Committee backs labor-peace agreement requirement for cannabis businesses, 6-4

The House Labor, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee on a 6-4 vote recommended passage of House Bill 331, which would require adult-use cannabis businesses with 10 or more employees to enter labor peace agreements as a condition of licensure.

Proponents said the bill is narrowly focused on the organizing phase and is intended to prevent economic disruptions while preserving workers’ right to vote on union representation. "This is not a collective bargaining agreement," said Steven Curtis, a labor lawyer with the Albuquerque firm Yoots and Valdez. "This is a bill to create labor peace during the organizing phase of the relationship." Curtis told the committee the agreements would require employers to allow reasonable access for labor organizations while the organizations agree not to picket, strike or boycott during an organizing campaign.

Opponents — including industry representatives and small-license holders — said the requirement would single out cannabis businesses and could harm small operators. "Workers in New Mexico already enjoy protections under the National Labor Relations Act and the National Labor Relations Board," said Matt Kennicott, CEO of The Plug and a microlicensee in Socorro. "We support the right to organize, but we don't see this legislation as necessary." Ben Lewinger of the New Mexico Cannabis Chamber of Commerce said many licensees are small and financially constrained, and warned the bill does not exclude microlicenses: "There is currently a section in rules that encourages cannabis businesses, excluding microlicenses, to maintain a labor peace agreement. Unfortunately, there's no provision in the proposed bill that would exclude microlicenses," he said, later adding industry revenue figures: "In December, 65% of operating storefronts reported less than $50,000 in monthly revenue, and 41% reported less than $25,000."

Committee members questioned federal preemption and the choice of cannabis as a target. Representative Reap asked whether the National Labor Relations Act preempts state requirements; Curtis and the bill sponsor responded that while preemption doctrines exist, states retain some authority over labor regulation and that similar measures exist in other states. The sponsor said the bill was intentionally drafted with a 10-employee threshold after consulting the Economic Development Department and industry stakeholders.

Several members also pressed on what an agreement would require in practice. "There is no upfront cost," Curtis said. "It just requires that they provide access at reasonable times to the employees." Supporters said the agreements are intended to reduce strikes or picketing that could disrupt a new industry, while opponents warned of litigation: states that have attempted similar mandates have faced lawsuits in some cases, and Oregon and New York were cited by witnesses as places with current or anticipated court challenges.

After debate, Representative Anaya moved a do-pass recommendation; Representative Ortiz seconded. The committee roll call included recorded votes: Anaya (yes), Garcia (yes), Hall (no), Johnson (yes), Mejia (no), Ortiz (yes), Reed (no), Terrazas (no), Torres Velasquez (yes), Roybal Caballero (yes). The chair announced the motion carried 6-4.

The bill now moves from committee with a do-pass recommendation; the text specifies that a labor peace agreement would be a condition of licensure for cannabis establishments with 10 or more employees and defines essential terms in the bill text.