A group of U.S. lawmakers has reintroduced the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act in Congress, a measure opponents argue could tilt labor relations too far in favor of unions. The bill, resubmitted on March 5 by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., would alter definitions of employee and employer, simplify the process for workers to unionize, and hold employers more accountable for labor violations.

Originally introduced in 2019, the PRO Act passed through the House in 2020 but stalled in the Senate, facing a similar outcome in 2021. Despite its struggles, the bill has gained some bipartisan support, with Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., co-sponsoring the bill’s reintroduction in the House.
The proposed legislation aims to amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by clarifying when a worker qualifies as a full-time employee instead of an independent contractor. According to the Century Foundation, nearly 20% of U.S. construction workers, or 2.1 million people, were misclassified or paid off the books in 2021. The PRO Act intends to ensure these workers receive the benefits owed to them as full-time employees, including health insurance.

Additionally, the bill would limit some employer tactics. These include:

• Banning employers from permanently replacing striking workers or discriminating against those who participate in strikes.
• Removing restrictions on unions from conducting “secondary” strikes or boycotts, where workers support strikes at other companies.
• Prohibiting employers from forcing workers to attend "captive audience" meetings meant to discourage union membership.
• Clarifying employers' obligations to bargain in good faith and setting deadlines for reaching collective bargaining agreements to prevent delays.

Employer Response

‍Trade groups like the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) and the Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) have long opposed the PRO Act, claiming that it could force workers into unions against their will and undermine competitiveness in the labor market.

“While the PRO Act purports to help workers, it actually strips away many of their rights and privacies while expanding opportunities to coerce law-abiding employers, thereby hurting the economy and upsetting a delicate balance of rights and restrictions established by the National Labor Relations Board, the courts, and Congress,” said Brian Turmail, AGC’s vice president of public affairs and workforce.

Kristen Swearingen, ABC's vice president of legislative and political affairs, also criticized the PRO Act, calling it harmful to small business owners, employees, and independent contractors. “The reintroduction of the PRO Act displays continued disregard for the livelihoods of small business owners, employees, and independent contractors,” she said. “While Congress has long rejected the PRO Act and its provisions, these legislators continue to pursue failed policies and attack business models and fundamental freedoms that have fueled entrepreneurship, job creation, and opportunity for the American worker.”

Union Perspective

‍From the union side, the AFL-CIO has expressed strong support for the PRO Act, calling it "the key to America’s future." The labor group argues that the bill would make it easier for workers to form unions and negotiate better working conditions. The AFL-CIO represents more unions in the U.S. than any other group and believes the current NLRA is outdated and needs reform.

Despite previous setbacks, there remains a chance that the PRO Act or elements of it could eventually become law. In addition to Fitzpatrick's backing, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., introduced a bill on March 4 that includes specific deadlines for union negotiations after a vote to form a union.

ABC CEO Michael Bellaman commented that Hawley’s bill addresses “the most egregious provision” of the PRO Act.

Originally reported by Zachary Phillips in Construction Dive.