Comments on: Vote No On Amendment 55

By: Bhig

Bhig — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:34:13 +0000

It's all about power, you little girls. Yes, wouldn't it be great to work under the apathetic Kamalas of the world. Huh? Why would a lawyer argue against having more work? Must be a business owner too.

By: Mr. S

Mr. S — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:20:10 +0000

It's really sad the one among 60 attorneys in the Faegre corporate employment practice that wrote this opinion didn't have the guts to sign his/her own comment. We wouldn’t expect any other stand on the issue other than opposed from one of if not the largest legal practice for employers. Thank goodness we don’t depend on the likes of Faegre to defend individual civil rights. If we are to believe it to be impossible to fire an employee for cause, then it must be true that every government in the United States and every employer with union employees are not able to terminate employees. With a result of more effective human resources management that treats employees equitably and with respect will be the best outcome we’ve seen in years from any amendment in Colorado.

By: Matt_Cullen

Matt_Cullen — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:20:10 +0000

This amendment, and three other labor related ones (53,56, and 57) have been dropped.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/oct/02...

By: KamalaXYZZY

KamalaXYZZY — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:20:10 +0000

Employees? Employees… oh, yes, I think I vaguely remember them now. Aren't those the guys I used to use before I discovered contractors? Yes, that's them, I'm sure of it now.

All I remember from that time is that there are lots of laws and paperwork related to them. I don't deal with them any more. Now I just run my business.

By: fronesis

fronesis — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:20:10 +0000

I commented over at Ryan's, and I am NOT necessarily disagreeing with most of what you said here. But one little remark. At the end you write:

"I can't believe how anyone would think mimicking Germany or France's employment laws will make us more competitive."

Just to clarify: I don't think those who advocate increased workers' rights or urge collective organization for labor are making a case for American competitiveness. They are arguing for a different balance between corporate profit and worker' wages and benefits. When it comes to this other issue, I think lots of people would see the benefits of France and Gemany's employment laws – e.g. a living wage, decent health care, reasonable hours, etc.

Now, some neo-liberals WILL argue for workers' rights in the language of 'competitiveness', but as you point out, that's a BAD argument. The real question for me is whether the so-called 'competitiveness' of businesses is the only issue we should consider when it comes to relations between business and labor.