Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LABOR NEWS—Major unions divided ahead of escalating trade war with Canada, (Aug 24, 2026)

By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

“The new needless 50% tariffs coming into force today will have real consequences for workers, businesses and communities on both sides of the border.”

As the United States and Canada continue to clash over tariffs and trade policy—major new tariffs having come into effect over the weekend—a divide on this question has surfaced within the labor movement. While major unions broadly agree that trade policy should protect workers and rebuild manufacturing, they increasingly disagree on how best to achieve those goals. Recent statements from the United Steelworkers (USW), the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), and the United Auto Workers (UAW) highlight a growing debate over whether tariffs on close allies like Canada help or hurt working people.

Recently, for example, USW and IAM, each of which represent members in both countries, formed an alliance to publicly urge U.S. policymakers to rethink tariffs aimed at Canadian goods. In a joint letter to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, USW International President Roxanne Brown and IAM International President Brian Bryant argued that Canada is not the source of the trade challenges facing North American workers. Brown added, in the press release announcing the letter, that “Canada has never been the problem.” Instead, they called for greater cooperation between the two countries to confront unfair trade practices elsewhere in the global economy.

The unions contend that the U.S.-Canada economic relationship is fundamentally different from many other trade relationships because of its highly integrated supply chains, comparable labor standards, and long-standing industrial cooperation. They emphasize in the letter that workers and manufacturers in both countries routinely contribute to the same products, with materials and components crossing the border multiple times during production. According to the unions, new tariffs risk disrupting those relationships while providing little benefit to workers on either side of the border.

IAM has been outspoken about it. IAM leaders have been vocal about the effect of tariffs on aerospace manufacturing, one of the most integrated industries in North America. In February, IAM International President Brian Bryant and Canadian Territory General Vice President David Chartrand praised a U.S. House vote rejecting tariffs on Canada and warned that broad tariffs against allies could jeopardize jobs, raise costs and create instability throughout the continent's manufacturing economy. They argued that workers should not become collateral damage in a trade dispute between governments.

In February, in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision, Bryant also stated: “Arbitrary, snap tariff decisions—especially those targeting close allies like Canada—create uncertainty that endangers jobs in highly interdependent industries such as aerospace and manufacturing, raises prices for consumers, and makes it harder for businesses and workers to plan for the future. That instability also complicates collective bargaining, where predictability is essential to securing strong contracts and long-term job security.” He added, “Trade policy should strengthen manufacturing and workers—not create unnecessary economic chaos.”

Last year, Bryant called Trump’s decision to impose a 35 percent tariff on Canadian goods “reckless and deeply harmful to working families on both sides of the border.”

USW’s Canadian leaders have also been critical. Canadian leaders within the USW have expressed similar concerns. USW Canada National Director Marty Warren has repeatedly criticized U.S. tariff actions, saying they threaten union jobs in steel, aluminum, mining, forestry, automotive manufacturing and other sectors. Following the imposition of new U.S. tariffs this summer, Warren said workers and communities in both countries would bear the consequences of a trade war they did not create. He has called on governments to support affected workers while investing in industrial policies that strengthen domestic manufacturing capacity.

Retaliation not enough. Over the weekend, Warren added to this dialogue with a new statement. “The new needless 50% tariffs coming into force today will have real consequences for workers, businesses and communities on both sides of the border,” he explained. “We support the government’s commitment to respond dollar for dollar, but retaliation alone is not enough.”

Specifically, he argued that while he continues to believe that Canada should remain ready to negotiate a fair agreement, he also believes the country “cannot build our economic future around the next tariff threat. We need to keep building here, protecting Canadian jobs and diversifying toward reliable trading partners.” He added, “Canadian workers did not create this trade war. Governments must make sure workers and communities do not bear the cost.”

Still, neither the USW nor the IAM have rejected tariffs altogether. Both unions continue to support trade enforcement tools designed to combat illegal dumping, global overcapacity and unfair trade practices. USW and IAM leaders have argued that tariffs can play an important role when used strategically against bad actors but have cautioned against using them against trusted allies such as Canada. Their position reflects a broader belief that labor standards and industrial policy should guide trade enforcement decisions.

UAW went in a different direction. Over the course of 2025, at least, the UAW took a noticeably different approach.

In February 2025, for example, UAW President Shawn Fain voiced support for aggressive tariff action as a way to reverse decades of trade policies that the union believes contributed to factory closures, job losses, and wage stagnation in U.S. manufacturing. Fain described tariffs as an important first step toward rebuilding domestic production and called for a broader renegotiation of trade agreements, including the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

At the same time, the UAW has stopped short of endorsing tariffs without conditions. Fain has warned that workers should not be used as pawns in unrelated policy disputes and stressed that trade reform must ultimately focus on protecting working-class communities rather than corporate interests. The union has consistently linked tariffs to a larger agenda centered on rebuilding manufacturing, stopping plant closures, and strengthening domestic labor standards.

Not all voices within the UAW embraced this protectionist message. UAW Region 1 Director LaShawn English emphasized solidarity with Canadian workers in a March 2025 statement, arguing that tariffs should not pit workers in one country against workers in another. English called for a North American trade framework built around enforceable labor standards and good union jobs throughout the region.

Fain has since taken a more complex approach in some of his comments about tariffs. At the 2026 UAW National CAP Conference in February, for example, Fain argued that tariffs should not be used for political games and that the working class should not be treated as “pawns.” Still, it remains to be seen whether he will apply that sentiment to the auto industry.

With the escalation currently taking place—with Canada promising retaliatory tariffs and Trump vowing to add new tariffs on Canadian automobiles—it is possible that new lines could be drawn.

News: UnionsMembers Labor LaborNews IndustryNewsTrends EconomicNews