Bill Overview
Title: Striking Workers Healthcare Protection Act
Description: This bill prohibits an employer from terminating or significantly altering the employer-provided health insurance coverage of an employee engaged in a lawful strike. An employer that violates this prohibition is subject to a maximum civil penalty of $50,000 for each violation.
Sponsors: Rep. Axne, Cynthia [D-IA-3]
Target Audience
Population: People engaged in lawful strikes with employer-provided health insurance
Estimated Size: 20000
- The bill is aimed at protecting health insurance coverage for workers who are on strike.
- The exact number of people who strike can vary annually and geographically.
- A significant portion of the workforce are unionized or have the potential to strike under organized efforts.
- The bill affects those currently working as employees with employer-provided health insurance.
- According to global labor data, there could be bilateral strikes occurring which impact varying numbers of workers.
Reasoning
- The Striking Workers Healthcare Protection Act is designed to provide a safety net for striking workers by ensuring their health insurance coverage is not disrupted during a strike.
- The policy will primarily impact unionized workers who have employer-provided health insurance.
- The anticipated budget of $10,000,000 in year 1 suggests a focus on monitoring compliance and perhaps compensating any initially impacted workers, with a larger rollout over ten years.
- Given the estimate of 20,000 potentially impacted workers, the policy will likely prioritize areas or sectors with a higher incidence of strikes.
- Many workers may not be directly impacted if they do not strike often or at all.
Simulated Interviews
Automobile assembly line worker (Michigan)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a relief to know that I won't lose my health insurance if we go on strike.
- This policy gives us more bargaining power and peace of mind.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Public school teacher (California)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel more secure knowing my health is protected during strikes.
- It's one less thing to worry about which reduces stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Nurse (New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing I won't lose my healthcare is a huge relief.
- The power dynamics change now that our health insurance is safeguarded.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Construction worker (Ohio)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It reassures me that if I need to, my health insurance will remain intact during strikes.
- Something like this could make healthcare more stable overall.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
IT support specialist (Texas)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see this affecting me since I'm not in a unionized sector.
- It's good for those who are, but doesn't change anything for me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Coal miner (West Virginia)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could help stabilize my family's healthcare during tough times.
- An essential support for when our work conditions push us to strike.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Manufacturing worker (Illinois)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's a positive move that gives workers a bit more leverage.
- It encourages us to take a stand without losing coverage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Utility worker (Florida)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law means management can't threaten our insurance anymore.
- Stability in healthcare means peace of mind during disputes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Barista (Oregon)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a non-union employee, this doesn't seem relevant to me.
- I hope it encourages more stable healthcare access across the board though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Steelworker (Pennsylvania)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have seen many workers struggle when striking without health insurance.
- This makes it a bit easier for us to focus on why we are striking.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy could strengthen the negotiating power of unions by assuring members of healthcare security during strikes.
- Possible legal challenges or employer opposition may affect implementation and compliance costs.
- Changes in employer healthcare contract terms to preemptively counteract the policy's effects should be considered.
- Evaluating the potential need for federal oversight or creation of a dedicated regulatory body to enforce compliance.