Denver Post repeated inaccurate "right-to-work" talking point

Summary: Reporting on a proposed "right-to-work" constitutional amendment that will be on the November ballot, The Denver Post inaccurately suggested that union membership can be "a condition of employment" under current Colorado law, and quoted amendment proponent Jonathan Coors as claiming that it will "guarantee" Colorado workers "the freedom to choose for themselves whether or not to join a union." But the article failed to mention that federal labor law already prohibits compulsory full union membership.

In an April 29 article (accessed through the newspaper's electronic edition) about a state "right-to-work" ballot initiative, The Denver Post reported that the measure "asks voters to amend the Colorado Constitution to say union membership or fees can't be a condition of employment," and quoted initiative supporter Jonathan Coors as saying that it "will guarantee that all workers in Colorado have the freedom to choose for themselves whether or not to join a union." However, as Colorado Media Matters has noted repeatedly, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) prohibits the "closed shop" -- a union contract provision under which an employer would compel full union membership as a condition of continued employment -- while allowing union security clauses requiring membership dues.

A similar article published April 28 on the Post website used the same Coors quote and misleadingly characterized the measure as one that "would ask voters to amend the Colorado Constitution to say that workers can't be mandated to join a union and pay dues or fees." In contrast to both Post articles, the Rocky Mountain News reported April 29 that the measure, which Colorado Secretary of State Mike Coffman approved for the November ballot on April 28, "would ban all-union workplaces," later explaining that "[s]uch arrangements require all workers covered by collective-bargaining contracts to contribute financially in return for being represented by a union."

From the April 29 Denver Post article " 'Right-to-work' initiative approved for November ballot":

A "right-to-work" ballot initiative got the green light Wednesday to appear on the November ballot.

Colorado Secretary of State Mike Coffman's office certified that organizers of the petition had collected the necessary 76,047 signatures of registered voters. Coffman's office determined a sample of the 136,608 signatures gathered showed that 69 percent, or 94,546 signatures, were valid. The proposal would appear as Amendment 47 on the November ballot.

The measure asks voters to amend the Colorado Constitution to say union membership or fees can't be a condition of employment.

In a statement, Jonathan Coors, a key proponent of the measure, said it "will guarantee that all workers in Colorado have the freedom to choose for themselves whether or not to join a union." Labor groups have alleged signature gatherers engaged in fraud. Jess Knox, a spokesman for Protect Colorado's Future, a coalition of unions and other groups opposing the measure, said a legal challenge is possible.

Contrary to the Post's suggestion that union membership can be "a condition of employment" according to current Colorado law, under the NLRA a collective bargaining agreement cannot compel all workers covered under the agreement to maintain full membership in the union. At most, an agreement can compel workers to maintain "financial core" status, which requires payment of certain dues and fees. The American Bar Association explained this in an overview of U.S. labor and employment law published by the Bureau of National Affairs:

"Financial core" status only requires payment of periodic dues or service fees and initiation fees. Employees with financial core status can request that their fees be used only for the union's collective bargaining activities, e.g., contract negotiation and administrative and grievance adjustments, and not for political purposes.

[...]

Full union membership cannot be compelled under the NLRA. The discharge of any employee pursuant to a union shop clause for any reason other than the failure to pay financial core obligations is unlawful. These limitations on statutorily permitted "union shop" clauses in effect create a form of compulsory "agency shop" membership. [emphases added]

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which supports laws such as the one proposed for Colorado, also acknowledges that federal law prohibits compulsory full union membership.

— E.B.

Posted to the web on Tuesday April 29, 2008 at 3:04 PM EST