Missouri Right to Collective Bargaining Initiative (2018)

Missouri Right to Collective Bargaining Initiative
Election date November 6, 2018
Topic Labor and unions
Status Not on the ballot
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin Citizens
List of Missouri measuresMissouri Proposition A - AugustMissouri Amendment 1Missouri Amendment 2Missouri Amendment 3Missouri Amendment 4Missouri Proposition BMissouri Proposition CMissouri Proposition DSubmit

The Missouri Right to Collective Bargaining Initiative was not on the ballot in Missouri as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018.

The measure would have provided a constitutional right to employees to negotiate, enter into, and enforce a collective bargaining agreement.

The goal of the amendment's proponents was to overturn any laws prohibiting unions from collecting dues from employees in their bargaining units as a condition of employment, also known as right-to-work laws, that the state legislature passed and governor signs.

Text of measure

Ballot title

As multiple versions of this initiative were filed for circulation, the secretary of state crafted a ballot title for each one.

Note: In Hill et al. v. Ashcroft (June 27, 2017), two of the following 10 ballot initiative summaries were rewritten. Updated ballot titles will be provided when available.

Measure 2018-092
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prohibit impairing, restricting or limiting the ability of employees to negotiate, enter into and enforce certain collectively bargained agreements with an employer? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-093
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prohibit impairing, restricting or limiting the negotiation and enforcement of certain collectively bargained agreements with an employer? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-094

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to: allow employers to have the right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives chosen by them and their employees; and prohibit impairing, restricting or limiting the negotiation and enforcement of certain collectively bargained agreements with an employer? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-095

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to: allow employers to have the right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives chosen by them and their employees; and allow an employer and employees’ chosen representatives to require that employees in a position represented by a representative of the employees’ choosing to contribute a pro-rata share of representational costs? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-096
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prohibit impairing, restricting or limiting the ability of employees to negotiate, enter into and enforce certain collectively bargained agreements with an employer? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-097
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prohibit impairing, restricting or limiting the negotiation and enforcement of certain collectively bargained agreements with an employer? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-098

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to: allow employers to have the right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives chosen by them and their employees; and prohibit impairing, restricting or limiting the negotiation and enforcement of certain collectively bargained agreements with an employer? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-099

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to: allow employers to have the right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives chosen by them and their employees; and allow an employer and employees’ chosen representatives to require that employees in a position represented by a representative of the employees’ choosing to contribute a pro-rata share of representational costs? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-101
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prohibit restricting or impairing an agreement that requires employees to support their chosen collective bargaining representative? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Measure 2018-102
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prohibit restricting or impairing an agreement that requires employees to support their chosen collective bargaining representative? State and local government entities expect no costs or savings. Any change in state and local revenue is unknown.

Constitutional changes

See also: Article I, Missouri Constitution

The measure would have amended Section 29 of Article I of the Missouri Constitution.

Full text

The full text of the measure is available for the 10 proposals:

• Petition 2018-092
• Petition 2018-093
• Petition 2018-094
• Petition 2018-095
• Petition 2018-096
• Petition 2018-097
• Petition 2018-098
• Petition 2018-099
• Petition 2018-101
• Petition 2018-102

Sponsor

The measure was proposed by Mike Louis, who was the president of the Missouri AFL-CIO.

Background

Amendment 23

Voting on Labor and Unions
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local labor and unions Local project labor agreements Local pensions

See also: Missouri Right to Work, Amendment 23 (1978)

Missouri Amendment 23, an initiated constitutional amendment, was on the ballot in 1978. The measure would have added language to the state constitution that said that an individual has a right to work regardless of membership or non-membership in a labor organization. Voters defeated the ballot initiative 60.02 to 39.98 percent.

2015 and 2016

In 2015, Gov. Jay Nixon (D) vetoed a right-to-work bill that the state legislature passed. He explained his veto, saying, "For generations, the ability of workers to join together and bargain collectively for fair wages, and training has lifted the living standards of families everywhere both union and non-union."

Following the general election on November 8, 2016, Republicans remained in control of both chambers of the state legislature and Eric Greitens (R) defeated Chris Koster (D) to become governor. The change in partisan control of the governorship made Missouri a Republican trifecta. The term trifecta describes a government in which a single party controls both legislative chambers and the governorship.

Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, described the 2016 gubernatorial election in Missouri as the most important in the nation because of the right-to-work issue. Democrat Chris Koster opposed right-to-work on the campaign trail, stating, "I’m opposed to using government regulations to lower the wages of Missourians. Eric’s desire to roll back collective bargaining rights in Missouri is inconsistent with the goal of building a strong middle class." Gov. Greitens said he would sign a right-to-work law during his campaign. He responded to Koster's criticism of him on the issue, saying, "Eric absolutely believes right-to-work is a necessary step to create good-paying jobs, and he will sign it as governor."

Speaker of the House Todd Richardson (R-152) and Senate President Pro Tempore Ron Richard (R-32) said passing right-to-work legislation would be a priority in 2017. The following table show's partisan control of the state House, state Senate, and governor's office since 1992.

Missouri Party Control: 1992-2025
Eight years of Democratic trifectas  •  Thirteen years of Republican trifectas
Scroll left and right on the table below to view more years.

