WA House OKs unemployment benefits for striking workers, but adds four-week limit
A strike sign is seen on display as Boeing workers gather on a picket line near the entrance to a Boeing facility during an ongoing strike on October 24, 2024 in Seattle, Washington. (Photo by)
Organized labor secured a major win Saturday as Democrats in the state House pushed through legislation to provide striking workers in Washington with unemployment benefits.
But union leaders were not all smiles afterward. The bill was amended on the floor to impose a four-week limit on receiving benefits, eight weeks less than the version approved in the Senate.
Senate Bill 5041 passed the House on a 52-43 vote with seven Democrats joining Republicans in voting against the measure.
The Senate must now decide if it will agree with the revisions or insist on its position. When the bill came up for a vote last month, Senate Democrats narrowly defeated an amendment for a four-week limit before passing the bill 28-21.
New Jersey and New York are the only states with such provisions for striking workers. Oregon lawmakers are debating legislation this year that would offer unemployment benefits to striking workers there.
On Saturday, Democratic lawmakers said the bill ensures workers who choose to walk off the job will be less stressed about going without pay and seeing their finances erode in a lengthy dispute. With the threat of economic hardship eased, workers will be in a better position to endure lengthy negotiations.
'Fundamentally, this takes a step to level the playing field for striking workers,' said Rep. Beth Doglio, D-Olympia.
Republicans argued that providing benefits would be an incentive for union workers to strike. They tried unsuccessfully to amend the bill to exclude public school teachers and hospital workers.
'If you are paying people to strike, you will have more strikes,' said Rep. Jeremie Dufault, R-Selah.
The policy only assures a level of benefits is available 'for workers when they do go on strike,' said Rep. April Berg, D-Mill Creek. 'The state is not paying workers to strike.'
Rep. Jim Walsh, R-Aberdeen, said the bill is unfair because taxpayers and businesses with no involvement in a labor disagreement will have their contributions to the unemployment insurance fund go to striking workers.
'People who are not a party to the disagreement will pay for it,' he said.
As written, a striking worker would become eligible for benefits on the second Sunday following the first day of a strike, provided that the strike is not found to be prohibited by federal or state law. Workers would be subject to a one-week waiting period after they become eligible for benefits.
If a strike is determined to be prohibited by state or federal law, any benefits paid are liable for repayment.
Employees would also qualify for unemployment insurance during employer-initiated labor lockouts. Lockouts are one way management can pressure a striking workforce during contract negotiations.
Rep. Kristine Reeves, D-Federal Way, authored the amendment for the four-week limit on receiving benefits. It passed on a voice vote. Normally, unemployment insurance is available for up to 26 weeks in a one-year period.
If the bill becomes law, the changes would take effect Jan. 1, 2026, and last through Dec. 31, 2035.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Weighs In on 'Civil War' Concerns
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. On Monday, President Donald Trump was asked about Democratic California Governor Gavin Newsom's remarks that his Republican administration wants "civil war on the streets" amid ongoing protests against raids by Los Angeles Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The president was asked by a reporter, "What do you make of the fact that [Newsom] says you want a civil war?" Trump responded, "No, it's the opposite. I don't want a civil war. Civil war would happen if you left it to people like him." REPORTER: Gavin Newsom says you want a Civil War. TRUMP: "It's just the opposite, I don't want a Civil War. Civil War would happen if you left it to people like him." — Breaking911 (@Breaking911) June 9, 2025 This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.


The Hill
32 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump isn't done with Musk yet, Michael Cohen says
President Trump's ex-personal attorney Michael Cohen on Saturday said that Trump isn't done with tech billionaire Elon Musk yet, after tensions between the two men became incredibly heated in a public social media spat last week. 'They're going to really go after Elon Musk like nobody has seen, ever, in this country, because they can,' Cohen told MSNBC's Ali Velshi. 'And one thing Elon doesn't understand is this political guerilla warfare that they're going to conduct against him,' he added. On Thursday, a fight between Musk and Trump over the president's 'big, beautiful bill' earlier in the week escalated rapidly on Musk's X platform and Trump's Truth Social platform. The president said the tech billionaire 'just went CRAZY!' and threatened Musk's government contracts. Musk alleged that Trump had ties to convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein on X. The public spat followed the end of Musk's recent service in the Trump administration and an alliance with the president that appeared to start off strong. Musk endorsed Trump in July 2024 in the wake of Trump surviving an assassination attempt in Pennsylvania. Musk's administration service was marked by intense backlash from those on the left and Democrats over actions taken by Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on the federal government. 'He doesn't care about Elon Musk,' Cohen said in his MSNBC appearance, talking about Trump. 'He used Elon Musk for what he needed. Initially it was the money, so that he didn't have to lay out any of his own, and also, more importantly, for his access with X.' The Hill has reached out to the White House and X for comment.


San Francisco Chronicle
32 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Newsom blasts Trump's arrest threat as ‘unmistakable step toward authoritarianism'
President Donald Trump on Monday endorsed the idea of arresting California Gov. Gavin Newsom over the state's resistance to federal immigration enforcement efforts in Los Angeles, intensifying a clash that has already drawn legal challenges and fierce rebukes from Democratic leaders. 'I would do it if I were Tom,' Trump said, referring to Tom Homan, his border czar, who over the weekend suggested that state and local officials, including Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, could face arrest if they interfered with immigration raids. 'I think it's great. Gavin likes the publicity, but I think it would be a great thing,' Trump added. Trump's remarks signal a sharp escalation in the administration's crackdown on sanctuary jurisdictions and a willingness to target political opponents in unprecedented ways. Newsom responded swiftly, calling Trump's words a chilling attack on American democratic norms. 'The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor,' Newsom wrote on X. 'This is a day I hoped I would never see in America. I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.' Tensions escalated sharply after Trump deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles following days of civil unrest related to Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. The deployment marked the first time a president has federalized a state's National Guard without the governor's consent since 1965. Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced plans to sue Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, alleging the deployment was unlawful. 'Federalizing the California National Guard is an abuse of the President's authority under the law,' Bonta said at a press conference. 'There is no invasion. There is no rebellion.' Meanwhile, David Huerta, president of SEIU California, was charged with felony conspiracy to impede an officer after his arrest during the L.A. protests. Despite the furor, legal experts note that Homan lacks the authority to arrest elected officials, and his role remains advisory. Still, Trump's rhetoric has raised alarms among critics who view his comments as part of a broader pattern of undermining democratic institutions. 'This is a preview of things to come,' Newsom warned in an interview with Brian Taylor Cohen that he shared on social media. 'This isn't about L.A., per se,' the Democratic governor added. 'It's about us today, it's about you, everyone watching tomorrow. This guy is unhinged. Trump is unhinged right now, and this is just another proof point of that.' At a news conference held by lawmakers in Sacramento to discuss the protests in Los Angeles, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, said Trump's threat to arrest Newsom is a 'direct assault on democracy and an insult to every Californian.'