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: Sen. Brown, Sherrod [D-OH]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals engaged in lawful strikes with employer-provided health insurance
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill focuses on employees who are engaged in a lawful strike, ensuring their healthcare protection.
- Striking workers are a subset of the general workforce that periodically exercises their right to strike under certain conditions.
- The legislation directly targets employers and their health insurance policies offered to striking employees.
- Estimates of the global population of workers are approximately 3.3 billion individuals. However, not all workplaces or workers have the legal right to strike or have employer-provided health insurance.
- The impact is limited to those employees whose employers provide health insurance and who choose to strike, which could be a small percentage of the total workforce.
Reasoning
- The policy aims specifically at individuals engaged in lawful strikes who have employer-provided health insurance. This already limits the affected population significantly because not all workers have employer-provided insurance, and striking is relatively rare.
- A significant portion of the workforce may never be involved in a strike due to the nature of their employment or industry norms. This makes this policy highly targeted.
- The budgetary constraint indicates that the policy can support a substantial number of violations per year, up to 1 million violations at a hypothetical penalty cost, but actual numbers are likely much lower due to the rarity of strikes and insurance terminations during them.
Simulated Interviews
Manufacturing line worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would be great because it would give us peace of mind during strikes.
- Strikes are already stressful, and losing insurance would be devastating.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
School teacher (New York City, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even though teachers in my district rarely strike, having this policy means a lot.
- Healthcare during strikes has always been a concern during negotiations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Film industry worker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Strikes are common in this industry, but we often worry about insurance loss.
- This act would relieve a major stress point during negotiations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Auto factory worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Striking is always risky, especially regarding health coverage.
- This law makes striking less daunting from a healthcare perspective.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Tech worker (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Striking isn't common in tech, so this law doesn't impact me much.
- It's good for those who need it, but not relevant to my current situation.
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 | 8 | 8 |
Nurse (Cleveland, OH)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Healthcare security during any work stoppage is crucial, even if we hardly ever strike.
- This act reassures us that our healthcare wouldn't be disrupted.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retail worker (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how this impacts me as we don't have unions or strikes in my job.
- Insurance is vital, so I'd support measures protecting it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Warehousing (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any threat to our health coverage during disputes makes strikes harder to pursue.
- With this policy, maintaining healthcare is one less thing to worry about.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Public transit worker (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having this assurance during strikes boosts our confidence to fight for our rights.
- Healthcare should never be a bargaining tool for either side.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
University professor (Salt Lake City, UT)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though we rarely strike, having this measure provides a safety net.
- It's a positive step towards supporting educators in disputes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $52500000 (Low: $31500000, High: $73500000)
Year 3: $55125000 (Low: $33075000, High: $77175000)
Year 5: $59503125 (Low: $35696250, High: $83283750)
Year 10: $71547428 (Low: $42928463, High: $100566393)
Year 100: $2814378628 (Low: $1688627177, High: $3940127479)
Key Considerations
- The compliance cost for businesses could lead to increased negotiation leverage for unions, possibly reducing the frequency and duration of lawful strikes.
- The policy might encourage employers to resolve labor disputes more amicably to avoid penalties, potentially reducing the discrete costs associated with ongoing strikes.