Talk about bad timing.
On the same day we learned the state’s unemployment rate rose to 6.6 percent, up from 5.8 percent in December and 4.3 percent in January 2008, a statehouse committee on Wednesday approved misguided House Bill 1170.
Sponsored by Rep. Edward Casso, D-Commerce City, the bill would allow union workers involved in “defensive lockouts” to receive unemployment benefits while they’re off the job.
In a defensive lockout, for example, a union has threatened some type of action, such as a strike, and management responds by locking them out.
The idea of an unemployment benefit is — as the phrase suggests — to assist those who, through no fault of their own, find themselves unemployed. As increasing numbers of Coloradans are in need of this temporary assistance, the statehouse has no business handing these funds to unions.
Under current law, those who are “offensively” locked out (meaning the company has locked them out preemptively and without economic cause) already are covered under unemployment benefits.
This law would now cover those in defensive lockouts, forcing businesses to pay for both the union workers, as they fund unemployment insurance, and the temporary workers needed to fill the vacancies.
It would, moreover, create an incentive for unions to threaten companies with economic actions, such as walkouts or strikes, without having to bear the cost.
By extending benefits to workers who initiate the confrontation, government also will, effectively, take sides in the dispute by subsidizing labor.
While locked-out workers may be off the job, they are certainly not “unemployed.” They are involved in a labor dispute. Their job is waiting for them when the dispute is over, with, more than likely, a higher salary than when they left.
Despite the increase in our state’s unemployment figures, Colorado’s jobless rate is still considerably lower than most states but remains concerning.
So, to add the burden of this bill, which ultimately will be passed on to all Coloradans, is just a bad idea — especially in this economy.
