Recently, public sector transit workers have been in the spotlight, receiving a significant amount of media attention as a result of strikes that effectively halted transportation in the city of San Francisco. This labor strife reignited a dialogue nationwide about whether public sector workers should be allowed to strike. Many states’ laws are silent on the issue of public sector strikes; the states that have addressed the issue deploy divergent and inconsistent resolution mechanisms.
Below is a chart detailing the rights that the 12 permissive strike states have extended to their public sector employees:
|
State |
Employees Covered |
Policy |
|
Alaska |
All public employees |
|
|
California |
Some municipal employees |
|
|
Colorado |
All public employees |
|
|
Hawaii |
All public employees |
|
|
Illinois |
All public employees |
|
|
Louisiana |
All public employees |
|
|
Minnesota |
All public employees |
|
|
Montana |
Public health nurses |
|
|
Ohio |
All public employees |
|
|
Oregon |
All public employees |
|
|
Pennsylvania |
All public employee except prison guards, police, firefighters, and court employees |
|
|
Vermont |
Municipal employees |
|
Adapted from Labor Relations in the Public Sector, Fifth Edition by Richard C. Kearney & Patrice M. Mareschal
One commonality among permissive strike states is that the vast majority bar strikes that would endanger public health, safety or welfare. For that reason, police and firefighters are prohibited from striking in almost every state. This prohibition dates back to 1919, when a massive police strike in Boston left citizens in an incredibly vulnerable state.
The 38 states not on the permissive strike list either do not recognize a legal right to strike or have an outright prohibition against public sector strikes. Similar to the permissive strike states, the penalties associated with prohibited strikes vary widely. How effective the lack of a legal right is as a deterrent to striking has been called into question numerous times, with the 2005 NYC MTA strike being a good example. New York provides for the most draconian anti-strike penalties, enacted in the Taylor Law. The penalties for a public sector union strike can include: large monetary fines levied against the union for every day its members are on strike, the loss of dues check off privileges for 18 months after striking, and potential jail time for the union leader. Knowing this, the union leaders still called a strike. On the opposite end of the spectrum are the more recent San Francisco BART strikes. Because the strikes were permitted under California law, the city had little recourse, despite the inconvenience to city residents. In both of these strikes, an agreement was eventually reached.
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
May 29
AFGE argues termination of collective bargaining agreement violates the union’s First Amendment rights; agricultural workers challenge card check laws; and the California Court of Appeal reaffirms San Francisco city workers’ right to strike.
May 28
A proposal to make the NLRB purely adjudicatory; a work stoppage among court-appointed lawyers in Massachusetts; portable benefits laws gain ground
May 27
a judge extends a pause on the Trump Administration’s mass-layoffs, the Fifth Circuit refuses to enforce an NLRB order, and the Texas Supreme court extends workplace discrimination suits to co-workers.
May 26
Federal court blocks mass firings at Department of Education; EPA deploys new AI tool; Chiquita fires thousands of workers.
May 25
United Airlines flight attendants reach tentative agreement; Whole Foods workers secure union certification; One Big Beautiful Bill Act cuts $1.1 trillion
May 23
United Steelworkers union speaks out against proposed steel merger; Goodwin Procter turns over diversity data; Anthropic AI's fair use claim over authors' creative work