PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Stauber, Pete [R-MN-8] · R–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1505 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1505 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1505 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1505 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-21 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This bill would set minimum rights for covered state and local police, firefighters, and emergency medical workers to negotiate pay, hours, and working conditions through unions. It would require binding arbitration—a decision resolving stalled contract negotiations—and create federal bargaining procedures where state protections fall short. Comparable or stronger state protections would remain. States could exempt certain small local governments. These are proposed changes; the supplied record does not establish enactment.
means an employee of a public safety agency who is a law enforcement officer, a firefighter, or an emergency medical services personnel;
(3) Providing for the right to bargain over hours, wages, and terms and conditions of employment. (4) Providing for binding interest arbitration as a mechanism to resolve an impasse in collective bargaining negotiations.
establishing collective bargaining procedures for employers and public safety officers in States where the Authority has determined, acting pursuant to section 4(a), do not substantially provide for such rights and responsibilities.
to preempt or limit the remedies, rights, and procedures of any law of any State or political subdivision of any State that provides comparable or greater rights and responsibilities than the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b);
to prohibit a State from exempting from coverage under this Act a political subdivision of the State that has a population of less than 5,000 or that employs less than 25 full-time employees
2025-02-21: Introduced in House
The proposed Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act declares a policy of encouraging negotiated labor agreements and dispute resolution. These statements describe Congress's proposed policy, rather than demonstrate the bill's effects.
This Act may be cited as the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.
Congress declares that the following is the policy of the United States:
The Federal Government needs to encourage conciliation, mediation, and arbitration to aid and encourage employers and the representatives of their employees to reach and maintain agreements concerning rates of pay, hours, and working conditions
Covered employers would be states and their political subdivisions that employ public safety officers. The bill's definition of a state includes the District of Columbia and U.S. territories and possessions.
The terms employer, public safety agency, and public safety employer mean any State, or political subdivision of a State, that employs public safety officers.
The term State means each of the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any territory or possession of the United States.
Covered workers would include law enforcement officers, firefighters, and personnel providing emergency medical care outside hospitals. Temporary transfers into supervisory or management jobs would remain covered; permanent supervisory, management, and confidential employees would be excluded. The firefighter and law enforcement definitions rely on other statutes.
The term emergency medical services personnel means an individual who provides out-of-hospital emergency medical care, including an emergency medical technician, paramedic, or first responder.
The term public safety officer— (A) means an employee of a public safety agency who is a law enforcement officer, a firefighter, or an emergency medical services personnel; (B) includes an individual who is temporarily transferred to a supervisory or management position; and (C) does not include a permanent supervisory, management, or confidential employee.
The term firefighter has the meaning given the term employee engaged in fire protection activities in section 3(y) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(y)).
The term law enforcement officer has the meaning given such term in section 1204 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10284(6)).
State definitions at enactment would generally determine who counts as a confidential, management, or supervisory employee. Without applicable state definitions, the bill supplies its own: confidential employees must be designated and routinely assist supervisors and managers confidentially; managers influence employer policy; supervisors must exercise specified independent personnel authority for a majority of their work time.
The term confidential employee has the meaning given such term under applicable State law on the date of enactment of this Act. If no such State law is in effect, the term means an individual, employed by a public safety employer, who— (A) is designated as confidential; and (B) is an individual who routinely assists, in a confidential capacity, supervisory employees and management employees.
The term management employee has the meaning given such term under applicable State law in effect on the date of enactment of this Act. If no such State law is in effect, the term means an individual employed by a public safety employer in a position that requires or authorizes the individual to formulate, determine, or influence the policies of the employer.
The term supervisory employee has the meaning given such term under applicable State law in effect on the date of enactment of this Act. If no such State law is in effect, the term means an individual, employed by a public safety employer, who— (A) has the authority in the interest of the employer to hire, direct, assign, promote, reward, transfer, furlough, lay off, recall, suspend, discipline, or remove public safety officers, to adjust their grievances, or to effectively recommend such action, if the exercise of the authority is not merely routine or clerical in nature but requires the consistent exercise of independent judgment; and (B) devotes a majority of time at work to exercising such authority.
