Hearing SB916: Paying people to strike

Public hearing on Oregon Senate Bill SB916
By Taxpayers Association of Oregon
OregonWatchdog.com

On February 11th, 2025, Oregon Senate bill SB916, which would give strikers employment benefits for striking, reached the Senate Committee on Labor and Business. There, public comment and testimony were provided. The Senate committee received multiple testimony that was both supportive and negative, dominating the committee agenda, even with the limit of two minutes for each testimony.

Those who supported SB916 were employees and members of union organizations who advocated that workers needed this compensation due to the financial strain they faced when striking. Supporters of SB916 highlighted that businesses and managers can hold out much longer than employees on the picket line, claiming that this will even out the power dynamic between employees and business owners. SCIU Oregon commented in support of SB916 and many union organizations, such as the Oregon Nursing Association.

Detractors of SB916 highlight that this is an additional harm to the local business community, as the cost imposed on all businesses would make operating in Oregon far more difficult. Oregon NFIB (National Federation of Independent Business) highlight came out in strong opposition, highlighting that this will tip the balance of negations to unions. NFIB highlights that unions are to support their members from the membership due to creating worker strike funds to support the strikers. “Basically, employers would subside work stoppage and pay workers to go on strike against them,” said Anthony Smith, Oregon State Director of NFIB; in addition to, highlighting this would increase the costs for all employees and taxpayers across the state.

Oregon Business and Industry (OBI) also came out in opposition, stating that Oregon’s current unemployment insurance, which allows individuals who lose employment of no fault of their own to receive unemployment benefits, is contradictory to striking because “these two principles are not recognizable.” OBI highlighted that this would upend all processes of good faith negotiations within Oregon and add more punishment to Oregon business. There is also an incentive for more protracted and more strikes in Oregon, with the balance of bargaining firmly in the hands of unions.

The Oregon School Board Association also opposed SB916, concerned that it would increase the number of strikes in Oregon and cause them to last much longer. Strikes impact not only schools but also taxpayers and the education of Oregon’s youth and families. Using the benefit model, an estimated $1.7 million was spent on a one-month strike.

The committee listened to testimony and asked questions for an hour, hearing for and against SB916. The committee will meet again to discuss in greater detail certain aspects of the definition, greater detail of operation and cost calculations, and review states with implement laws similar to the bill on February 13th, Thursday. Watch the full committee meeting here.

— Was this helpful?  If so, Contribute online at OregonWatchdog.com (learn about a Charitable Tax Deduction or Political Tax Credit options to promote liberty).