In today’s news and commentary, employers and unions clash over a potential change to Canada’s federal labor code, Harvard’s Center for Labor and a Just Economy releases model state sectoral bargaining laws, and New Jersey sues Amazon for violation of antitrust laws. 

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government is preparing reforms to Canada’s federal labor code, with Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu holding a fresh round of consultations on the provision that lets the government end strikes by ordering binding arbitration. Employer groups are using the process to push for a “national public interest test” that would let the labor minister preemptively refer disputes in critical transportation sectors to arbitration before a strike even begins. The proposed change would build on Section 107 of the labor code, which the government has already used repeatedly in recent years to end strikes, most notably last August, when Air Canada flight attendants openly defied a back-to-work order before reaching their own agreement. The question came up again during WestJet’s strike earlier this week. Unions argue employers are exploiting trade tensions with the US to erode collective bargaining rights, while the government has floated a possible compromise to empower special mediators.

Meanwhile, the Center for Labor and a Just Economy at Harvard Law School yesterday released a Model State Sectoral Bargaining Law, a legislative template that would let states create industry-wide bargaining systems as a complement to traditional worksite unionizing. The model law, offered in two versions that differ mainly in how much authority a newly created State Labor Standards Board would wield, would set sector-wide wage and benefit floors, cover workers regardless of how they’re classified, and allow a Board to extend an existing union contract’s terms across an entire sector once that agreement covers 30% of the sector’s workers. The Center cites research suggesting that sectoral bargaining could more than double collective bargaining coverage in the United States. 

Finally, New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport filed a federal antitrust lawsuit Tuesday accusing Amazon of using its outsized buying power to dominate last-mile delivery services across New Jersey and the New York City metro area, arguing the company functions as a monopsony that turns nominally independent delivery contractors into “captive sellers.”. The complaint, filed in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleges Amazon’s control over package assignment and route creation leaves suppliers financially dependent on the company, which that ultimately harms drivers who face longer hours and lower pay. The state also claims Amazon has taken steps to prevent delivery companies from poaching each other’s drivers, chilling competition, and is asking the court to enjoin those practices. Amazon spokesman Steve Kelly denied the allegations, saying delivery suppliers are independent business owners free to work with other companies.