WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2190

An Act amending the act of July 23, 1970 (P.L.563, No.195), known as the Public Employe Relations Act, in collective bargaining impasse, further providing for arbitration; and, in strikes, further providing for prohibited strikes.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Lisa Borowski and 24 co-sponsors

The bill would expand binding arbitration to resolve police bargaining impasses and tighten rules on prohibited strikes for public employees.

Removed from table
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2190

Summary of Pennsylvania HB 2190 (2025-2026)

Title

An Act amending the Public Employe Relations Act (July 23, 1970, P.L.563, No.195) to modify provisions on collective bargaining impasse arbitration and strikes, including provisions related to prohibited strikes.

Purpose and Intent

  • To broaden and clarify the use of binding arbitration in collective bargaining impasses, with a focus on policing.
  • To tighten rules around strikes by public employees, defining or expanding prohibited strike conduct.
  • The bill is presented with an emphasis on allowing binding arbitration for all police, as indicated by the memo title “Allowing Binding Arbitration for All Police.” This suggests an intent to require or facilitate binding arbitration as a mechanism to resolve bargaining disputes involving police, potentially beyond existing statutory constraints.

Key Provisions and Changes (as indicated by the bill text and related materials)

  • Arbitration in Impasses:
    • The bill amends the act’s provisions governing collective bargaining impasse, specifically enhancing or altering the arbitration process. This could include:
    • Expanding who can invoke arbitration.
    • Modifying timelines, procedures, or standards used by arbitrators.
    • Providing for binding arbitration outcomes to settle impasses between public employer and employee representatives.
  • Strikes:
    • The bill revises the section on strikes, focusing on prohibited strikes. Potential changes could involve:
    • Expanding or clarifying what constitutes a prohibited strike.
    • Adjusting penalties or enforcement mechanisms for strikes by public employees.
    • Establishing or reinforcing timelines or notice requirements related to strikes.
  • Focus on Police:
    • The accompanying sponsor memo highlights “Allowing Binding Arbitration for All Police,” suggesting a particular emphasis on police departments. This could imply:
    • A policy preference for binding arbitration in policing labor disputes across the Commonwealth, potentially altering how police unions and municipalities resolve bargaining deadlocks.
  • Statutory Alignment:
    • The amendments operate within the framework of the Public Employe Relations Act, which governs public-sector labor relations, including collective bargaining, impasse resolution, and strike prohibitions.

Who Would Be Affected

  • Public-sector employees represented by bargaining units subject to the Public Employe Relations Act, with a specific focus on police departments and law enforcement personnel.
  • Public employers (e.g., municipalities, police departments) that negotiate with public employee unions.
  • Labor relations decision-makers, including arbitrators and the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, as the arbitration and strike provisions connect to impasse resolution and enforcement mechanisms.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Status:
    • Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on February 3, 2026.
    • Reported as amended on April 27, 2026.
    • First consideration in the House on April 27, 2026.
    • Laid on the table on April 27, 2026 (i.e., not advancing to a floor vote at that time).
  • Committee action:
    • The Judiciary Committee conducted a voting meeting on multiple related bills, including HB 2190, with a committee vote showing unified approval (26 YES, 0 NO) for the reported bill as amended and for an amendment adopted during committee proceedings.
  • Effective date:
    • The text provided does not specify an effective date; typically, if enacted, the act would specify an effective date in its final provisions.

Additional Notes

  • The bill’s language and exact amendments to the Public Employe Relations Act are contained in the 2025-2026 session text (HB 2190). The accompanying sponsor memo explicitly calls out “Allowing Binding Arbitration for All Police,” signaling a policy objective that may broaden binding arbitration applicability within policing labor disputes.
  • As of the latest action, the bill is in the Judiciary Committee and has not yet been enacted into law.

Context and Considerations (for readers)

  • Binding arbitration can reduce prolonged impasses by having a neutral arbitrator set terms, potentially limiting strikes and work stoppages.
  • Expanding binding arbitration to more police bargaining disputes could affect wage, benefit, and work-rule negotiations, as well as the strategic balance between municipalities and police unions.
  • Stakeholders may include police unions, local governments, taxpayers, and residents interested in public safety staffing and costs.

If you’d like, I can extract the exact proposed statutory language changes from the bill text and provide a side-by-side comparison with the current law.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.