A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
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 "Protection on the Picket Line Act" amends the National Labor Relations Act. It addresses situations where an employer takes disciplinary action against an employee for harassment or abuse during protected activities. The bill outlines specific requirements that must be met for such disciplinary actions to be considered an unfair labor practice.
Yes
- Scored +5
Would business owners be better off under this?
Gives business owners more authority to discipline employees for misconduct during strikes.
- Scored +2
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Provides employers with more legal leeway to discipline employees for abuse during protected activities.
The opposite
- Scored -5
Would union members be better off under this?
Increases the risk of disciplinary action for workers during protected activities and makes it harder to prove unfair labor practices.
- Scored -4
Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise?
Increases the ability of employers to discipline employees during protected union activities and raises the burden of proof for employees.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Employer ability to discipline for abuse: Section 2 allows employers to take disciplinary action against employees for harassment or abuse that happens during protected activity without it automatically being an unfair labor practice.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Higher burden of proof for employees: Under Section 2, for a disciplinary action to be an unfair labor practice, the General Counsel must first show the employee was in a protected activity, the employer knew about it, and the employer had animus against that activity.
-
Employer defense: Section 2 allows an employer to avoid an unfair labor practice charge if they can prove they would have taken the same disciplinary action even if the employee was not engaging in protected activity.
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.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Provides employers with more legal leeway to discipline employees for abuse during protected activities. Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — Increases the ability of employers to discipline employees during protected union activities and raises the burden of proof for employees.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Gives business owners more authority to discipline employees for misconduct during strikes. Would union members be better off under this? — Increases the risk of disciplinary action for workers during protected activities and makes it harder to prove unfair labor practices.
- 11/6/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Bill CassidyRepublican · Louisiana