Congress moves to protect striking workers' health insurance from employer retaliation
H.R. 3532 — Striking and Locked Out Workers Healthcare Protection Act · Filed by Chris Deluzio (D-PA) · 54 cosponsors · Introduced May 21, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill amends the National Labor Relations Act to prohibit employers from canceling or reducing health insurance coverage for workers during a lockout or lawful strike. It creates civil penalties of up to $75,000 per violation during lockouts and $50,000 per violation during strikes—doubled to $150,000 or $100,000 respectively if the violation coincides with discharge or serious economic harm and the employer has prior violations within 5 years. Directors and officers can also face personal liability if they directed, committed, or knowingly failed to prevent such violations.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core function is to extend labor protections by preventing employers from using health insurance termination as a coercive tactic during labor disputes. It is fundamentally a worker-protection measure, not a healthcare reform or industry regulation per se.
What the text implies
- Employers may shift to alternative cost-cutting tactics during labor disputes (e.g., reducing hours, accelerating automation, or relocating operations) if health-coverage termination is no longer available as leverage.
- The bill creates potential liability for corporate directors and officers personally, which may incentivize more cautious labor-relations practices but could also increase D&O insurance costs.
The full analysis lists 4 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
labor unions and worker advocacy organizations; workers and their families (through retained health coverage)