Workers keep health insurance during strikes under new labor protection bill

What it does

This bill makes it illegal for employers to cancel or change an employee's health insurance coverage during a lockout or while the employee is on a lawful strike. It amends the National Labor Relations Act to classify these actions as unfair labor practices and imposes civil penalties of up to $75,000 per violation during a lockout (doubled to $150,000 if the employer has prior violations and the action harms the employee) and up to $50,000 per violation during a strike (doubled to $100,000 under similar circumstances). Company directors and officers can also be personally liable if they directed or knowingly allowed the violation.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is a straightforward prohibition on employer conduct (health coverage termination during labor disputes) paired with civil penalties. It is a protective labor statute, not a tax measure, appropriation, or deregulation—it restricts employer power and strengthens worker rights.

What the text implies

• Employers may respond by shifting to high-deductible or limited-benefit plans before labor disputes begin, or by reducing health plan generosity across the board to offset expected penalty exposure.
• The bill does not address whether employers can reduce other compensation or benefits during strikes/lockouts as a substitute for health coverage termination, potentially creating a loophole.
• Personal liability for directors and officers may incentivize corporate restructuring to insulate decision-makers from penalty exposure, or may increase D&O insurance costs.
• The penalty structure (doubling for prior violations within 5 years) may disproportionately affect smaller employers with less sophisticated compliance infrastructure, creating a disparate impact on firm size.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Workers gain a concrete protection—the right to keep health insurance during strikes and lockouts—which removes a major economic pressure that forces workers to abandon labor disputes. The penalty structure incentivizes employer compliance and creates a deterrent against retaliation, strengthening workers' ability to exercise collective bargaining rights without losing essential coverage.

Who stands to gain

• workers and labor unions (protected health coverage during disputes)
• health insurance carriers (continued premium collection during strikes/lockouts)

Named in the bill

National Labor Relations Act, National Labor Relations Board, Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, employers, employees, labor unions, group health plans

Where it stands

55 cosponsors: 55 Democrats.

• May 21, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• May 21, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Education and Workforce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

2 lobbying clients named this bill on 2 disclosure filings across 1 quarter, Jun 2026 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $569,143 in lobbying spend. A filing names 42 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 41% of bills with at least one filing.

Chris Deluzio, the sponsor, reported $527,000 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• International Brotherhood of Teamsters — $489,143 on 1 filing
• United Mine Workers of America — $80,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.