Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
  • Home
  • About
    • Professor David Doorey
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Submissions
  • Student Blog Initiative
Canadian Law of Work Forum (CLWF)
Comparative Work LawUnions and Collective Bargaining

A Clean Slate: Reforming Law to Empower Workers

by Ben Sachs March 4, 2020
written by Ben Sachs March 4, 2020

By Sharon Block and Ben Sachs, Harvard Law School

Running throughout the Democratic presidential debates has been a consistent theme: We are living in an era of deep economic and political inequality, and these dual crises now threaten to undermine our democracy.

What does economic inequality look like today? Well, it would take an average Amazon worker 3.8 million years, working full time, to earn what CEO Jeff Bezos now possesses. And the country’s wealthiest 20 people own more wealth than half of the nation combined—20 people with more wealth than 152 million others.

On the political front, the facts are just as stark. Political scientists increasingly believe that our government no longer responds to the views of anyone but the wealthy.

Of course, these forms of inequality are mutually reinforcing: As economic wealth gets more concentrated, the wealthy build greater and greater political power that they, in turn, translate into favorable policies that lead to even more profound concentrations of wealth. And on and on.

This campaign season, the focus has been on a set of competing policy responses to these crises—health care reform, tax reform and education reform. But we think that there’s a more important solution. A better way to break the cycle of economic and political inequality. That solution is labor law. That’s because labor law is what enables workers—also known as the vast majority of Americans—to build economic and political power that can countervail the power of the wealthy.

Indeed, we know from history that when workers come together and collectively build organizations that are capable of countervailing the power of the wealthy and the power of corporations, the outcomes are profound. A large part of the explanation for our current crisis of economic inequality is the decline of the labor movement. Unions redistribute wealth—from capital to labor, from rich to poor—and without unions, we have lacked for a check on economic concentration.

The decline of the labor movement also explains much of the current crisis of political inequality. When unions were strong, they helped ensure that the government was responsive to the needs and desires of the poor and middle class; without unions, these millions of lower-income Americans have lost their most effective voice in our democracy. As Dolores Huerta, leader of the farmworkers historic organizing effort, put it, “Organized labor is a necessary part of democracy, [because] organized labor is the only way to have fair distribution of wealth.”

The question, however, is not how to restore the economy and the politics of the past. Nor is it how to restore the labor movement of its heyday. These cannot be the questions because although American democracy and the American economy were more responsive and more inclusive in the 1950s and 1960s, they were still profoundly exclusionary. Across our entire history, access to economic and political power has been unforgivably shaped by racial and gender discrimination, by discrimination based on immigration status, by sexual orientation and identity discrimination and by ableism.

What we need, then, is a new labor law that is capable of empowering all workers to demand a truly equitable American democracy and economy. That’s why over the past 18 months academics, advocates, union leaders and activists have come together to produce recommendations for a comprehensive rewrite of American labor law. This effort, called “Clean Slate for Worker Power,” has sought to answer the question: What would labor law look like if, starting from a clean slate, it was designed to empower working people to build an equitable economy and politics?

Our answer to this question comes in the form of a detailed set of policy recommendations that would transform how workers organize and exercise power. But the key to all of our recommendations is that the law must enable workers to countervail corporate power wherever corporate power impacts workers’ lives.

This means a labor law that equips workers to build and exercise power not just at the level of the individual workplace, but also across enterprises and industries, in the corporate board room and in our political democracy. The pathways to building such power, moreover, must be universal so no workers are left behind, which means that labor law reform must start by reversing decades-old exclusions that have a disproportionate effect on women and workers of color.

The biggest change we propose would be for labor law to allow workers to build power and engage in collective bargaining across entire industries, not just with individual firms. This requires us to create a sectoral bargaining system where agreements cover all employers and all workers in a sector—for example, bargaining between unions and the fast-food industry rather than bargaining between a union and a single McDonald’s franchise.

Through sectoral bargaining, labor law can take wages out of competition, relieving the downward pressure on pay that has so greatly contributed to the increase in income inequality. It would also reduce the incentives that firms now feel to fight unionization, and it would solve the puzzle—which plagues multiple industries and the gig economy—of who qualifies as an “employee.” Since all workers would be covered by sectoral agreements, it would no longer matter very much who is an employee and who is not.

