

      There must be loads of case law regarding this. Any lawyers on this site care to weigh in?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

191 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!

Colorado Pols