Year	92	93	94	95	96	97	98	99	00	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25
Governor	R	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
Senate	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
House	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R

Senate Bill 19

On December 1, 2016, Senate Bill 19 was filed by Sen. Dan Brown (R-16). The Missouri Senate approved the legislation on January 26, 2017. The chamber’s nine Democrats, along with three Republicans, voted against the bill. On February 2, 2017, the Missouri House of Representatives passed Senate Bill 19, with 100 representatives approving and 59 disapproving the bill. Rep. Courtney Curtis (D-73) was the only Democrat in either chamber to support the bill. Rep. Doug Beck (D-92) attempted to change the bill into a legislative referral, which voters would have addressed on November 6, 2018. His amendment failed 91 to 64. Rep. Rory Rowland (D-29) sought to insert a sunset clause of five years into the bill, which would have required Senate Bill 19 be re-approved and signed every five years. The amendment failed 100 to 59. On February 2, 2017, the bill was delivered to the governor.

Gov. Eric Greitens (R) signed Senate Bill 19 on February 6, 2017. He said, "This is about more jobs - Missourians are ready to work, and now our state is open for business!"

Vote in the Missouri State Senate January 26, 2017
Requirement: Simple majority of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 17  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	21	12	0
Total percent	63.64%	36.36%	0.00%
Democrat	0	9	0
Republican	21	3	0

Vote in the Missouri House of Representatives February 2, 2017
Requirement: Simple majority of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 82  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	100	59	3
Total percent	61.73%	36.42%	1.85%
Democrat	1	44	1
Republican	99	15	2

Referendum

See also: Missouri Proposition A, Right to Work Referendum (August 2018)

Missouri AFL-CIO president Mike Louis and Missouri NAACP president Rod Chapel filed a veto referendum at the secretary of state's office on February 6, 2017. The referendum was designed to overturn Senate Bill 19. Signatures were due for the referendum on August 28, 2017. The veto referendum was certified for the ballot.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Missouri

Supporters of the initiative were required to collect a number of signatures equivalent to 8 percent of the 2016 gubernatorial vote in six of the eight state congressional districts. This means that the minimum possible number of valid signatures required was 160,199. Signatures needed to be filed with the secretary of state six months prior to the election on November 6, 2018. Six months prior to the election was May 6, 2018.

Mike Louis, president of the Missouri AFL-CIO, proposed 10 versions of the initiative. The petitions were approved for circulation on January 9, 2017. Signatures were not filed for the initiative.

Lawsuits

  

Lawsuit overview
Issue: Petition summary; whether the summary fails to explain the measure and its effects
Court: Cole County Circuit Court and Missouri Court of Appeals
Ruling: Court of Appeals reversed in part the Circuit Court's decision to rule in favor of the plaintiffs; Court of Appeals ruled 8 of 10 ballot titles as sufficient and fair
Plaintiff(s): Mary Hill, Michael J. Briggs, and Roger Bruce Stickler	Defendant(s): Secretary of State John R. Ashcroft and Mike Louis
Plaintiff argument: The ballot summaries are insufficient, misleading, and unfair and should be rewritten	Defendant argument: The ballot summaries meet the required criteria

  Source: Cole County Circuit Court and Fox 2

Hill et al. v. Ashcroft

Cole County Circuit Court

On January 19, 2017, Mary Hill, Michael J. Briggs, and Roger Bruce Stickler filed litigation in the Cole County Circuit Court against the Missouri secretary of state over the ballot summaries of the multiple initiative petitions. Hill, Briggs, and Stickler are workers backed by the Right to Work Foundation. A separate lawsuit was filed for each of the petitions. In the lawsuit over Initiative Petition 2018-092, plaintiffs said the ballot summary was "insufficient, misleading and/or unfair" and that it should be rewritten. According to plaintiffs, the ballot summary should had mentioned how the measure would impact union dues, collective bargaining agreements, and the right-to-work law. Plaintiffs suggested the following alternative ballot summary in their lawsuit:

“

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to prohibit the General Assembly and localities from barring agreements between public and private-sector labor unions and employers requiring payment of union dues and/or agency fees as a condition of continued employment?

”

Regarding the lawsuit, Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation, said, "These deliberately misleading initiative petitions are nothing more than an attempt by Big Labor to confuse voters in hope that the confusion will result in overturning popular Right to Work protections." Missouri AFL-CIO president Mike Louis responded to the lawsuit, stating, "Why is a DC-based special interest group, funded by the uber-rich, challenging the rights of hard-working Missourians to have their voices heard at the ballot box? Missouri voters wanted to see the swamp drained, that means putting the power back with the people."

On March 23, 2017, Judge Jon Beetem ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. He concluded, "Because the summary statements here do not provide this essential context, they are unfair and insufficient." Judge Beetem rewrote the ballot summaries.

Missouri Court of Appeals

On March 30, 2017, defendants appealed the Circuit Court's ruling to the Missouri Court of Appeals' Western District. On June 27, 2017, the Court of Appeals reversed most of the changes made to the ballot summaries by Judge Beetem. The appellate judges reinstated 8 of 10 of the original ballot summaries and made modifications to two ballot summaries.

Missouri Supreme Court

Plaintiffs in Hill et al. v. Ashcroft appealed the state Court of Appeals' ruling to the Missouri Supreme Court on July 12, 2017. However, the case was dropped after the ballot initiatives were dropped.

See also

Suggest a link

• Missouri 2018 ballot measures
• 2018 ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Missouri

External links

• Initiative Petitions at the Missouri Secretary of State