The House has passed a labor-friendly bill with the backing of 20 Republican members. This bipartisan support highlights a significant shift in labor policy discussions.
Key points
House passed a labor-friendly bill
20 Republicans supported the bill
Bipartisan support for labor policy
Significant shift in labor discussions
Vote occurred on May 12, 2026
The U.S. Capitol Building at dusk on May 12, 2026, in Washington, D.C.
The U.S. Capitol Building at dusk on May 12, 2026, in Washington, D.C.
Graeme Sloan/Getty Images North America
It's a problem the labor movement has decried for years: After a successful union election, it takes far too long — an average of 465 days, according to Bloomberg Law — for workers and their employers to reach a first contract.
In some cases, it's taking even longer. Neither the Buffalo, N.Y., Starbucks baristas who unionized in late 2021 nor the Staten Island Amazon warehouse workers who unionized in the spring of 2022 have a contract.
Now, by a vote of 230 to 193,the House has approved a bill that would force employers to the table, allow federal mediators to get involved if a deal is not reached within 90 days, and — if needed — settle the matter through arbitration shortly thereafter.
TwentyRepublicans joined Democrats in voting to pass the measure, called the Faster Labor Contracts Act.
Q&A
What labor-friendly bill did the House approve?
The House approved a bill aimed at enhancing labor rights and protections for workers.
How many Republicans supported the labor-friendly bill?
Twenty Republicans supported the labor-friendly bill in the House vote.
What are the implications of the House passing this bill?
The passage of this bill may lead to increased labor protections and influence future labor policy discussions.
When was the labor-friendly bill passed by the House?
The labor-friendly bill was passed by the House on May 12, 2026.
Charities in England and Wales ‘donate millions to illegal Israeli settlements’
Thirty-two charities in England and Wales have donated over £28 million to illegal Israeli settlements, according to MP Melanie Ward. If gift aid is claimed, taxpayers could subsidize these settlements by £5.6 million, prompting an investigation by the Charity Commission.
Most Makerfield voters say offensive posts would put them off candidate, poll finds
A poll shows that 55% of Makerfield voters would be less likely to support a candidate with offensive social media posts. Only 31% said such posts would not affect their voting decision.
"No more stop the steals. You got an election, you can get a contract," said New Jersey Democrat Donald Norcross, a union electrician and the bill's sponsor, at a press conference last fall.
Norcross says the measure would be the most significant new protection for workers since before World War II, an assertion echoed by labor leaders.
"This is one of the most consequential labor bills to come before Congress in generations," said Teamsters General President Sean O'Brien in a statement earlier this year. "It has the potential to hold Corporate America accountable for endlessly dragging out negotiations and denying workers the first union contracts they deserve."
Republicans opposed to the bill described it as government overreach, something that would be bad for employers, employees and the economy.
Sean O'Brien, General President of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, testifies on Capitol Hill on November 14, 2023 in Washington, D.C.
Sean O'Brien, General President of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, testifies on Capitol Hill on November 14, 2023 in Washington, D.C.
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images North America
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images North America
A discharge petition got the bill to the House floor
The bill reached the House floor via a procedural tactic known as a discharge petition — the same tactic used to force a House vote on the release of the Epstein files. Democrats have increasingly turned to discharge petitions, which require a simple majority, to circumvent House Speaker Mike Johnson. Seven Republicans joined Democrats in signing the discharge petition to get the Faster Labor Contracts Act to the House floor.
Now, the measure heads to the Senate, where it faces steeper odds, although it does have the support of several Republicans, including Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, one of the bill's sponsors.
For years, Democrats have unsuccessfully pushed for far more sweeping reform to federal labor law through a bill called the PRO Act. The Faster Labor Contracts Act replicates one provision of that bill, creating an expedited timeline for what has to happen once workers vote to unionize.
Within 10 days, employers must begin contract negotiations. If no agreement is reached after 90 days, either party can bring in the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, a federal agency tasked with handling labor disputes, both within government and in the private sector.
If there is still no agreement after another 30 days, the dispute would be settled by a three-member arbitration panel, which would take into consideration the employer's financial status, the employees' cost of living, and the wages and benefits at comparable companies, among other factors. The agreement would be binding for two years or until the two sides settle on something else.
Opponents say it's a "draconian" measure
The CHRO Association, which represents chief human resource officers at 350 large corporations, called the measure "draconian" in a letter to Speaker Johnson.
"Sometimes [contract negotiations] do take time, as frustrating as it is," says Gregory Hoff, the association's general counsel, noting that union contracts can run hundreds of pages long and be in place for years. "It's very, very important to get these things right the first time."
While the CHRO Association does support some kind of reform to speed up the negotiation process, Hoff says giving the government the ability to impose a contract so soon after a union election is not the right solution.
"It's not their fault, but it's unreasonable to expect that the government arbitrator would have a better idea of what's going on on the ground than people who actually work there along with their union representatives, along with the employer," Hoff says.
Another complication is that the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service has been diminished by the Trump administration. The agency is now down to about 90 employees, less than half of what it was before President Trump signed an executive order targeting a number of entities to be "eliminated to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law."
"When you think about all the first contracts that might pop up in even just a given year… I think the idea that they could handle all this is highly optimistic," says Hoff.
