Elizabeth Hovde states that House Bill 1893 would have completely changed a fund paid for by taxes on employers and meant for employees who lose work through no fault of their own
Elizabeth Hovde
Washington Policy Center
One of the worst bills with the longest legs kept me on watch until sine die in the now adjourned Washington state legislative session.
House Bill 1893, allowing striking workers to receive unemployment insurance benefits, nearly succeeded this legislative session. It would have completely changed a fund paid for by taxes on employers and meant for employees who lose work through no fault of their own.
Creating a taxpayer-financed strike fund was a priority for big labor, and HB 1893 had 51 Democrat co-sponsors. (A companion bill in the Senate had 21 co-sponsors.) The back-scratching bill cleared the House and luckily stalled in the Senate. Labor mourned the proposal’s loss, and labor leaders promised it would be back, with April Sims, President of the Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO, saying, “This is not over.” Count on it. At least two other states on the East Coast already allow striking workers such benefits. Similar efforts are underway in many states.
Labor unions donate heavily to Democrats and seemed surprised that when they told state lawmakers to jump, this time not enough of them said “how high?” forcibly enough.
The Washington State Standard quoted Joe Kendo, a lobbyist for the Washington State Labor Council, saying he was “sorely disappointed” and that “Senate Democrats couldn’t pull it together.” Sen. Karen Keiser, D-Des Moines, sponsored the legislation in the Senate and chairs the Labor and Commerce Committee, which voted to advance both bills. She told the Standard, “We were really close. We were so close I could taste it.” She added, ”I think there was a caution and a reluctance. A lot of people were just not comfortable taking on a big, new idea in a short session.”
It wasn’t just a big, new idea and a short session, it was and is a horrible policy idea that no lawmaker should ever be comfortable with. Ask taxpayers to pay workers who choose not to work and encourage more strike activity, costing other workers, employers and society at large? Think better, supporters.
Some amendments were made to make House Bill 1893 more palatable, but even wait periods, time limits on the unemployment benefits given to striking workers and taxing employers with striking workers more were not enough to make this proposal make sense.
Strikes have grown significantly the last two decades (see chart). The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that during the last 20 years, the average number of “major work stoppages” at the beginning of the year was 16.7. That compares to 33 at the beginning of 2023. (Major work stoppages include strikes and are defined as involving 1,000 or more workers. Smaller worker strikes — think strikes at Starbucks stores — are not included in this compilation.)
Four strikes among the 33 major work stoppages at the beginning of the year were based in Washington state. Legislation such as HB 1893 and SB 5777 would help that number increase if workers know they will be paid to not work. Read more about this harmful proposal in my policy paper, “SB 5777, to pay state-funded unemployment benefits to workers who choose to go on strike.”
Elizabeth Hovde is a policy analyst and the director of the Centers for Health Care and Worker Rights at the Washington Policy Center. She is a Clark County resident.
Also read:
- CCRW to host dinner event featuring Charter Review Commission members
The Clark County Republican Women will host a Feb. 12 dinner event focused on the work of the County Charter Review Commission, featuring multiple commission members. - Letter: ‘Hockinson is worth investing in, and this levy is part of that commitment’
James Landon argues that supporting the Hockinson Schools levy is a necessary investment in the community, its schools, and the next generation. - Letter: PDX activists flood Clark County Council over anti-ICE resolution
Rob Anderson argues that organized Portland-based activist groups dominated public comment at a Clark County Council meeting to pressure councilors over an anti-ICE resolution. - Opinion: Moving the ball down the field
Nancy Churchill argues that while HB 2221 will not advance this session, the public hearing marked meaningful progress by opening dialogue, building relationships, and advancing science-based wildlife management discussions in Olympia. - Vancouver Fire responds to fatal structure fire
Vancouver Fire crews responded to a structure fire on East 6th Street where one person and one dog were found deceased and the cause remains under investigation. - A sub-district vote could be a way to go to pay O&M costs associated with light rail
Clark County Council members heard details on how a voter-approved C-TRAN sub-district could be created to fund long-term operations and maintenance costs for light rail tied to a new Interstate Bridge. - Speculation on Seahawks’ sale heats up following proposed WA ‘jock tax’
Speculation about a potential Seahawks sale has intensified amid debate over a proposed Washington income tax that would apply to high-earning athletes and performers.
