Pa. Labor & Industry Committee advances bill allowing striking workers to collect unemployment benefits

House Bill 145, which would amend Pennsylvania’s unemployment compensation law to allow individuals impacted by a work stoppage to collect unemployment compensation (UC), was favorably reported out of the House Labor & Industry Committee after a 14-12 roll-call vote.

The measure drew partisan and philosophical debate during the committee meeting. Committee staff member Ryan summarized the bill’s effect: "House Bill 145 amends the unemployment compensation law to allow individuals impacted by any work stoppage to collect UC benefits." Proponents said the change would support workers who withhold labor to press for better wages and conditions; opponents warned it could create economic disincentives and make the Commonwealth less attractive to employers.

Representative Kroejewski, the bill’s prime sponsor, framed the proposal as a defense of workers’ historical right to strike, saying, "The right to strike for better working conditions is a time-honored right and tradition for workers in this country." Kroejewski asked colleagues for an affirmative vote to move the bill forward.

Committee members questioned how the bill would interact with strike pay and existing UC rules. Representative Reger asked, "How does this bill interact with strike pay?" Ryan replied that if a worker receives strike benefits while receiving UC "they would report this information to the Department of Labor and Industry, as income," and that such income "may reduce the UC benefits that they receive." Those mechanics would be applied under the existing UC income-reporting framework, Ryan said.

Several members voiced broader concerns about economic effects and fairness. Representative Barter said, "I believe this bill will drive it away. So it's bad for Pennsylvanians. It's bad for our economy." Representative Vaughn raised a statutory fairness issue, noting the bill would create "two standards" because some public-safety employees — including police, firefighters and corrections officers — are barred by law from striking. Representative Jones, who spoke from personal experience in a union household, warned that the bill could change union practice, saying, "They'll be striking all the time," and described concerns about potential incentives.

Other members defended the proposal as an appropriate use of a system funded by workers. Representative Green said, "Workers pay for UC benefits," and argued that striking employees should not be left destitute.

Committee discussion referenced actions in other states: members noted laws or proposals in New Jersey, New York, Washington and Oregon, and that the California Legislature passed a similar bill in 2023 that Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed. Representative Grove argued that the veto illustrated fiscal and competitiveness concerns for states that adopt such measures.

On the motion to "report House Bill 145 favorably as committed," the committee recorded 14 yes votes and 12 no votes; the chair announced, "The bill passes." The committee clerk then reported, "House Bill 145 is favorably reported as committed." No amendments, fiscal detail or effective date were specified during the meeting.

The committee's action is a committee-level procedural step. The bill was not enacted by the committee vote alone; it must proceed through the legislature’s remaining steps before becoming law.