The Colorado Union Observer
News and opinion about litigation, legislation, and other developments that could affect Colorado labor law and employees’ rights.
Note: The content of this page does not solely reflect lawsuits filed by clients of the Fairness Center, and the opinions expressed in linked articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the Fairness Center.
Featured News
One year and a free speech case later, this Colorado Springs teacher is headed back to the classroom
Chalkbeat Colorado
“The case, which pitted a union activist against a conservative-leaning school district that has become less union-friendly in recent years, raised questions about when employee free speech rights cross the line to insubordination and workplace disruption.”
Denver school board censures Monica Hunter over allegations of antisemitism, conflict of interest
The Denver Post
“The allegation that Hunter made antisemitic remarks was the most serious accusation against the director, but Gaytán and other district leaders also expressed concerns that Hunter’s job with the state’s largest teachers union carries potential conflicts of interest when she takes certain votes as a board member.”
Judge upholds Douglas County’s taxpayer-funded anti-union violation
The Denver Gazette
“The state’s investigation found that in early 2024, while the Fraternal Order of Police was beginning to organize in Douglas County, officials used their elected positions and county funds ‘to disseminate inherently coercive, false, and misleading statements’ while openly opposing unionization.”
Third time’s the charm? Colorado Democrats will once again fight to change how workers unionize next session
KMGH-TV ABC 7 Denver
“Dubbed the Worker Protection Act by advocates, two iterations of the concept to eliminate the second vote needed to form a union in Colorado have passed out of the state Legislature and were then vetoed by Gov. Jared Polis in 2025 and 2026.”
NEW AFFT REPORT: Teachers Pour Millions Into Colorado’s Largest Union. CEA’s Spending Still Outruns Its Revenue
Americans For Fair Treatment
“CEA spent $17 million in fiscal year 2025, including $10.5 million — 61.4% of all spending — on salaries, benefits, pensions and payroll taxes for its own staff. For every dollar the union distributed in grants, it spent about $5.88 on its own workforce.”
Denver school board member’s job with teachers union poses ethical dilemma, experts say
The Denver Post
“‘It’s incredibly concerning if the people writing the checks work for the people who receive the checks,’ said Jonathan E. Collins, professor of political science and education at Columbia University’s Teachers College. ‘This places a major constraint on accountability.’”
Denver firefighters left the state union years ago. They sent us a $400k bill anyway
The Denver Post
“This is our members’ hard-earned money. . . They have sacrificed for every dollar, and they have earned the right to decide, through their autonomous democratic vote as members of Local 858, where that money goes and who speaks on their behalf.”
News of Colorado Unions
News
Opinion
Frequently Asked Questions
Since 2020, Colorado has passed multiple new state laws that relate to unions and public employees. These laws allow for mandatory unionization of nearly 70,000 state and county employees. For instance, Colorado Workers for Innovative and New Solutions (WINS) Local 1876 is a union representing more than 27,000 state employees, affiliated with American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Employees in several counties across the state are now unionized under AFSCME Colorado. Further statutes and regulations relating to labor law are under consideration.
NOTE: If you have questions about this topic, or think you have a legal issue, consider contacting a lawyer. Fairness Center lawyers represent clients for free and can be reached here or at 844.293.1001. We strongly encourage you to pursue with haste any legal claim you believe you may have, as the mere passage of time may prevent you from exercising possible legal claims.
The Fairness Center currently offers free legal representation in Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut, Colorado, New Jersey and to federal employees, and may soon be expanding to other areas. The Fairness Center has represented clients involved in disputes with unions, including:
- American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE),
- American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME),
- American Federation of Teachers (AFT),
- International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW),
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters (Teamsters),
- Law Enforcement Employees Benevolent Association (LEEBA),
- National Education Association (NEA),
- National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU),
- New York State United Teachers (NYSUT),
- Pennsylvania State Corrections Officers Association (PSCOA),
- Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA),
- Service Employees International Union (SEIU),
- Transportation Workers Union of America (TWU),
- United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW),
- UNITE Here, and more.
NOTE: If you have questions about this topic, or think you have a legal issue, consider contacting a lawyer. Fairness Center lawyers represent clients for free and can be reached here or at 844.293.1001. We strongly encourage you to pursue with haste any legal claim you believe you may have, as the mere passage of time may prevent you from exercising possible legal claims.
Unions owe a duty of fair representation to all the employees in a bargaining unit they represent, whether they are union members or not. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that the duty is breached when a union’s actions toward an employee it represents are “arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith.” Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 190 (1967).
Many jurisdictions follow that standard, but the exact details of what the duty requires may vary by jurisdiction and circumstances.
The Fairness Center has represented clients, like Connecticut teacher John Grande, who have alleged that their union violated the duty of fair representation because they were not union members or because union officials misrepresented important information during collective bargaining, as was the case with Pennsylvania employee Mark Kiddo and his colleagues.
NOTE: If you have questions about this topic, or think you have a legal issue, consider contacting a lawyer. Fairness Center lawyers represent clients for free and can be reached here or at 844.293.1001. We strongly encourage you to pursue with haste any legal claim you believe you may have, as the mere passage of time may prevent you from exercising possible legal claims.
Unions owe a duty of fair representation to all the employees in a bargaining unit they represent, whether they are union members or not. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that the duty is breached when a union’s actions toward an employee it represents are “arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith.” Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 190 (1967).
Many jurisdictions follow that standard, but the exact details of what the duty requires may vary by jurisdiction and circumstances. Some states permit unions not to represent nonmembers in “individualized” grievances. Also, some states allow nonmembers to represent themselves in grievances, at least in the first stages.
The Fairness Center has represented clients, like Connecticut teacher John Grande, who alleged that their union violated the duty of fair representation because they were not union members or because union officials misrepresented important information during collective bargaining, as was the case with Pennsylvania employee Mark Kiddo and his colleagues.
NOTE: If you have questions about this topic, or think you have a legal issue, consider contacting a lawyer. Fairness Center lawyers represent clients for free and can be reached here or at 844.293.1001. We strongly encourage you to pursue with haste any legal claim you believe you may have, as the mere passage of time may prevent you from exercising possible legal claims.
If you are a public employee who is not a union member, you have a constitutional right not to pay fees to a union, according to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision in 2018.
Some courts have said that employees who were union members but who later resigned from the union had to continue paying union dues for a period of time in some circumstances. One example is if the employee had signed a membership card or application containing certain language.
We have successfully represented clients who were told they had to pay the union when they did not want to. However, the facts and circumstances of each situation vary, and our ability to offer representation may depend on the relevant legal jurisdiction.
NOTE: If you have questions about this topic, or think you have a legal issue, consider contacting a lawyer. Fairness Center lawyers represent clients for free and can be reached here or at 844.293.1001. We strongly encourage you to pursue with haste any legal claim you believe you may have, as the mere passage of time may prevent you from exercising possible legal claims.