Within 180 days after enactment, the Federal Labor Relations Authority would have to determine whether each state's protections meet or exceed the bill's standards. It could not add other criteria and would have to consider affected employers' and unions' views, giving their joint agreement on compliance the greatest practicable weight.
The term Authority means the Federal Labor Relations Authority.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Authority shall make a determination as to whether a State substantially provides for the rights and responsibilities described in subsection (b).
The term substantially provides, when used with respect to the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b), means comparable to or greater than each right and responsibility described in such section.
the Authority shall consider the opinions of affected employers and labor organizations. In the case where the Authority is notified by an affected employer and labor organization that both parties agree that the law applicable to such employer and labor organization substantially provides for the rights and responsibilities described in subsection (b), the Authority shall give such agreement weight to the maximum extent practicable
the Authority shall be limited to the application of the criteria described in subsection (b) and shall not require any additional criteria.
The minimum standards would include workers' right to form and join a union seeking to represent them exclusively. Employers would have to recognize a union freely chosen by a majority of employees, agree to bargain with it, and put agreements in writing.
(1) Granting public safety officers the right to form and join a labor organization, which may exclude management employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, that is, or seeks to be, recognized as the exclusive bargaining representative of such employees. (2) Requiring public safety employers to recognize the employees’ labor organization (freely chosen by a majority of the employees), to agree to bargain with the labor organization, and to commit any agreements to writing in a contract or memorandum of understanding.
The standards would include bargaining over hours, wages, and employment terms and conditions. When contract negotiations stall, they would require binding interest arbitration—a process in which an arbitrator resolves the disputed contract terms.
(3) Providing for the right to bargain over hours, wages, and terms and conditions of employment. (4) Providing for binding interest arbitration as a mechanism to resolve an impasse in collective bargaining negotiations.
States would need to provide enforcement of the required rights and written labor agreements through a court with jurisdiction, a state administrative agency if the state chooses, or both.
(5) Requiring enforcement of all rights, responsibilities, and protections enumerated in this section, and of any written contract or memorandum of understanding between a labor organization and a public safety employer, through— (A) a State administrative agency, if the State so chooses; and/or (B) any court of competent jurisdiction.
A state-compliance determination would remain effective until replaced. An employer or union could request reconsideration after establishing a material change in state law or its interpretation; if the Authority agrees that such a change occurred, it would have to issue a new determination within 30 days of receiving the request.
A determination made pursuant to paragraph (1) shall remain in effect unless and until the Authority issues a subsequent determination
Upon establishing that a material change in State law or its interpretation has occurred, an employer or a labor organization may submit a written request for a subsequent determination. If satisfied that a material change in State law or its interpretation has occurred, the Authority shall issue a subsequent determination not later than 30 days after receipt of such request.
An affected individual, union, or employer could challenge a determination within 60 days in the federal appeals circuit where it resides or does business, or in the District of Columbia Circuit.
The term person means an individual or a labor organization.
Any person or employer aggrieved by a determination of the Authority under this section may, during the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the determination was made, petition any United States Court of Appeals in the circuit in which the person or employer resides or transacts business or in the District of Columbia Circuit, for judicial review.
A state found to meet the standards would retain its law without displacement by this bill. For a state falling short, federal procedures would begin on the latest applicable date: two years after enactment; the end of the first regular legislative session beginning after the initial determination; or, for a subsequent determination, the end of the first regular session beginning after that determination.
