Sarah Leadem is a joint degree candidate at Harvard Law School and the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
In today’s News and Commentary, Illinois voters will soon vote on a state constitutional amendment to guarantee collective bargaining, Yale graduate students file for a union election, and Striketober continues for Starbucks while negotiations stall and the company files unfair labor practice charges.
On November 8, Illinois voters will vote to amend their state constitution to guarantee the right to bargain collectively. Illinois’s Amendment 1, dubbed the “Workers’ Rights Amendment,” is a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. That is, it was passed by the Illinois General Assembly last year and now comes before voters in the general election. The ballot measure would amend the state constitution to guarantee all employees the “fundamental right to organize and to bargain collectively” and expressly prohibits any law that interferes with that right. Most significantly, this law would prohibit–or ban–future right to work laws in Illinois. While a few states have similar laws, this is the first time the issue will be left to voters. Amendment 1 has provoked contentious debate. Labor unions support the measure while the Chamber of Commerce and the Illinois Manufacturer’s Association oppose.
Yesterday, graduate student researchers and instructors filed a petition with the NLRB seeking a union election. A large majority of graduate students echoed the call to unionize: According to Unite-Here Local 33, the currently unrecognized graduate student union, more than 3,000 out of 4,000 graduate workers at Yale signed the petition. Students have called on Yale University to remain neutral in the election process. The University has not yet agreed to do so.
Striketober continues for Starbucks workers while negotiations stall and the company files charges. As reported by OnLabor, Starbucks representatives walked out of the first day of bargaining yesterday. The company cited objections to workers joining bargaining virtually and alleged that the union unlawfully recorded negotiations. Starbucks filed unfair labor practice charges against the union. Starbucks Workers United was quick to respond, highlighting that past ULP charges filed by Starbucks have been readily dismissed by the NLRB. Starbucks workers themselves have registered hundreds of violations against the company. At the same time, momentum continues: yesterday, Starbucks workers at the New York City Roastery went on strike and new Starbucks locations voted to join the union.
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
March 16
Starbucks' union negotiations are resurrected; jobs data is released.
March 15
A U.S. District Court issues a preliminary injunction against the Department of Veterans Affairs for terminating its collective bargaining agreement, and SEIU files a lawsuit against DHS for effectively terminating immigrant workers at Boston Logan International Airport.
March 13
Republican Senators urge changes on OSHA heat standard; OpenAI and building trades announce partnership on data center construction; forced labor investigations could lead to new tariffs
March 12
EPA terminates contract with second-largest union; Florida advances bill restricting public sector unions; Trump administration seeks Supreme Court assistance in TPS termination.
March 11
The partial government shutdown results in TSA agents losing their first full paycheck; the Fifth Circuit upholds the certification of a class of former United Airline workers who were placed on unpaid leave for declining to receive the COVID-19 vaccine for religious reasons during the pandemic; and an academic group files a lawsuit against the State Department over a policy that revokes and denies visas to noncitizens for their work in fact-checking and content moderation.
March 10
Court rules Kari Lake unlawfully led USAGM, voiding mass layoffs; Florida Senate passes bill tightening union recertification rules; Fifth Circuit revives whistleblower suit against Lockheed Martin.