A Democratic bill with 7 Democratic cosponsors · See all 7 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Restoring Justice for Workers Act aims to prohibit forced arbitration in work disputes. It seeks to prevent employers from requiring workers to sign agreements that block access to courts or prevent them from joining class actions before a dispute occurs. The bill also prohibits retaliation against workers who refuse to enter into arbitration agreements. For agreements made after a dispute arises, the bill requires specific disclosures and a waiting period to ensure consent is voluntary. Finally, it amends the National Labor Relations Act to protect the rights of employees to engage in concerted activities regarding work disputes.
Yes· 3 of 6
- Scored +9
Would union members be better off under this?
The bill significantly enhances the rights of workers to engage in concerted and collective activities.
- Scored +8
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill enhances due process for workers by ensuring they can access the court system for disputes.
- Scored +7
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Providing access to courts and collective actions benefits low-income workers seeking redress.
The opposite
- Scored -6
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill increases legal risks and potential litigation costs for employers.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Access to Courts: The bill prohibits predispute arbitration agreements that require arbitration of work disputes, which could allow workers to seek redress in court rather than through private arbitration (Section 5, Subsection a, paragraph 1).
-
Protection from Retaliation: The Act prohibits covered entities from retaliating or threatening to retaliate against a worker for refusing to enter into an arbitration agreement (Section 5, Subsection a, paragraph 5). It also prohibits retaliation against employees for refusing to promise not to pursue collective claims (Section 4, Subsection a, paragraph 6, sub-paragraph C).
-
Empowerment of Collective Action: The bill prohibits agreements that prevent workers from joining together for joint, class, or collective claims, which helps workers who may need to act together to afford seeking relief (Section 2, Finding 5; Section 4, Subsection a, paragraph 6, sub-paragraph A).
-
Informed Consent for Postdispute Arbitration: For arbitration agreements made after a dispute has already occurred, the bill requires that workers be informed in writing using plain language about their rights and the ability to refuse the agreement without retaliation (Section 5, Subsection a, paragraph s-paragraph B). It also mandates a 45-day waiting period to ensure the agreement is truly voluntary (Section 5, Subsection a, paragraph 2, sub-paragraph C).
-
Right to Legal Redress for Retaliation: Workers injured by retaliation for refusing arbitration can bring a civil action in district court to seek relief, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs (Section 5, Subsection c).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Limitations on Collective Bargaining Agreements: The protections provided in this chapter do not apply to any arbitration provision in a contract between a covered entity and a labor organization, except for specific rights regarding judicial enforcement (Section 5, Subsection d, paragraph 2, sub-paragraph C).
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 union members be better off under this? — The bill significantly enhances the rights of workers to engage in concerted and collective activities. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Providing access to courts and collective actions benefits low-income workers seeking redress. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The bill protects the legal rights of many middle-class employees. Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill increases legal risks and potential litigation costs for employers.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill enhances due process for workers by ensuring they can access the court system for disputes. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal authority by amending the NLRA and the Federal Arbitration Act to protect worker rights.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — The bill strengthens labor rights by protecting concerted activities and the ability to pursue collective claims.
- 8/17/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/30/2026
- Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
- 6 Cosponsors 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.
Suzanne BonamiciDemocrat · Oregon
Julia BrownleyDemocrat · California
Mark DeSaulnierDemocrat · California
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Robert ScottDemocrat · Virginia
Janice SchakowskyDemocrat · Illinois