Many years ago, one of the most knowledgeable political operatives I know told me a great story about a meeting he had with labor leaders.

My friend was chief of staff for a Republican senator. For the senator’s first few campaigns, unions stridently opposed him. But he won by increasingly large margins. Eventually, the senator was consistently cruising to re-election with nearly 70 percent of the vote.

When my friend and the senator met with union representatives during the senator’s third term, the labor chiefs were singing a different tune. They were seeking ways to cooperate with the senator to move their agenda forward. They succinctly described their change of heart: “Senator, if we can’t beat you, we’re for you.”

That kind of attitude is now framing the way the business lobby approaches several issues. Democratic majorities on Capitol Hill are only going to grow in the next election. Traditional Republican business allies are being defeated or are retiring in droves.

From 1995 through 2006, Republicans held sway in the House and Senate. Business interests could squelch, delay or modify employment proposals that were deemed too burdensome for corporations.

Now, Democrats control the legislative agenda. For the moment, they can’t ram through everything they want, especially with a slim 51-49 majority in the Senate. But they are the ones framing the debate. For the most part, they propose legislation and Republicans (and the business lobby) have to reach out or risk getting flattened.

Lately, the business community has decided to negotiate with advocacy groups and work out compromises on bills that could have been a nightmare for HR professionals.

For instance, they have reached an accommodation on a mental health parity bill that will equalize coverage for medical procedures and for mental health. But it will not expand mental health coverage to every ailment listed in a diagnostic manual used in the psychiatry profession, a provision that business adamantly opposed.

Another recent example involves a bill that would broaden the interpretation of a law that prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities. The original version of the measure drew opprobrium from the corporate lobby, which argued that it would generate frivolous lawsuits.

After months of negotiations with disability advocacy groups, a compromise bill emerged that doesn’t please everyone yet doesn’t enrage anyone to the point of causing them to dig in against the measure. The bill was approved by the House in late June, 402-17.

The Society for Human Resource Management hails the agreement as a victory for workplace fairness. The machinations on this bill may have caught some SHRM members by surprise. As an organization that often takes the management side on legislation, this kind of accommodation was a change of pace.

Former SHRM president and CEO Susan Meisinger told an audience at the SHRM annual conference in Chicago last month that the bill illustrates how HR can be a catalyst for overcoming corporate inertia and making the workplace more diverse.

“We need to be that third option between action and inaction, between ‘yes’ and ‘no,’ ” she said.

Mike Aitken, SHRM director of governmental relations, put it this way during a public policy session at the SHRM show: “Our job at SHRM is not just always to oppose things.”

The cooperation also is a sign of hope that Washington can work in an era of bitter partisanship.

“If this works, if the [bill] passes and gets signed into law, it would be a great model,” says Larry Lorber, a partner at the Washington law firm Proskauer Rose and a leader of the coalition supporting the disability bill.