“The common belief is that [the labour peace agreement] makes it much more likely that a union will successfully organize the workers and represent them when negotiating a collective agreement,” the association told its members. “If this is the case, a cannabis employer will face greater flexibility and higher costs for the activity and management of the collective relationship.” AB 1291 is no different. By forcing 1,291 reluctant cannabis companies to negotiate and accept labour peace agreements, AB imposed from 1291 an outcome that Congress deliberately left to the free play of economic forces. The NNRA does not allow public and local authorities to interfere with the right of employers to communicate with workers about union training in accordance with Section 8 (c). Nor does it allow the governments of the federal states and municipalities to introduce “a standard of balanced bargaining power. or to define economic sanctions that could be allowed for negotiators in an ideal or balanced state of collective bargaining. (Machinists, 427 U.S. at 149-50.) But that`s what AB 1291 seems to be doing. As a result, AB 1291 may be unconstitutional. Political adviser Mike Madrid said it was not uncommon for work to use its political muscles to force companies to bend to their will. Although the unions have been helpful in getting the cannabis industry off to a new start, the honeymoon is over, Madrid said.
The Boston Globe has a well-told story this morning about the United Food and Commercial Workers` union campaign at the IAnthus-specific Mayflower Medicinals plant in Massachusetts. It`s no secret that unions – particularly UFCW – are aggressively campaigning across the cannabis industry for operators in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Illinois, California and other pro-work countries. Filed Under: Policy – Legal Tagged With: Authorization cards, Labour Peace Agreements, National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”), United Food and Commercial Workers This week, the letter is signed by the following union leaders: In a letter to these governors, UFCW called the agreement an important first step in strengthening the cannabis industry and supporting good jobs, but also stressed the need to invest in high standards. that put consumers and workers first. UFCW President Marc Perrone issued the following statement: California`s largest marijuana association is in a dilemma after powerful unions accused the organization of distributing an anti-union document and called on Democratic politicians to “dissociate themselves from cooperation with the group” to show the immense political strength of the work being organized on the state Capitol. “A strong, powerful and diverse cannabis workforce is essential to realizing the intent of voters to deliver prop 64 – a regulated market that ensures the safety of consumers, communities and workers,” said Amber Baur, Executive Director of the UFCW Western States Council. “To this end, the UFCW Western States Council is actively engaged on many issues, both with the industry and with its working partners. This includes lowering the threshold of the peace agreement on labour. Since its passage in 2018, the Cannabis Use Act (“MAUCRSA”) has required cannabis licence applicants of 20 or more people to “make the declaration that the applicant has already signed and complies with the terms of an employment contract.”  (Cal. bus. Prof. Code Nr.
26015.5 (a) (5) (A).) A peace agreement, as defined in California`s cannabis legislation, must include at least the following obligations: Helping our members put food on our nation`s tables and serving customers in all 50 states, Canada and Puerto Rico. Learn more about UFCW on www.ufcw.org The U.S. Supreme Court decision at Chamber of Commerce v. Brown, 554 U.S. 60 (2008) is also rich in teachings. In Brown, it was the California Assembly Bill 1889 (“AB 1889”), which prohibits some private employers from using public funds to “support, promote or discourage union organizations.” (Id.