Strikers’ UI Benefits Bill Heads to Governor, Veto Expected
A controversial bill allowing striking workers to collect unemployment benefits is headed to Gov. Ned Lamont’s desk after passing the state House May 30.
Lamont, who has repeatedly shared his opposition to the measure—saying it “sends a terrible signal”—is expected to veto the bill.
“I don’t like the striking workers bill and I’m not going to support it,” he told reporters as the Senate debated the legislation on May 28.
“I guess that means I’m going to veto it.”
Lamont vetoed vaguely worded legislation last year that created a $3 million, taxpayer-funded “Connecticut families and workers account” intended to support strikers.
‘Dangerous Precedent’
Lamont has championed or endorsed numerous pro-worker policies during his time in office, including minimum wage increases, paid family and medical leave, expanded paid sick leave, and restrictions on employer workplace communications.
However, it’s clear the governor sees SB 8—a top priority for organized labor and Senate Democratic leadership—as too extreme in a state long perceived as having a poor business climate.
“I support the right to organize, I’m going to oppose any efforts to interfere with that right coming out of Washington, DC,” he said.
“But if you want to make sure this is a state that grows and adds good-paying jobs for people, I don’t think the striking workers bill is the way to go.”
Connecticut employers are the sole revenue source for the state’s unemployment system, which underwent a series of recent reforms designed to restore its long-term solvency.
CBIA president and CEO Chris DiPentima called the legislation “terrible public policy that sets a dangerous precedent.”
“Long-standing employee protections under state and federal law already achieve the proper balance between the unemployment system’s policy goals and collective bargaining rights,” he said.
“That balance is critical. While workers have the right to organize, bargain collectively, and strike, those rights should not be subsidized by employers—nor by taxpayers.”
Split Vote
Following three hours of debate, the House passed SB 8 on an 87 to 59 vote, as 13 Democrats joined all Republicans except one—Rep. Tom Delnicki (R-South Windsor)—in opposition, with five members absent.
Democratic representatives Hector Arzeno (D-Greenwich), Jill Barry (D-Glastonbury), Pat Boyd (D-Pomfret), Savet Constantine (D-Wilton), Lucy Dathan (D-New Canaan), Jamie Foster (D-Ellington), Renee LaMark Muir (D-Deep River), Jennifer Leeper (D-Fairfield), Stephen Meskers (D-Greenwich), Chris Poulos (D-Southington), John Santanella (D-Enfield), Jonathan Steinberg (D-Westport), and Kerry Wood (D-Rocky Hill) voted against the bill.
The bill won Senate passage earlier in the week on a 24-11 party line vote after a five-hour debate, with Sen. Norm Needleman (D-Essex) absent.
Language imposing a slew of restrictions on warehouse distribution centers was removed from the bill prior to the vote.
Just two states—New York and New Jersey—allow strikers to collect unemployment. In 2023, California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed legislation similar to Connecticut’s bill.
Skewing the Balance
Following the Senate’s action on SB 8, RTX Corporation—one of the state’s largest private sector employers—sent a letter to all House members sharing its “grave concerns” with the bill.
The letter notes that by significantly skewing the balance in labor relations, the bill “would yield unsustainable labor contracts for Connecticut manufacturers, further exacerbating their existing Connecticut labor challenges and rendering other states more viable options for future work—ultimately putting at risk the very people whom this legislation is ostensibly intended to protect.”
RTX just reached a new contract agreement this week with machinists at its Pratt & Whitney subsidiary after a three-week strike.
“This new contract ensures RTX Connecticut union-represented employees remain among the highest paid aerospace and defense production workers in the U.S., with annual individual income above both U.S. and Connecticut median household income, and strong benefits packages,” the letter states.
The strike was marked by union leaders using their vehicles to block the road leading to Pratt & Whitney’s Middletown facility and other local businesses and making obscene gestures at stalled motorists.
Federal Law
Under federal law, individuals must be able to work, available to work, and actively seeking work to be eligible for unemployment benefits.
In addition, U.S. Department of Labor data shows Connecticut’s trust fund balance is significantly below the 1.0 Average High Cost Model level guidance.
Paying unemployment compensation strikers increases the risk the fund will become insolvent—leading to a dramatic increase in federal unemployment taxes for employers of all sizes.
“Using the state’s trust fund to provide unemployment compensation to individuals on strike puts our entire UI system in jeopardy and will inevitably lead to tax hikes,” said CBIA’s Paul Amarone.
“The trust should be preserved for the thousands of Connecticut residents who are involuntarily unemployed, able and willing to work, and are actively looking for work.”
For more information, contact CBIA’s Paul Amarone (860.244.1978).
RELATED
EXPLORE BY CATEGORY
Stay Connected with CBIA News Digests
The latest news and information delivered directly to your inbox.
CBIA IS FIGHTING TO MAKE CONNECTICUT A TOP STATE FOR BUSINESS, JOBS, AND ECONOMIC GROWTH. A BETTER BUSINESS CLIMATE MEANS A BRIGHTER FUTURE FOR EVERYONE.