AUGUSTA — The on-again, off-again bill that put organized labor on high alert is now off-again.

For now.

The Legislature’s Labor Committee unexpectedly voted 11-1 Monday to hold over until next session a bill that would end the state’s collection of fees, or “fair share,” from nonunion, public-sector workers. The fees are transferred to the state employees union to pay costs associated with representing nonunion workers in salary negotiations and grievances. 

Republicans said the decision came after a late amendment to the bill, LD 309, created confusion during the June 2 public hearing. However, Democrats and labor advocates said Monday that the decision came after Republicans realized they didn’t have the votes to support the bill. 

Meanwhile, House Speaker Rep. Robert Nutting, R-Oakland, said the decision should put to rest accusations from the Maine State Employees Association that the GOP’s late-session decision to hear the bill after it languished in committee for months was designed to impact contract negotiations between the LePage administration and the MSEA.

“This couldn’t be further from the truth, and the decision to hold this over until next session should make that 100 percent clear,” Nutting said in a news release.

The motive for reintroducing the legislation had been called into question ever since Republican lawmakers sent the bill back to committee after indicating that it was headed to the legislative scrap heap.

During the June 2 public hearing LePage’s legal counsel, Dan Billings, told committee members that Louis DiLorenzo, a New York labor attorney who LePage last month hired at $295 an hour to help administration officials negotiate with the MSEA, had helped draft the amendment to LD 309.

“Billings made all of our points,” Sen. Troy Jackson, D-Allagash, said.

Chris Quint, executive director of the MSEA, said Monday’s decision came after Republican leadership knew it didn’t have the votes to pass LD 309. Quint said he was confident there was enough support from Republicans in committee to vote against the bill if a vote had been held.

If true, such crossover could have foreshadowed a defeat in the full Legislature.

The amended right-to-work bill was designed to reverse decisions under Democratic-controlled legislatures that forced the state to collect “fair share” fees from nonunion workers.

Opponents of fair-share say workers shouldn’t be forced to pay unions fees because they’re private organizations that traditionally support Democratic causes and candidates.

Fair-share proponents argue that nonunion workers receive the benefits of collective bargaining, such as workplace protections and negotiated wages, while paying roughly half of full union dues.

Nonunion state workers pay about $250 year in fair-share fees, or about $5 per week.

There are about 2,700 nonunion state workers.

Both sides presented their cases to the Legislature’s Labor Committee during a public hearing that approached seven hours in length and ended at close to 11 p.m.

The reintroduction of the bill, also unexpected, drew more than 700 protesters to the State House last week.

Republicans said the amended version of LD 309 is no longer a “right-to-work” bill, but the hearing drew right-to-work supporters and labor advocates who viewed the bill as Gov. Paul LePage’s opening salvo against organized labor.

Labor advocates say LD 309 is more insidious than the administration is willing to admit.

Jeff Young, a Brunswick labor attorney, told the committee that the bill should be called “The Full Employment Act for Labor Lawyers” because its provisions — which he said were unprecedented in any other state — would cause “confusion and chaos.”

Young said the bill would also prohibit the collection of dues from union members after a contract expires. Because most collective-bargaining contracts go beyond the previous contract’s expiration date, unions could be forced to accept “unacceptable terms.”

Rep. Andre Cushing, R-Hampden, said Monday that the latter was a concern that factored into leadership’s decision to hold the bill over to next session.

The decision was unexpected because the committee members and a legislative analyst worked through the weekend to rework the bill for a potential committee vote on Monday.

[email protected]