The Colorado Sun Misinformation
The Colorado Sun Refused to Publish the Facts—Here They Are Anyway
Employees Deserve the Truth from Union Officials,” written by Nathan McGrath—a political activist and attorney from Pennsylvania with no apparent experience in Colorado’s public labor landscape. The piece was riddled with legal inaccuracies, omitted critical context, and mischaracterized Colorado contracts and labor law.
In response, a fact-based rebuttal was submitted by the President of the Pueblo Association of Government Employees (PAGE)—a local union directly implicated in the original article. The rebuttal clarified that outdated contract language referencing agency fees is unenforceable under the 2018 Janus v. AFSCME decision, that the Denver Housing Authority is not subject to Janus because it is not a public employer, and that no evidence has been presented of any worker being unlawfully charged union fees.
Despite the factual foundation, local relevance, and direct organizational stake in the issue, The Colorado Sun declined to publish the rebuttal. That decision speaks volumes.
It now appears The Colorado Sun does not prioritize fact-based journalism, legal accuracy, or even its own reputation for fairness. By publishing inflammatory out-of-state rhetoric while silencing informed local voices with firsthand knowledge of the contracts and institutions being discussed, the Sun undermines public trust in its editorial integrity.
The Facts They Wouldn’t Print
1. “Fair share” clauses are legally unenforceable under Janus
McGrath implies unions are actively charging non-members illegal dues. This is false. The U.S. Supreme Court’s Janus decision (2018) made it unconstitutional to require non-members to pay union fees without consent. Any contract language to the contrary—especially in agreements negotiated before 2018—is legally null. These outdated provisions cannot be acted on and do not justify accusations of misconduct.
2. Contract language ≠ contract enforcement
Outdated language is not the same as illegal behavior. In many cases, legacy clauses remain in effect until renegotiated. Their presence does not indicate that anyone is being unlawfully charged—it means the contract needs to be updated through the normal collective bargaining process. That process takes time and cooperation, not public shaming.
3. DHA is not a public employer under Janus
Denver Housing Authority is a quasi-governmental organization that is not subject to the Janus ruling. DHA operates a closed-shop model legally and transparently, informing all job applicants of the union membership requirement before hiring. McGrath’s omission of this fact is not a minor oversight—it is a fundamental misrepresentation of the legal status of the entity he criticizes.
4. No evidence of actual violations
McGrath's piece includes zero evidence of employees being unlawfully charged or denied representation. He relies solely on outdated language and extrapolation. The rebuttal submitted by PAGE’s president made this clear—and The Colorado Sun refused to print it.
Why This Matters
The Sun’s refusal to publish a factual, locally informed rebuttal—submitted by the very union misrepresented in its pages—raises serious concerns about its editorial judgment. A responsible news outlet does not suppress fact-based responses from affected parties, especially when those facts directly refute published inaccuracies.
The people of Colorado, especially public workers and taxpayers, deserve clarity—not misinformation from out-of-state ideologues and silence from local journalists. If The Colorado Sun truly values its reputation, it should explain why it published misleading commentary and then denied space for factual correction from a legitimate local labor leader.
Until then, the facts will be published elsewhere—by those who still believe in truth, accountability, and the right to respond.
The union was informed of the politically motivated and factually inaccurate publication on or about July 15, 2025.
Here is the original response submitted to The Colorado Sun from the PAGE Union
Setting the Record Straight on Public-Sector Unions in Colorado
Nathan McGrath’s July 8 opinion piece, “Colorado Public Employees Deserve the Truth from Union Officials,” raises concerns about labor contracts in Colorado—but it does so using legal inaccuracies, misleading framing, and omissions that ultimately do more to confuse than inform.
It is troubling that a Pennsylvania-based activist with no direct experience in Colorado labor law or collective bargaining would submit such a mischaracterized article to a reputable outlet like The Colorado Sun. Coloradans deserve factual, grounded reporting—not politically motivated conjecture.
First, McGrath references so-called “fair share” clauses in collective bargaining agreements that allegedly compel non-members to pay union fees. However, this overlooks a basic legal reality: the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in Janus v. AFSCME rendered such provisions unenforceable. If any such language appears in legacy contracts, it is legally null—meaning it cannot be acted on, enforced, or used to compel payment.
Second, these contracts were negotiated prior to Janus, and haven’t yet been revised through standard renegotiation cycles. The presence of outdated language is not proof of ongoing legal violations or unethical behavior, as McGrath implies—it is a matter of process.
Third, McGrath’s mischaracterization of the Denver Housing Authority (DHA) is deeply misleading. DHA is not a public-sector employer subject to Janus. As a quasi-governmental entity, DHA lawfully maintains a closed-shop structure, and all job applicants are informed of union membership requirements as a condition of employment. These facts are publicly available and should have been disclosed.
Finally, there is no evidence presented in the article that any Colorado public employee has been unlawfully charged dues or denied representation since Janus. The author relies entirely on contract excerpts and speculation to fuel concern—without offering a single verifiable example of a rights violation.
The Colorado Sun has built its reputation on independent, fact-based journalism. Publishing an editorial riddled with inaccuracies and out-of-context claims undercuts the very trust the paper has worked hard to earn. Public employees, taxpayers, and union members all deserve transparency—but transparency starts with truth, not rhetoric.
I respectfully encourage The Colorado Sun to consider printing this response to clarify the legal and factual issues for its readership.
As of July 31, 2025, The Colorado Sun has not provided any response or justification to the President of the Pueblo Association of Government Employees (PAGE) regarding its refusal to publish a factual, ethical, and locally relevant rebuttal article.
This continued silence undermines the publication’s credibility. For the union leadership and its members, The Colorado Sun’s editorial choices increasingly appear to reflect political bias rather than a commitment to journalistic integrity or public service. Their actions suggest a disregard for the voices of Colorado’s working people—particularly those in the public sector who deserve fair and accurate representation in the media.
Comments
Post a Comment