Beyond sectoral bargaining, we also recommend giving workers multiple forms of workplace representation, including members-only unions and works councils. These structures, common in other advanced capitalist economies, facilitate both information sharing between workers and managers and can be a first step toward building the kind of strong unions required by a functioning sectoral bargaining system.

To ensure that workers are secure enough to take advantage of these new opportunities, moreover, we recommend that all workers in the United States be entitled to just-cause protection from discharge. And we argue that labor law needs to give workers a voice in the issues beyond wages and working conditions that are important to them and their communities, including employers’ impact on the environment.

Fundamentally redesigning our labor laws, rather than pursuing incremental reforms to our current laws, would provide the foundation for building powerful organizations for working people. At a time when the foundations of our democracy are being questioned, the project of creating a widespread system of workplace democracy is urgent.

This post was originally published as an op-ed in Newsweek. It is reproduced here with permission.

Clean Slateemployment lawLabor LawLegal ReformUnited States
0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
Ben Sachs

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

previous post
Confusion has its costs: Ontario’s teacher bargaining and the right to strike in Canada
next post
How the Ontario Labour Board Ruled Foodora Workers are “Employees” and Not Independent Contractors

You may also like

Real Pleadings: Has Uber Created a New Service...

February 15, 2021

Prof. Doorey’s Updated Beginners’ Guide to the Charter...

February 1, 2021

Calling the Shots: Is Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination a...

January 29, 2021

Would Rioting at Canada’s Parliament Building Be Grounds...

January 8, 2021

What is a Minority Union?

January 4, 2021

Canadian Bar Association Podcast: “After the Pandemic: Protecting...

December 17, 2020

David Doorey on Jacobin: “Collective Bargaining Needs a...

December 16, 2020

Arbitrator: Employees Must Get Swabbed for COVID

December 16, 2020

“Autonomous Worker” Regulation

December 1, 2020

Reflecting on the Use of Neutrality Agreements in...

November 27, 2020

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 219 other subscribers

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

CLWFFollow

CLWF
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
RSandillRicha Sandill@RSandill·
24 Feb

@SCLSclinic and I were so fortunate to represent this client last year. I am thrilled that this decision brings more clarity for family status accommodations rights amidst a pandemic that has tested parents, caregivers, and families like never before. https://twitter.com/CanLawWorkForum/status/1364605259071561730

CLWF@CanLawWorkForum

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364627677785821185Retweet on Twitter 13646276777858211851Like on Twitter 13646276777858211853Twitter 1364627677785821185
Retweet on TwitterCLWF Retweeted
TheLawofWorkDavid J. Doorey@TheLawofWork·
24 Feb

Here's my latest in @jacobinmag.

If Ontario's labor laws applied in Alabama, the Amazon vote would have been held months ago so workers could get back to their jobs. Instead, the NLRA permits Amazon to conduct a months' long onslaught of anti-union propaganda. https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1364613560425275392

Jacobin@jacobinmag

Amazon workers in Alabama are voting on whether to unionize, but the company is bombarding them with anti-union propaganda. In Canada, by contrast, votes are held quickly, making it harder for companies to stack the deck — a model that can work in the US. http://jacobinmag.com/2021/02/amazon-alabama-canada-labor-law-union-vote

Reply on Twitter 1364623976174092316Retweet on Twitter 13646239761740923168Like on Twitter 136462397617409231613Twitter 1364623976174092316
CanLawWorkForumCLWF@CanLawWorkForum·
24 Feb

New from @RSandill (counsel for applicant), discussing important new "family status" discrimination decision from OHRT:

"Kovintharajah v. Paragon Linen & Laundry: When Failure to Accommodate Child Care Needs is “Family Status” Discrimination"

https://lawofwork.ca/13360-2/

Reply on Twitter 1364605259071561730Retweet on Twitter 13646052590715617304Like on Twitter 13646052590715617304Twitter 1364605259071561730
Load More...

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.