Bill
HB 2650
Illinois Unemployment Insurance would make workers affected by labor disputes eligible for benefits during stoppages, reversing the previous ineligibility.
Status and procedural history
- Bill number: HB 2650
- Subject: Unemployment Insurance — treatment of labor disputes (amends 820 ILCS 405/604)
- Sponsors: Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid (primary; Illinois); (note: a separate unrelated Arizona HB 2650 appears in the packet and is not part of this Illinois measure)
- Introduced: February 6, 2025 (first reading same day)
- Committee referrals (IL): Referred to Rules Committee, then Labor & Commerce Committee, Wage Policy Study Subcommittee; further actions include readings and re-referrals (most recent status: Rule 19(a) / Re‑referred to Rules Committee).
- Companion: SB 2195
Purpose / intent
- To change Illinois law so that individuals who are fully or partially unemployed because of a stoppage of work caused by a labor dispute (e.g., strike) are eligible — rather than ineligible — to receive unemployment benefits for the affected weeks. The bill makes conforming edits to existing statute language (820 ILCS 405/604).
Key provisions and changes
- Eligibility reversal: Rewrites Section 604 to provide that an individual shall be eligible (instead of ineligible) for benefits for any week in which the individual's total or partial unemployment results from a stoppage of work due to a labor dispute at the last place of employment.
- Maintains certain exclusions and clarifications:
- The term “labor dispute” does not include an individual’s refusal to work because the employer failed to pay accrued earned wages within 10 working days from the date due, or failed to pay other uncontested accrued obligations within 10 working days.
- The statute’s treatment of employer lockouts is addressed: a lockout by an employer is distinguished from a labor dispute for disqualification purposes, and the bill preserves that individuals should not be denied benefits solely because of a lockout—subject to specified conditions (for example, an individual locked out remains ineligible if ineligible under another section, and eligibility during a lockout may be denied for weeks when specified bargaining-related conditions are not met). (Text contains provisions clarifying circumstances under which lockouts and bargaining conduct affect eligibility.)
- Neutral procedural provisions:
- When separate departments or branches of work are involved at a single premises, the claims adjudicator must make separate determinations about eligibility under this Section; those determinations may be appealed to the Director per Section 800.
Who is affected
- Workers involved in strikes or other labor disputes (may become eligible for UI benefits during stoppages).
- Workers locked out by employers (the bill clarifies eligibility treatment for lockouts).
- Employers and labor organizations — potential impacts on bargaining dynamics.
- Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES) — will administer changes, adjust claims adjudication and appeals.
- State Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund — potential fiscal effects if benefit outlays increase.
Potential impacts and considerations
- Fiscal: Expanding eligibility for weeks lost to labor disputes could increase UI benefit payments; the bill does not include an appropriation or fiscal note within the text provided.
- Policy: Reverses the longstanding policy that denies UI benefits during labor disputes, which may affect strike behavior and collective-bargaining dynamics.
- Administrative: IDES will need to update adjudication guidance, forms, and appeals procedures to implement separate determinations and lockout-related criteria.
Note on packet contents
- The packet accompanying the request also included an unrelated Arizona draft (an Arizona HB 2650 text proposing to prohibit use of “social credit scores” by banks). That Arizona provision is not part of the Illinois unemployment-insurance HB 2650 summarized here.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
