Colorado lawmakers on Tuesday officially approved the proposal to eliminate the requirement for an election before labor organizations can negotiate to impose dues on non-union members.

The measure’s fate remains uncertain, as Gov. Jared Polis has said he would veto it if business and labor, which had been negotiating over the legislation, failed to reach a compromise.

Both sides confirmed over the weekend that no deal had been reached.

Senate Bill 005, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez, D-Denver, Sen. Jessie Danielson, D-Wheat Ridge, and Reps. Javier Mabrey, D-Denver, and Jennifer Bacon, D-Denver, seeks to repeal 80-year-old requirement to hold an election to establish a “union security” agreement at a an-already unionized workplace. Under that law, once agreed to by the company and the labor group, non-union workers would be required to pay union fees.

Polis has until June 6 to act on the bill, which passed on a 43-22 party-line vote. He could sign it or veto it — or allow the measure to go into effect without his signature.

Federal law governs union formation. For that election, a labor group must receive a simple majority to unionize — a related but separate issue than what’s before Colorado lawmakers.

At issue at the Colorado Capitol is the state law requiring the “second” election to allow a unionized workplace to negotiate over fees on non-union members. That election requires a higher threshold of a 75% “yes” vote to pass. The unions want to get rid of it.

The business and labor sectors are divided on the measure since it was introduced early in the session. Polis told both groups he would not sign the measure into law unless they could reach a compromise. With the end of the session in sight, Polis pushed for a deal, but the parties did not reach a compromise.

Some Republicans took issue with the fact that under the bill, all employees at a unionized workplace — regardless of union membership — would be required to pay what labor calls “agency fees.” Proponents argued that these fees are only fair since unions are legally required to represent all employees, whether they are members or not, and the benefits secured thereby applies to everybody.

The bill would take choice away from workers, said Rep. Rebecca Keltie, R-Colorado Springs, who noted her father was a union member.

“I do believe in unions; I believe in what they do,” she said. “I’m proud to be a union daughter, but I believe this bill is not written in a way that allows for union and non-union to exist, so I will be a no.”

Assistant Minority Leader Ty Winter, R-Trinidad, echoed Keltie, adding he even spent time as vice president of a union in the mid-2000s.

He noted an amendment introduced by Rep. Bob Marshall, D-Highlands Ranch, which sought to eliminate the second election but would decrease the threshold to allow a union to negotiate over the dues on non-union members.

Had the amendment been included, Winter said he would’ve voted in favor of SB 005.

He said politicians around the country from both parties are sending jobs overseas, making life increasingly difficult for blue-collar workers.

“If we’re gonna have genuine discussions about you making the best wage you can to take care of your family, shipping jobs out of this state is not fair to you all,” he said. “It is not fair to take good-paying blue collar jobs and ship them out of this state, and I will never get behind that.”

Rep. Jamie Jackson, D-Aurora, spoke of how her mother’s union membership helped her earn better wages and provide security for her family.

“We need to make it easier for people to unionize instead of harder,” she said. “We know that when we uplift labor, that is a win-win for everybody It’s a win for labor, and it’s a win for business.”

Union membership has been shown to increase job satisfaction and performance while decreasing turnover, something both business and labor can support, she said, adding that directly impacts a business’s success and it “(enhances) morale, output, and ultimately the bottom line.”

“This bill ensures that workers can organize without retaliation or fear of interference. That should be a basic right, not a battleground,” she said.

Bacon expressed disappointment that the issue has become so polarized, especially when, she said, so many members from both parties have personal connections to unions.

Senate Bill 005 is “not asking for anything that is unique,” Bacon argued, considering Colorado is the only state in the country that requires two elections to begin discussions on “union security” agreements.

“We all need labor, and the principle of this bill says that those that want to show up and say they want to collectively bargain can do so in one vote,” she said.

union workers under a company agreement.

The labor coalition pushing the legislation and its allies at the state Capitol have insisted it’s about workers’ ability to unionize, a framing it adopted early on by arguing that unionization yields much better economic results for a state.

Business representatives have countered that the proposal has nothing to do with workers’ ability to form a union. They maintained that the legislation deals with imposing dues on all workers, regardless of whether they are union members.