Jesús García (D-IL)
Good Jobs for Good Airports Act
A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The "Good Jobs for Good Airports Act" requires employers of service workers at small, medium, and large hub airports to provide a minimum prevailing wage and fringe benefits. It sets these standards based on the higher of the Service Contract Act determinations or applicable state and local laws. Covered employers must certify monthly that they are complying with these wage and benefit requirements. The bill grants the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Transportation authority to enforce these rules and provides for civil penalties. Additionally, interested persons are permitted to bring civil actions in district court to enforce these standards.
Yes· 3 of 21
- Scored +8
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Directly raises income and benefit levels for low-wage airport service workers.
- Scored +7
Does this raise the lowest wage an employer may pay?
Requires covered airport service workers to be paid the prevailing wage or state/local minimum, whichever is higher.
- Scored +5
Is this likely to lift people out of poverty?
Increases wages and benefits for low-wage airport service workers.
The opposite
- Scored -6
Would business owners be better off under this?
Imposes higher labor costs and strict monthly certification requirements.
- Scored -4
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Increases labor costs and adds monthly certification burdens for covered employers.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Higher Wages and Benefits: Covered service workers will be paid a wage and provided fringe benefits that are at least as high as the Service Contract Act determinations or state and local laws, which could increase their earnings and security (Sec. 2(b)(2)(a)).
-
Improved Workplace Stability: The bill aims to stabilize workplace conditions and reduce turnover, which Congress finds is necessary for recruiting and retaining excellent staff (Sec. 2(a)(1)(D)-(E)).
-
Public Safety and Security: By ensuring a well-trained and stable workforce, the bill intends to support public safety, security, and protection from infectious diseases at airports (Sec. 2(a)(1)(B)).
-
Protection of Local Standards: The act does not preempt state or local laws that already require higher wages or greater benefits, ensuring workers keep the best protections available (Sec. 2(b)(2)(f)).
-
Legal Recourse for Workers: Interested persons are given the right to file civil actions in federal court to enforce the labor standards defined in the act (Sec. 2(b)(4)(A)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Increased Costs for Employers: Covered employers are required to pay the higher of two different wage and benefit standards, which may create a financial burden on businesses employing service workers (Sec. 2(b)(2)(a)).
-
Strict Certification Burdens: Employers must certify compliance monthly under penalty of perjury, and failure to submit or submitting a false certification is a violation of the law (Sec. 2(b)(2)(b)).
-
Severe Financial Penalties: Employers who violate the labor standards face civil penalties that can be up to three times the amount of standard civil penalties (Sec. 2(b)(3)(A)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Directly raises income and benefit levels for low-wage airport service workers. Would union members be better off under this? — Sets a high wage floor that complements collective bargaining goals. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Positively impacts low-wage service sectors where minority populations are often overrepresented. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Positively impacts low-wage service sectors where minority populations are often overrepresented. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Positively impacts low-wage service sectors where minority populations are often overrepresented. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Increases wages for service workers regardless of contractual relationship. Would men be better off under this? — Positively impacts low-wage service roles often held by men. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Increases wages and benefits for adult service workers. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Positively impacts low-wage service sectors where minority populations are often overrepresented. Would students be better off under this? — Increases wages for part-time airport service roles. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Hub airports are primarily located in or near urban centers. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Positively impacts low-wage service sectors. Would women be better off under this? — Positively impacts low-wage service roles often held by women. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Increases entry-level wages for many airport service positions. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — May provide benefit increases for some middle-income service staff. Would business owners be better off under this? — Imposes higher labor costs and strict monthly certification requirements.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this raise the lowest wage an employer may pay? — Requires covered airport service workers to be paid the prevailing wage or state/local minimum, whichever is higher. Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — Increases wage floors for workers, including those under collective bargaining agreements. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Increases labor costs and adds monthly certification burdens for covered employers.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Requires the provision of minimum fringe benefits, which typically include health coverage. Does this make the country readier for the next outbreak? — Aims to improve health and safety and protection from infectious diseases via a stable workforce.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Increases wages and benefits for low-wage airport service workers.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Grants the Secretary of Labor and Transportation authority to mandate wages and enforce penalties.
- 7/14/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania