HB 1893 failed to clear one of the final hurdles of the session as the Senate decided not to bring the bill up for a floor vote before the March 1 opposite house cutoff. The bill died after it became clear to Senate leadership that it did not have enough votes to pass off the floor. Organized labor was strongly in favor of the bill throughout session, and private sector employers were nearly universally opposed.

AWC became involved on HB 1893 after the Senate Labor & Commerce Committee amended the bill in a way that could have imposed unnecessary costs on cities and other public employers whose employees strike illegally. After it became clear that AWC’s suggested amendments to fix the issue were not going to be accepted, we urged cities to contact their Senators to oppose the bill in its current form. We appreciate the city leaders who took the time to reach out to their legislators and oppose this problematic bill. We do expect the bill proponents to reintroduce the proposal in 2025.

AWC opposes problematic Senate committee amendment to bill on unemployment for striking workers

February 22, 2024

The Senate Labor & Commerce Committee added an amendment to HB 1893 that could be problematic for cities. The committee amended and passed the bill on February 19. It is now in the Senate Rules Committee waiting to be scheduled for a floor vote.

Under the version that was voted out of the House, striking employees would only be eligible for benefits if “the strike is not prohibited by federal or state law or court order.” Public employees generally do not have the right to strike, though there are no statutory consequences for such a strike and employers have to enforce the ban themselves in court. The House’s language left more flexibility for public employers like cities to quickly challenge a striking employee’s unemployment claim and avoid being charged for the costs of benefits that should have never been paid.

The Senate committee’s new language changes this in a problematic way. Under the amendment, striking employees would be disqualified from benefits only if the strike is “found to be prohibited by federal or state law in a final judgment.” Final judgments are rare in strike cases, and the requirement to obtain one adds an extra layer of legal process for cities in order to avoid paying for otherwise unlawful unemployment benefits. That process takes time, during which benefit payments could be made to unlawfully striking workers. On top of that, the amendment also only reinstates the disqualification from unemployment benefits on the date of the final judgment, not retroactively. This means that unlawfully striking workers would get to keep any benefit payments made while a city was in court getting a final judgment, and the city could be charged for those benefits even if the strike was eventually judged unlawful.

On top of the unfairness of forcing cities to cover the cost of unemployment benefits that should never have been paid in the first place, this new change could serve as an unnecessary incentive for public sector unions to unlawfully strike.

AWC is reaching out to senators to urge them to either fix or oppose this problematic change to HB 1893 if it reaches the Senate floor.

Bill to allow striking workers access to unemployment benefits clears the House

February 19, 2024

A controversial bill that would allow striking or locked-out workers access to unemployment insurance while on strike passed out of the House. It was heard last week and is scheduled to be voted out of its Senate committee this week ahead of Wednesday’s second policy committee cutoff.

HB 1893 is sponsored by Rep. Beth Doglio (D–Olympia) and has 50 co-sponsors, all Democrats. The bill passed out of the House on February 12 on a 53-44 vote, with five Democrats joining all House Republicans to vote no. Several floor amendments were adopted during the lengthy floor debate on the bill’s way off the House floor.

Under current law, unemployment benefits are available to workers who lose their jobs through no fault of their own, and the law currently recognizes participating in strikes and lockouts during a labor dispute as the employee’s choice to not work. The current version of HB 1893 would change that by lifting the ban on unemployment benefits for workers who have been locked out of their work by their employer during a bargaining process. The bill also permits workers on strike to receive up to four weeks of unemployment benefits after the second Sunday following the start of the strike, as long as the strike is not prohibited by state or federal law or a court order. Striking workers applying for benefits will still be subject to a one-week waiting period.

In this version of the bill, the cost of providing unemployment benefits to striking workers will fall on the workers’ individual employer, with the benefits paid being charged to the employer’s experience rating account. Workers who receive retroactive wages for their time on strike will be subject to an unemployment benefits overpayment assessment, and the benefits they received during the strike will need to be paid back. The bill also contains a severability provision that makes any part of the bill inoperative to the extent that it conflicts with federal requirements or interferes with employers’ eligibility for federal tax credits or federal funds.

Generally, public employees (including city workers) are prohibited from striking by law. However, this ban is not automatically enforced by the state and some public employees have gone on strike despite the prohibition. Some groups of city employees, like police and firefighters, have additional statutory prohibitions against striking, but also have access to binding interest arbitration. Strikes of city workers have been rare in recent memory. In addition, local governments such as cities can qualify as “reimbursable employers” for the purposes of unemployment insurance, where the employer reimburses the state for unemployment benefits actually paid out for its former workers in lieu of paying unemployment insurance payroll taxes like private employers.

Dates to remember

HB 1893 is scheduled for a vote in the Senate Labor & Commerce Committee on Monday, February 19 at 8 am.