tandempower, I like that you posted your proposal for discussion. I think public debate of ideas like this is what makes the forum interesting.

I didn’t know about the “Harvest Trail” before this thread so I have researched it a bit. Most websites describe it as an Australian Government Program started in 2003, but perhaps the term was used informally long before that, to describe the lifestyle and wanderings of seasonal agricultural workers travelling around Australia to different sites as different crops come into season needing pickers or other labourers. Now the government provides resources to help smooth the process.

It serves a pre-existing need – the demand for a floating pool of labourers willing to go where they are needed, travelling light, since each site will be a temporary home, and cheaply, since the pay is not great. It’s also a tourist attraction for people from outside Australia who want to have a “working vacation” as a way to see the country and stay for a few months.

However it doesn’t have one specific geographic location or direction – it’s a "virtual" trail connecting any worker to any agricultural location. The destinations are all over the country, so it’s not a good model for your OP suggestion of a linear bike/work/live corridor in some fixed, permanent location.

For a specific bike/work corridor to make sense there would have to be a specific geographical/commercial reason for it to be located exactly where it is. Maybe it would connect a large city with the nearest major tourist destination, like Calgary with Banff, or Paris with Versailles, or two reasonably close cities like New York and Philadelphia. However if your objective was to get from A to B either as a tourist, or on a business trip, or for a seasonal or temporary job, it would make sense for the overwhelming majority of people to spend an hour or two getting there by car, train or bus, not a day or two travelling by bike.

Another alternative would be if the bike route itself was the tourist attraction, like the Quebec Route Verte, or some other scenic trails. But those rides attract people from hundreds or thousands of miles away, who want to bike when they get there, not bike to get there, and not work while they are there on holiday.

Of course, it’s also true that more and more work is electronic work that can be done anywhere, and if you have a job or employer that doesn’t expect you to be at a desk under their observation all the time, there’s no reason why you couldn’t travel and work. Or, even if you don't do electronic work, if you worked for a chain store or a business that has multiple office sites, like a bank, and negotiated a working tour where you worked for a week or a month in Boston, then a week or a month in Philadelphia, then a week or a month in Atlanta and so on, it would be an interesting way to get to know all those cities. However, unlike the Harvest trail, there would be no large crowds travelling with you, and nobody setting up trailers for you to live in, so housing would be a big challenge. And again, there is no reason why special bike routes are going to be set up for this kind of sporadic, multidirectional travel.