If the Authority determines, acting pursuant to its authority under subsection (a), that a State substantially provides rights and responsibilities described in subsection (b), then this Act shall not preempt State law.
then such State shall be subject to the regulations and procedures described in section 5 beginning on the later of— (A) the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act; (B) the date that is the last day of the first regular session of the legislature of the State that begins after the date the Authority makes a determination under subsection (a)(1); or (C) in the case of a State receiving a subsequent determination under subsection (a)(4), the date that is the last day of the first regular session of the legislature of the State that begins after the date the Authority made the determination.
If a state's only shortcoming is that it protects some categories of public safety workers but not others, the Authority would identify the uncovered categories for federal procedures. Already protected categories would remain solely under state law for these bargaining rights.
solely because the State law substantially provides for such rights and responsibilities for certain categories of public safety officers covered by the Act but not others, the Authority shall identify those categories of public safety officers that shall be subject to the regulations and procedures described in section 5, pursuant to section 8(b)(3) and beginning on the appropriate date described in paragraph (1), and those categories of public safety officers that shall remain solely subject to State law
the Authority shall only exercise the powers provided in section 5 with respect to those categories of public safety officers who have not been afforded the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b).
Within one year after enactment, the Authority would have to issue bargaining regulations for employers and covered workers in states found to fall short of the standards.
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Authority shall issue regulations, in accordance with the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b), establishing collective bargaining procedures for employers and public safety officers in States where the Authority has determined, acting pursuant to section 4(a), do not substantially provide for such rights and responsibilities.
The Authority would decide which employee groups are appropriate for union representation, supervise or conduct representation elections, resolve good-faith bargaining disputes and unfair labor practice complaints, and review challenges to arbitration awards.
(1) determine the appropriateness of units for labor organization representation; (2) supervise or conduct elections to determine whether a labor organization has been selected as an exclusive representative by a voting majority of the employees in an appropriate unit; (3) resolve issues relating to the duty to bargain in good faith; (4) conduct hearings and resolve complaints of unfair labor practices; (5) resolve exceptions to the awards of arbitrators;
The Authority would protect employees' freedom both to participate in union activity and to refrain from it, without penalties or retaliation.
protect the right of each employee to form, join, or assist any labor organization, or to refrain from any such activity, freely and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and protect each employee in the exercise of such right;
To administer the bill, the Authority could compel testimony and evidence, administer oaths, obtain sworn testimony outside hearings, and require written answers to questions.
take such other actions as are necessary and appropriate to effectively administer this Act, including issuing subpoenas requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of documentary or other evidence from any place in the United States, and administering oaths, taking or ordering the taking of depositions, ordering responses to written interrogatories, and receiving and examining witnesses.
The Authority could ask a federal appeals court with jurisdiction over the parties, or the District of Columbia Circuit, to enforce its final orders and grant temporary relief or a restraining order.
The Authority may petition any United States Court of Appeals with jurisdiction over the parties, or the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to enforce any final orders under this section, and for appropriate temporary relief or a restraining order.
Unless the Authority had filed an enforcement petition, a party could sue in an appropriate federal district court to enforce its regulations or orders. The right to sue over an order would end when the Authority sought the same relief. For state employees, enforcement would belong exclusively to the Authority unless the state waived sovereign immunity—its protection against certain lawsuits.
Unless the Authority has filed a petition for enforcement as provided in paragraph (1), any party has the right to file suit in any appropriate district court of the United States to enforce compliance with the regulations issued by the Authority pursuant to this section, or to enforce compliance with any order issued by the Authority pursuant to this section.
The right provided by this subsection to bring a suit to enforce compliance with any order issued by the Authority pursuant to this section shall terminate upon the filing of a petition seeking the same relief by the Authority.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the Act, and in the absence of a waiver of a State’s sovereign immunity, the Authority shall have the exclusive power to enforce the provisions of this Act with respect to employees of a State.
Subject to preserving state and local laws on public safety strikes, the bill would prohibit employers, officers, and unions from using lockouts, coordinated sick leave, slowdowns, strikes, or other organized job actions that measurably disrupt emergency services and are designed to force agreement on a proposed contract.
