Dramatic twists over refinery bill test Republicans' support from unions

Jun. 23—A series of surprising twists and turns stemming from a suburban oil refinery have forced Minnesota Republican lawmakers into an awkward position that could test their support from blue-collar unions.

The proposal in question is both a workplace safety plan and a union-security plan that has galvanized unionized workers at Marathon Oil's St. Paul Park refinery.

On Tuesday, as dozens of unionized workers chanted "refinery safety!" outside the chamber, Republican state senators united in opposing the plan — a same plan that days before many of those same senators voted in favor of.

If Republicans, who control the Senate, can stay united, they can keep the plan from reaching the desk of Gov. Tim Walz, who has said he'll sign it. But Democrats have pounced on the idea and are vowing to try to bring it up again.

POLITICALLY FASCINATING

Politically, the situation is fascinating as both parties tussle over catering to a potentially influential voting bloc while scrambling to balance a two-year state budget as a June 30 deadline looms.

Once longtime loyalists to the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, hard-hat unions, such as pipefitters who work at refineries, have in recent years drifted toward Republicans. The reasons are numerous and complex, but one Minnesota dynamic has been a split among Democrats over mining in the Iron Range in northern Minnesota, as well as proposed oil pipelines. Strident opposition to several mining and pipeline proposals from Democrats in the metro has coincided with DFL losses on the Range, or, in the case of two longtime DFL senators, near defections, as Iron Range Sens. Tom Bakk and David Tomassoni this year elected to caucus independent of either party.

Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump's support, especially among non-college-educated white men, opened inroads for Republicans, who have made strides to jettison their former image a pro-management, anti-union party.

Above all, unions today are pragmatic when it comes to policy. "We support those who support us," said Joe Fowler, president of the Minnesota Building and Construction Trades Council, a powerful affiliation of labor groups. "It isn't partisan."

In fact, this week, amid the pressure from unions over the refinery issue, Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka, R-East Gull Lake, said numerous times that he would not support so-called "right-to-work" proposals that seek to weaken unions' strength in the workplace. That's a full reversal for Gazelka, who a decade ago sponsored an effort to put a right-to-work constitutional amendment on the Minnesota ballot.

Here's what put Gazelka and his caucus on the defensive.

REPUBLICANS SEEK DO-OVER

On Friday, Sen. Karla Bigham, DFL-Cottage Grove, sprung the provision on the Senate floor as an amendment to a much larger jobs bill.

The proposal, known as the "Safe and Skilled Workforce Act," had failed to gain traction in the GOP-controlled Senate earlier this year. Opposed by management, the plan would mandate that contractors for certain jobs at refineries only employ workers who have gone through a union apprentice program to certify them for safety issues. The plan came in the wake of concerns over the St. Paul Park refinery, but also would have prevented Marathon from continuing a practice of importing non-unionized, lower-wage workers, often from southern states.

"You've got Minnesota workers who are unemployed right now, and they're bringing people from out of state because they cost less," explained Jim Sloan, business agent of the Steamfitters Pipefitters Local 455 in St. Paul. "So its not just a union thing. It's a safety thing."

The proposal has the support of the Building and Construction Trades Council, as well as other politically significant organized labor groups.

The idea is opposed by Marathon. A representative of Marathon could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

Bigham's Friday amendment passed easily, 50-17 — a margin that included a majority of Republican senators in the tightly divided chamber. That hadn't been the Republicans' plan.

"I think a lot of those were political votes," Gazelka later said of his colleagues, some of whom were caught off-guard by Bigham's amendment. He explained that once they were faced with a provision supported by the trades unions, they felt compelled to vote in favor of it to avoid seeing "post cards" mailed to their constituents during next year's elections. (Gazelka himself is considering a run for governor against Walz, a Democrat.)

But it wasn't to be. The entire bill was pulled from the Senate floor on Friday and sent back to a committee controlled by Republicans who opposed the plan. They stripped it out.

On Tuesday, the whole situation played itself out again, but this time Republicans were united, and not a single Republican voted in favor of it.

Sen. Jason Rarick, R-Pine City, who chairs the labor and industry committee, was among a number of Republicans who sought to assuage the workers outside the chamber. He sympathized with their cause, he said, but supported the idea that the issue needed further study.

"This is an issue that cannot happen in a couple of weeks, a couple of days, or even a couple of months," Rarick said. "Even though I would love to vote yes on this, I cannot."

The issue threatened to force Republicans into exactly the place they don't want to be: picking sides between unions and business, Gazelka acknowledged as he attempted to explain where Republicans stand.

"The goal is to drive those groups together, not get in the middle and try to solve it," he said.

UNIONS 'DISHEARTENED'

It's unclear what the political consequences might be for Republicans. They still remain, for example, supportive of pipeline and mining plans supported by the same unions, while Democrats remain divided as opposition over pollution and climate change have often carried the day.

Before the vote, many of the union members emphasized that actions, not words, are what matter. "Today's vote will help define who our friends are," Fowler, of the Building and Construction Trades Council, said.

Afterward, messages were mixed. "I'm pretty disheartened actually," said Sloan, of the Steamfitters Pipefitters local, emphasizing that he was speaking for himself and not necessarily his entire union. "We know who voted against this and we'll hold them accountable and expose them."

Fowler, too, said he was disappointed. But when asked whether the vote meant his group would target Senate Republicans in next year's campaigns, he declined to commit.

"We view ourselves as a bipartisan group, but that was a partisan line," he said. But then he added: "I'm not sure what we'll do. We have to work with all these lawmakers."

The issue might not be dead.

House Speaker Melissa Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park, said it was likely the House, which is controlled by Democrats, would pass a similar measure, thus forcing Senate Republicans to confront it again.