Fried: Are Fort Collins Employees Citizens or Serfs?

Next week Fort Collins will mail you a ballot for the June 10 special election that boils down to one simple question: Should we amend the city charter so city employees have the right to join a union? Every other working person in town—whether they work for a private company, the county, the schools, the state or the feds—already has the right to join a union. You might as well put this question on the ballot instead: Are city employees valued citizens in a democracy, or serfs laboring on the manor?

The usual anti-union suspects claim that voting for this measure will bankrupt the city. Say what? The argument goes like this: First we allow city workers to join unions. They all immediately do so. (What does that say about the level of morale among city employees?) The union makes outrageous bargaining demands the city can't meet, the dispute is submitted to binding arbitration, and suddenly, some liberal activist judge in Denver has robbed our treasury to pay off his union buddies.

But how about a dose of reality: What if the employees join a union, they and the city bargain in good faith and we reach an amicable contract? Employees can't get what the city doesn't have, and since employees are also residents and taxpayers of the city, they have a vested interest in seeing it doesn't go broke. But they also have a vested interest in raising wages (which have been in a deep freeze for years), lowering health care costs (don't we all!) and improving poor working conditions. If city leaders insist that allowing workers to join unions will inevitably lead to arbitration, it can only be because they have no intention of bargaining in good faith.

Where do these arbitrators come from? Do the unions impose them unilaterally? Hardly. The city selects the panel of neutral and qualified arbitrators. Under the proposed ordinance, the very first criteria the arbitrator uses to resolve the dispute must be “the interests and welfare of the public and the financial ability of the City to bear the costs involved.” After considering all the factors, the arbitrator will select either the union's or the city's “final offer” as the most reasonable outcome. Therefore, all the city has to do is make a more reasonable offer than the union if they can't agree on a contract.

The proposed charter change also outlaws employee strikes and employer lockouts.

Given all these safeguards, the only real reason to oppose the ballot measure is if you think employees don't deserve any say in their own work lives, any right to organize and bargain collectively with their employer, any dignity or empowerment at all.

The city election is far from the only electoral battle over labor in Colorado in 2008. Right-wing forces are again trying to put a “right to work (for less!)” measure on the state ballot. Amendment 47 would prohibit mandatory union dues for employees in a shop covered by a labor agreement. Since unions are required to represent everybody in grievance procedures, and the better wages/benefits they negotiate help everyone, those who choose not to join the union must pay their rightful share in lieu of dues. Essentially, if you ride the bus, you pay the fare. If enough people are so selfish or foolish they hitch a free ride, the bus company goes bankrupt, and the service ends. Killing off unions is the (barely) hidden agenda here.

In a brilliant counterpunch, Colorado unions have submitted several sensible pro-worker ballot measures, including a ban on at-will firing, ending tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas, and giving employees injured on the job stronger legal protections. These measures, plus the chance to right the national ship before it sinks completely, should contribute to record turnouts in November, and (cross your fingers) real gains for the progressive majority.



Eric Fried is whistling “Solidarity Forever” at eric@pvgreens.org.