Gov. Jared Polis is pushing a last-minute deal between organized labor and businesses over proposed changes to Colorado’s 80-year-old law that governs a key requirement before unions can impose fees on non-union members.

That negotiation has intensified over the last several days, according to sources familiar with the talks. The legislative session will end in less than two weeks. 

All three sides — business, labor and the governor’s office — have each put forth a proposal.

That Polis is now intimately involved in finding a compromise appears to represent a change from the governor’s earlier public pronouncements, in which he said he would like business representatives and the labor coalition behind Senate Bill 005 to find common ground or he won’t sign the bill, assuming it reaches his desk.

The bill, if enacted, repeals the 80-year-old labor law‘s requirement for a second election in order for a union to establish a “union security” agreement at a workplace. Once agreed to by the company and the labor group, non-union workers would be required to pay union fees.           

Federal law governs union formation. In an election, a labor group must receive a simple majority to unionize. Colorado law requires a second election to allow the establishment of a “union security” agreement at the now-unionized workplace. That election requires a higher threshold of a 75% “yes” vote to pass. The unions want to get rid of that second election.   

One of the sources speculated that the governor doesn’t want to be seen as vetoing a union bill at the same time that he also doesn’t want to be perceived as standing against businesses.

The push by labor to get rid of the second election has produced one of the biggest battles at the state Capitol. 

Labor groups have argued that Colorado’s Labor Peace Act is outdated, imposing an unnecessary barrier toward unionization.  

Senate Bill 005 is about “empowering workers who want a seat at the table to negotiate fair pay, benefits, and safer working conditions and have made that choice by electing to form a union,” said Bryant Preston, president of IATSE and AFL-CIO. 

Business representatives, on the other hand, have rejected that framing, countering that the legislation is not about forming a union, which any organized labor can pursue. Instead, they said, it’s about labor groups seeking to make it easier to impose fees on non-union members. Additionally, they said Colorado’s Labor Peace Act is already an ideal compromise that has served the state well for decades.  

“It represents an effective and reasonable compromise that has protected workers’ rights to organize and collectively bargain, while simultaneously presenting Colorado as a favorable and attractive state to start, build, grow, or relocate businesses,” said Jamie Chavez of the Westminster Chamber of Commerce. 

Polis has told sponsors he would only sign the measure into law if any changes made to the 80-year-old law secured the support of both business and labor.

“I remain open to a solution that brings workers and business to the table in a way that’s stable for our state,” Polis told Colorado Politics last month. “The Labor Peace Act has been stable for eight decades. I fundamentally believe that many of these proposed changes would not be as stable, so I’m optimistic that labor and business are talking, and I’m hoping those conversations are fruitful.”

So far, the groups have been unable to reach a compromise. 

The bill, which passed through the Senate on a party-line vote, has been awaiting action on the House floor for about two weeks — most likely because no compromise has been secured. 

According to sources, all sides have made offers, which carry a common theme: “Union security” can be authorized in the same election as the one to form a union — if certain thresholds are met. The three sides disagree on the thresholds, sources said.   

Here are the offers: 

• The business community agrees to lower the vote threshold in order to permit a union to begin negotiating over what labor groups called “representation fees” — the dues on non-union members. Under this offer, if, in the election to form a union, a simple majority of employees eligible to vote or 66% of workers who show up to cast a ballot say “yes,” then the labor group automatically gets the permission to negotiate over the fees. No second election is necessary. This position moves business from its starting point of a 75% threshold. 

• The labor coalition wants a lower threshold: If 53% of the workers who show up to vote in the first election say yes, then the labor group is authorized to negotiate over the fees. Under that scenario, a second election is also unnecessary. If the labor group failed to clear that threshold in the first election, a second election is necessary, under which the union must only secure a simple majority — 50% plus 1 — of the workers who show up to vote. 

• Polis has come to the table with his own proposal: The first election must get 66% of eligible employees to participate and, if 62.5% say yes, then the union may negotiate to impose dues on the entire workforce, including non-union members. If the labor group fails to clear that 62.5% threshold, then a second election may be conducted, under which only a simple majority of those who show up to vote would permit “union security.” 

Sources said the groups were still negotiating as of Friday.