Union leaders, municipal and higher-education employees, and elected lawmakers urged the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development on July 15 to give a favorable report to House Bill 2086 and Senate Bill 13-27, the Protect Labor Act, which would create state-level protections for private-sector organizing if federal labor protections falter.

Advocates said the bill would “inoculate” Massachusetts workers against changes at the federal level that could strip organizing rights or leave the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) unable to enforce the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). "We see the Protect Labor Act as a key component of Massachusetts' proactive response," Christy Lynch, president of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO, told the committee.

Supporters described two trigger conditions that would activate the law: repeal or judicial nullification of the NLRA or a determination by the NLRB that it lacks jurisdiction over a group of workers. "If the NLRB declines jurisdiction over a group of workers, then we in Massachusetts would take jurisdiction over those drivers," Lindsay, legislative counsel for labor supporters, explained during questioning.

Union officials gave concrete examples of workers they said need protection. Joshua Cohen and other railroad and transit union representatives pressed the committee to extend earned sick-time protections and noted the vulnerability of privatized contractors. Graduate employees at private universities testified that a reversal of a 2016 NLRB ruling that recognized them as employees would jeopardize unions at Harvard, MIT, Northeastern and other schools. "If Trump's NLRB overturns this decision, we could lose our union," said Dorothy Manovich, a Harvard graduate worker.

Speakers also described provisions included in the Protect Labor Act beyond the trigger: a presumption of employee status for classification disputes; expanded unfair-labor-practice remedies; a ban on captive-audience meetings by employers; authorization for virtual union elections; protections for health-care workers; and a process for the Massachusetts Department of Labor Relations (DLR) to certify bargaining representatives if federal protections vanish. "This bill codifies existing private sector union rights at the state level in the event that workers lose our federal rights," Katie Murphy, president of the Massachusetts Nurses Association, told the committee.

Supporters offered state and national context. Several witnesses cited Project 20/25, a national plan referenced repeatedly at the hearing, and recent federal executive actions they said have weakened collective-bargaining protections for federal employees. Senator Paul Feeney, a bill sponsor, said the current federal actions make a state-level backstop urgent: "We must act to fill these gaps."

Construction and building-trades representatives emphasized industry-specific needs. Frank Callahan, president of the Massachusetts Building Trades, asked that the bill preserve construction-sector organizing tools such as pre-hire agreements that depend on special handling under the NLRA. "Union organizing and collective bargaining in the construction industry is unique," Callahan said.

Opposition testimony was limited during this panel; most speakers were supporters. Several witnesses urged the committee to ensure the bill balances deterrents for employers who violate labor law with administrative flexibility. Leon Levari of SEIU noted federal-sector dispute-resolution practices and suggested the state consider pre-complaint dispute-resolution options to preserve productive bargaining relationships.

The committee received extensive written testimony from unions, worker centers, legal-aid groups and municipal and business stakeholders. No formal vote or motion on the bills was recorded during the hearing.

If advanced, the Protect Labor Act would create a state regulatory framework that only becomes operative under the trigger conditions stated in the bill text and repeated by witnesses during the hearing. Supporters urged an expedited favorable report to the legislature to safeguard unions and workers if federal protections continue to erode.