Face the State

Face The State Staff Report

FORT COLLINS - In spite of repeated opposition from the city's taxpayers and courts, the Fraternal Order of Police and the Communication Workers of America are not giving up the fight to see collective bargaining and binding arbitration brought to city employees.

Old Sarge/Flickr

A special election slated for June 10 will include a proposed charter amendment that, if approved by voters, would extend collective bargaining rights to 800 city workers across multiple departments while also allowing all unionized workers the option of using binding arbitration to settle disputes.

This is not the first time the city's residents will have seen collective bargaining or binding arbitration – a third party that would settle impasses instead of judges and courts – on the ballot.

These issues originally surfaced in 2004 when the FOP came forward with a measure that would allow the city police collective bargaining and binding arbitration rights. The measure passed by 335 votes. It was then challenged in court, where the binding arbitration stipulation was thrown out because the court believed it violated the city's charter to allow an unelected third party arbitrator to make decisions that could impact spending.

Larimer County commissioners have previously sparred with the Teamsters over use of the county payroll system for automatic union deductions, fueling debate over the role of organized labor in the public sector in Northern Colorado.

“How many times do they have to come back and hear no?” asked Andrew Boucher, a political consultant in Fort Collins, who agrees with the above court decision. “The arbitrator would, in essence, be telling the city council how to spend its tax dollars, and it is undemocratic to spend tax dollars without our consent,” he said.

The FOP came back in 2006 and asked for the binding arbitration it had been previously denied by the courts – spending $100,000 on their campaign. Voters rejected the proposal by a 2-to-1 margin.

But the FOP refused to admit defeat and has now teamed up with the Communication Workers of America for a third round. Union representatives did not return calls seeking comment.

David May, president of the Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce, questioned who was behind the measure. “Is this effort being driven by employees or is it being drive by unions?" he asked, "Because they are not the same thing.”

City employees have suffered financially in recent years when the city got ahead of itself with spending and had to announce a temporary salary freeze, which has now been lifted. According to Boucher, the unions are using this sour sentiment to push their initiative. He speculates that in this college town, both unions will target state employees at Colorado State University who may be sympathetic to the union cause at the municipal level.

May says both the city and chamber of commerce plan to fight the measure. He says they share a concern that a unionized city workforce could ultimately mean fewer services for city residents.

The Fort Collins City Council has also unanimously come out against the initiative, specifically opposing the use of an arbitrator. Council members have publicly expressed concern that any person appointed to arbitrate disagreements would not share the “same responsibilities as the city’s elected and appointed officials for balancing the needs of city employees with all other important financial needs of the city.”

Boucher just hopes that the third time’s not the charm for Fort Collins unions. “I expect there will be a strong campaign against it,” he said. “It is important that voters understand the issue and what’s at stake.”