Controversial union-busting bill is one precarious vote away from passage at the Utah Legislature. 

click to enlarge

• Benjamin Wood
• Firefighters and other public safety employees watch from the gallery as Senators debate new restrictions on collective bargaining on Thursday, Jan. 30, 2025.

CAPITOL HILL—A final vote on a controversial bill to eliminate collective bargaining activity by public sector labor unions is expected Friday after earning the preliminary support of the Utah Senate on Thursday.

HB267 cleared the House with a relatively narrow 42-32 victory on Monday, with members of the Senate then voting 18-10 in the first of two required chamber debates on the proposal. But Thursday's preliminary tally included several "aye on two" votes in the Senate—enough to threaten the bill's passage—an informal method for lawmakers to indicate personal reservations against a proposal and the potential for their support to flip.

"You may not want to count on me tomorrow," Sen. Evan Vickers, R-Cedar City, said during the chamber's roll call. "We’ll see."

Vickers was one of several members of the GOP majority who expressed criticisms of HB267, which in its current form would prohibit public sector employees—like teachers, firefighters, policemen, etc.—and the government entities that employ them from engaging in a collective bargaining process. Draper Republican Sen. Kirk Cullimore, the bill's Senate sponsor, said that public employees would be free to join and participate in labor organization, but those organizations should have no larger role in setting contract and policy provisions than any individual member of the community.

"Public employees will retain the freedom to join unions and advocate for their interests," Cullimore said. "It puts unions on the same footing as everybody else within the state."

Cullimore said a substitute version of HB267 will be presented before its final vote, and that he believes most public sector unions will move to a position of neutrality after that language is available, as virtually every labor association in the state is currently opposed and mobilizing its membership to advocate against the bill on the hill. The substitute would remove the outright ban on collective bargaining and instead allow it only after securing a majority vote among all of the employees within a particular cohort, Cullimore said, while still imposing new reporting and other regulatory requirements contained in the original bill.

"It would still allow for the majority of the working class to vote for a collective bargaining agent," he said.

During debate on Thursday, several Senators said the promise of a substitute bill was enough for their "aye on two" vote, allowing the bill to proceed to a final vote, while others criticized the blind voting as an unnecessary rush when weeks remain in the 2025 session.

"We cannot vote on a bill that we don't know about. We are not voting on a promise, we are not voting on a compromise," said Sen. Kathleen Reibe, D-Cottonwood Heights. "We vote on the bill that is in front of us and this bill is a bad bill."

Sen. Dan Thatcher, R-West Valley, said that he would have preferred to see the bill held until the substitute language was ready. Constituents have urged him to oppose the legislation, he said, and it is not yet known whether the changes contemplated by the bill's sponsors would change their positions.

"What I have heard is tremendous concern," Thatcher said. "What I see in the faces of the gallery here is tremendous concern."

Other members of the chamber made clear that they are fundamentally opposed to labor unions. One said he grew up hating unions after a strike and mill fire forced his family to relocate while he was a child. Another, Pleasant Grove Republican Sen. Brady Brammer, argued that modern times have made labor unions irrelevant, and that teacher salaries not increasing by the same percentage of overall state education spending is proof of the union's failure to improve conditions for employees.

"The unions are not doing what you think they’re doing. That’s the bottom line," Brammer said. "They’re not serving our employees very well. They would be better off without them."

Large portions of public education funding are restricted to particular areas of spending, making them unavailable for teacher salary increases. And of the unrestricted funding awarded to schools, a significant amount—and in some years virtually all—of those dollars are consumed by inflationary costs. What remains after those dedicated line items and cost increases can then be paid to teachers in the form of raises, typically after negotiation with the Utah Education Association and its district-level chapter organizations.

The union bill also follows the high-profile failure of lawmakers—and particularly South Jordan Republican Rep. Jordan Teuscher, lead sponsor of HB267—to place a constitutional amendment on the 2024 ballot that, if successful, would have dramatically altered the way public education is funded in Utah. The UEA, a perennial target of the state's GOP majority, opposed that amendment, which was found to have violated state election law and was subsequently invalidated by the courts, along with another proposed amendment challenged on similar grounds.

Senate Minority Leader Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City, argued that HB267 is clearly intended to be punitive against organized labor.

"This is a very direct attack on unions—period. I think that should be acknowledged," Escamilla said. "If this collective bargaining means so much to them to feel protected, safe and heard, they deserve this."

Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, said there was no need to hold the bill until the substitute is ready, as a second vote is required for passage and since there was support within the majority caucus for the bill as it currently stands. He argued that unlike private sector unions, which have an interest in maintaining a profitable workplace, public sector employees face little risk of their demands leading to bankruptcy.

He said the proposed change to allow collective bargaining only with majority support within the workplace is an appropriate measure to ensure that workers' interests are heard.

"If you’re going to represent an industry or a group of people, don’t you think you oughta have at least half of them with you before you come to the table?" Adams said.

Escamilla said the members of her caucus are likely to oppose the bill—all Democratic senators voted "no" on Thursday—even after the substitute is prepared. But she added that no members of the minority party had been invited to participate in negotiations on HB267.

"We still have concerns on the policy itself," Escamilla said. "We were not included on any of those conversations. To be extremely clear, we’re getting the same information as you are getting it."

On Thursday, Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall issued a statement calling on the Senate to oppose HB267. Salt Lake City is the only municipality in Utah to formal participate in collective bargaining with public sector labor unions, a point frequently reiterated by Cullimore in arguments about the bill's limited impact, but which critics have also raised to question the proposal's alleged necessity.

"From our dedicated police officers, firefighters and 911 dispatchers, to library staff and public utilities workers, over 60% of Salt Lake city's nearly 4,000 employees are union members," Mendenhall said. "This bill would not only harm those on the frontlines but would also erode the values of fairness and respect for hard work that we should be upholding in our state."