Ufcw Labor Peace Agreement
Given the decline in union membership in the private sector in the United States (currently 6.2%), it should come as no surprise that unions see the growth of the cannabis industry as a golden opportunity to reverse this downward trend. In particular, one union, United Food & Commercial Workers, boasts at its site of representing tens of thousands of cannabis workers employed in grow and grow facilities, production and processing plants, as well as laboratories and pharmacies. The amendments highlighted Section 8(c) “the intention of Congress to promote free debate on issues that separate work and management.” (Id. at 6-7.) The fact that Congress amended the NRA instead of leaving it to the courts to correct theRB`s decisions on a case-by-case basis is “an indication of the importance congress attaches to such `free debate.`” (Id. 7.) In addition, sections 8 (a) and 8 (b) show that “if the Congress has attempted to set limits on the representation of interests for or against trade union organizations, it has explicitly defined the mechanisms”. (Brown, 554 U.S. to 67.) In addition, “the amendment to Article 7 draws attention to the right of workers to refuse to join trade unions, which implies an underlying right to obtain information that opposes unionization.” (Id.) “The addition of Article 8(c) expressly excludes any regulation of discourse on trade union organization as long as the communications do not involve a `threat of retaliation or violence or promises of benefits.` (Id. [Internal citation omitted]) Based on these general principles, the court concluded that “California`s political judgment that partisan employer speech necessarily affects a worker`s decision to join a union or be represented by a union,” set aside AB 1889. (Id. at 68 [internal citation omitted]) The facts of Golden State I are revealing here. Like Golden State Taxi Company I, California cannabis companies are now faced with an “All or Nothing” hobson choice under AB 1291. If a cannabis company refuses to negotiate a work agreement with a work organization, it effectively loses the right to do business in California.
But if the cannabis trade negotiates a labor deal, the union knows full well that it can make huge concessions in exchange for its members giving up one of its most valuable economic weapons – the power to strike. On October 12, 2019, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1291 (“AB 1291”), which requires the company to sign a “labor peace agreement” with a union or risk the loss of its cannabis license; This will strengthen the already union-friendly national cannabis law. Ab 1291 has enjoyed the support and support of various unions, including the United Food and Commercial Workers Western States Council, a branch of 170,000 members representing thousands of cannabis workers. This bill, along with other California and local laws and laws, indicate a growing insistence by public and local regulators that employers doing business in California accept union-friendly demands. However, many of these new pro-union laws, including from 1291 on, could be unconstitutional. In a letter to these governors, the UFCW called the deal an important first step in strengthening the cannabis industry and supporting good jobs, but it also stressed the need to invest in high standards that put consumers and workers first. Marc Perrone, president of the UFCW, issued the following statement: “The general belief is that [labour peace agreements] make it much more likely that a union will successfully organize workers and represent them in the negotiation of a collective agreement,” the association told its members. “If this happens, a cannabis employer will face reduced flexibility and increased costs of operating and managing collective bargaining.”  A labour peace (also known as a labour harmony agreement) is essentially a contract between an employer and an organised trade union in which the employer undertakes to assist the trade union in organising the employer`s staff (i.e.: