Eric Posner Writes About Union Involvement in Merger Review

Merger Review Should Incorporate a Role for Unions

The Kroger-Albertsons merger proposal has sparked objections from unions which represent workers at the two grocery chains. The unions are understandably upset. The state of Colorado alleged in its complaint challenging the merger that during a 2022 strike by Kroger workers, Albertson agreed with Kroger not to hire them away. If the companies merge, workers’ bargaining power will likely be further eroded.

The merger controversy raises questions about the role of unions in merger review. Under current law, unions representing merging firms have no formal role, but may pressure one or both firms to drop or modify merger plans; unions may also demand concessions in return for union support. Before the Microsoft-Activision merger in 2023, a union representing Activision workers persuaded Microsoft to maintain neutrality if the union tried to organize former Activision workers after the merger was completed. In return, the union dropped its opposition to the merger. Unions can also petition regulators and share information with them, though unions have no way to compel regulators to take their concerns seriously.

Ad hoc union involvement in merger review is not uncommon. I have reviewed 46 attempted mergers with union involvement over the last 25 years. Unions supported seven of those mergers, opposed 34, and took mixed positions (or disagreed with one another) on five. Examples include the Amazon-MGM Studios merger (2021), Abbvie-Allergan (2019), Fiat Chrysler-General Motors (2015), Kraft-Heinz (2015), and Continental-United Airlines (2010). While one cannot draw firm conclusions about the value added from union involvement based on such sparse evidence, the record does show that many unions are well-motivated to participate in merger negotiations.

Read more at ProMarket