PRIA Logo™
119-s-3124119th CongressWALLET

Protection on the Picket Line Act

Sponsored By: Senator Tuberville, Tommy [R-AL]

Introduced

Summary

Limits when disciplining workers for harassment during Section 7 activity counts as an unfair labor practice. This bill would add a two-step test requiring the NLRB General Counsel to make an initial showing and then let employers prove they would have disciplined the same way regardless of the protected activity.

Show full summary
  • Workers: Workers disciplined for harassment during pickets would face narrower protection under the NLRA. Successful challenges would require proof the employer acted because of the protected activity and not for other reasons.
  • Employers: Employers gain a clearer defense. If they prove they would have imposed the same discipline absent the protected activity the action would not be treated as an unfair labor practice.
  • Unions: Unions arguing disciplinary retaliation would need to rely on the General Counsel's initial showing that the worker engaged in Section 7 activity, the employer knew, and there is evidence of animus.
  • NLRB General Counsel: The General Counsel must first show Section 7 engagement, employer knowledge, and evidence linking employer animus to the discipline before the case can proceed.

Personalized for You

How does this bill affect your finances?

Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.

Free to download

Bill Overview

Analyzed Economic Effects

1 provisions identified: 0 benefits, 1 costs, 0 mixed.

New rules for picket-line discipline

If enacted, this bill would add a new rule to the National Labor Relations Act about picket-line discipline. It would apply when an employer disciplines an employee for harassment or abuse that occurs during Section 7 protected activity. First, the NLRB General Counsel would need to make an initial showing that the worker engaged in protected activity, the employer knew, and the employer had animus tied to the discipline. Second, the employer would have to fail to prove it would have taken the same disciplinary action even without the protected activity. If both steps are satisfied, the discipline could be treated as an unfair labor practice. If the employer proves it would have disciplined anyway, the discipline would not be treated as an unfair labor practice.

Sponsors & CoSponsors

Sponsor

Tuberville, Tommy [R-AL]

AL • R

Cosponsors

  • Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA]

    LA • R

    Sponsored 11/6/2025

Roll Call Votes

No roll call votes available for this bill.

View on Congress.gov
Back to Legislation