School districts are major employers, which means sometimes we must face labor issues.
Senate Bill 916 has been one of the most contentious bills of this session. The bill would give striking workers, including school employees, the right to draw unemployment pay while they are not working.
We appreciate the efforts this week on both sides to make it a better bill, but we still have deep reservations.
SB 916 passed out of the Senate Labor and Business Committee on Thursday, March 6. The committee adopted the -4 amendments so that:
- All employees would be ineligible for claiming unemployment insurance in the first week of a strike, and after that the standard waiting week would apply. This means many employees would have to wait two weeks until receiving any benefits during a strike. However, employees who had already claimed a waiting week for unemployment insurance in the past 12 months (for example, a new employee or a classified employee who claimed unemployment insurance over the summer break) would not have a second waiting week and so would begin receiving benefits after the first week of ineligibility.
- Employers can reduce bargained backpay in light of unemployment benefits, and the Oregon Employment Department will claw back any excess benefits paid if backpay is issued after the fact.
- Most importantly for schools, language specifies that unemployment benefits paid due to a labor dispute to employees of a school district or education service district would count toward employees’ total bargained compensation and the district would deduct the benefits paid from future wages. This would pose an administrative burden to districts, but it does provide protection from being on the hook for paying unemployment insurance in addition to salary and benefits.
We worked hard to ensure this financial protection for schools and ESDs was included and want to thank Sen. Kathleen Taylor, committee chair and one of the bill’s sponsors, for her willingness to work with us.
The adoption of the -4 amendments is an important step to ensuring that districts aren’t spending additional dollars when employees aren’t in the classroom with students. Still, the Employment Department estimates that SB 916 would cause public employers as a whole to spend nearly $6 million of taxpayer dollars on unemployment benefits for striking workers in the 2025-27 biennium.
We remain concerned that this bill could increase the likelihood of longer and more frequent strikes, to the detriment of students.
When we consider SB 916 along with the proposal for class size to become a mandatory subject of bargaining in all schools (see Adrienne Anderson’s update), the bargaining landscape has the potential to look significantly different in the future.
We hope as legislators consider these bills they keep student needs in mind.
– Stacy Michaelson
OSBA Government Relations and Communications Director