Subject to subsection (b), an employer, public safety officer, or labor organization may not engage in a lockout, sickout, work slowdown, strike, or any other organized job action that will measurably disrupt the delivery of emergency services and is designed to compel an employer, public safety officer, or labor organization to agree to the terms of a proposed contract.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any law of any State or political subdivision of any State with respect to strikes by public safety officers.
Enactment would not invalidate covered union certifications, recognitions, elections, bargaining agreements, or memoranda approved by the listed public authorities and in effect the day before enactment.
A certification, recognition, election-held, collective bargaining agreement, or memorandum of understanding that has been issued, approved, or ratified by any public employee relations board or commission or by any State or political subdivision or its agents and is in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act shall not be invalidated by the enactment of this Act.
The bill would preserve comparable or stronger state and local rights and remedies. It also would not require states to rescind or override local laws that meet or exceed the standards.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed— (1) to preempt or limit the remedies, rights, and procedures of any law of any State or political subdivision of any State that provides comparable or greater rights and responsibilities than the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b);
Nothing in this Act or the regulations promulgated under this Act shall be construed to require a State to rescind or preempt the laws or ordinances of any of the State’s political subdivisions if such laws provide rights and responsibilities for public safety officers that are comparable to or greater than the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b).
States could continue enforcing right-to-work laws that bar negotiated requirements to join a union or pay union fees as a condition of employment.
to prevent a State from enforcing a right-to-work law that prohibits employers and labor organizations from negotiating provisions in a labor agreement that require union membership or payment of union fees as a condition of employment;
A state law in effect at enactment that otherwise provides the required rights would not be displaced solely because it lets employees represent themselves in employment relations with their public safety agency.
to preempt or limit any State law in effect on the date of enactment of this Act that provides for the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b) solely because such State law permits an employee to appear on the employee’s own behalf with respect to the employee’s employment relations with the public safety agency involved;
States could exempt a local government with fewer than 5,000 residents or fewer than 25 full-time employees. The employee count would cover the whole local government, excluding popularly elected officials and people appointed to boards or commissions. The exemption would be optional, not automatic.
to prohibit a State from exempting from coverage under this Act a political subdivision of the State that has a population of less than 5,000 or that employs less than 25 full-time employees, including each individual employed by the political subdivision, except any individual elected by popular vote or appointed to serve on a board or commission;
An otherwise qualifying state or local bargaining law would not be displaced solely because it does not require bargaining over pensions, retirement, or health benefits.
to preempt or limit the laws or ordinances of any State or political subdivision of a State that provide for the rights and responsibilities described in section 4(b) solely because such law or ordinance does not require bargaining with respect to pension, retirement, or health benefits.
Otherwise qualifying state and local laws could continue requiring labor agreements to be presented to a legislative body as part of approval.
solely because such laws or ordinances provide that a contract or memorandum of understanding between a public safety employer and a labor organization must be presented to a legislative body as part of the process for approving such contract or memorandum of understanding.
The bill would authorize Congress to provide whatever funding is necessary to implement it. This provision sets no dollar amount and does not itself appropriate money.
There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 19, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on February 21, 2025. It supplies no later action; that does not establish that no later action occurred.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:13:54Z. 2025-02-21: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2025-02-21: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-21. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not cover other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of absent earmark disclosures or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains a size-based exemption from the main coverage policy. Identifying this narrow exception does not establish improper intent or effects.
Qualifying small local governments could receive an exemption from the bill's coverage at their state's option. Eligibility requires fewer than 5,000 residents or fewer than 25 full-time employees, with elected officials and board or commission appointees excluded from the employee count. This would relieve qualifying employers of coverage while limiting the bill's reach to their public safety workers.
to prohibit a State from exempting from coverage under this Act a political subdivision of the State that has a population of less than 5,000 or that employs less than 25 full-time employees, including each individual employed by the political subdivision, except any individual elected by popular vote or appointed to serve on a board or commission;
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI