Brisbo said, however, that other states had similar requirements. A labour peace agreement does not require union training, but simply requires employers and workers to come to the table to show that they can avoid work stoppages that would hurt product supply and the whole new industry, he said. There are other serious doubts about the details of the proposal, as it did not contain details. How could such a contract effectively prevent work disruptions within the union? How would a single union provide adequate protection if several unions could eventually initiate organizing efforts in these companies? “Our members have asked themselves, “How does an entrepreneur negotiate fairly the content of a peace agreement if he is forced to sign this agreement?” said Schneider. Calley added: “It`s hard to know all the components. What does a company pay?┬áIn January, the state legislator simultaneously passed decisions against the treaty`s mandate. The government will probably point to a similar provision in California`s marijuana licensing system to support its proposal. California rules stipulate that a licensee of more than 20 employees must enter into an employment contract, but this provision was explicitly included in the language of Proposition 64, the election initiative that legalized marijuana with adult consumption in California. Nevertheless, most legal experts expect the California rule to eventually be repealed in violation of the National Labor Relations Act. In developing permanent rules for the public cannabis industry, Michigan regulators proposed that all legal cannabis companies be required to enter into labor agreements, in which a company allows a union to organize their store. But that language and other rules have been removed from the final version, which is expected to come into effect this week. Andrew Brisbo, Executive Director of the MRA, said that labour peace agreements should contribute to the stability of the developing market in order to combat the illegal market and ensure that consumers have access to safe products.

Cannabis organizations mostly opposed it, as individual workers and other officials largely supported the labor peace agreements contained in the proposed rules for the industry, in Wednesday`s public statement to the Marijuana Regulatory Agency. The rules define a labour peace agreement as “an agreement between a licensee and any organization of good faith work that at least protects the interests of the state by prohibiting labour organizations and members from participating in strikes, work stoppages, boycotts and other economic interventions in the plaintiff`s affairs.” The debate over the Michigan labour peace agreement comes at a time when discussions about unions in the cannabis industry are growing in the United States and Canada. New York, for example, requires such agreements in its medical cannabis industry. In Illinois, the Adult Legalization Act is: “The General Assembly supports and promotes job neutrality in the cannabis industry” – in short, employers do not interfere in efforts to organize employment – and the question of whether a company is considering such an agreement is considered positive in assessing business license applications. There is a long series of legal precedents that show that whitmer`s proposed rule is unconstitutional. The Supremacy Clause to the U.S. Constitution enforces federal laws on state and local laws that may be in conflict, and federal law reserves the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) the sole power to regulate private sector labour relations. In 2005, a U.S.

District Court ruled that a similar provision in Wisconsin, which would require contractors with local governments to enter into an employment contract, would be contrary to the National Labor Relations Act.