Wednesday’s vote on House Bill 98, introduced by Rep. Judy Boyle (R-Midvale), was 40-29, after the House State Affairs Committee endorsed the bill on Monday. Rep. Ted Hill (R-Eagle) abstained from voting on the House floor, claiming he could not vote because he is a member of a union. The bill now likely heads to the Senate State Affairs Committee for consideration.
“This wasn’t the outcome we wanted, but we’re not done fighting this bad bill yet,” said IEA Political Director Chris Parri. “We’ll need all hands on deck to kill it for good in the Senate when the time comes.”
HB 98 attacks teachers’ unions directly but does not apply to other public sector unions such as the Professional Fire Fighters of Idaho or the Fraternal Order of Police. The bill would:
- End paid release time for educators and force them to use personal leave for union work (currently, IEA locals can negotiate with their school district for leave to do union work)
- Eliminate payroll deduction as an option for paying union dues
- Prohibit school districts from offering stipends intended to be used for paying union dues or fees
- Bar school districts and schools from providing educator contact information to the union unless the employee provides authorization
- Ban distribution of union communication materials or membership solicitations on school property
- Limit compensation or paid leave for professional employees to engage in IEA activities
Wednesday’s floor debate on HB 98 was short but punchy, with several public education allies pointing out the many benefits of collaboration between school districts and IEA. Rep. Jack Nelsen (R-Jerome) talked about how school districts save money on HR departments by allowing union members to handle personnel issues internally.
Several other legislators, like Rep. Lori McCann (R-Lewiston), argued against targeting educators. “I think the teachers have taken enough of a hit,” McCann said before adding HB 98 is “not an Idaho bill.”
Rep. Wendy Horman (R-Idaho Falls), who has brought forward a stunningly unaccountable voucher bill against stiff opposition from IEA, objected to McCann’s characterization. House Speaker Mike Moyle (R-Star) shut down McCann’s comments.
“I will move on,” McCann said. “But I do not think that this is the Idaho Way. This is not how we want to do things.”
Other legislators speaking out against the bill, including IEA member Rep. Soñia Galaviz (D-Boise), said the union is being targeted for its political efforts. Other public sector unions are not targeted in HB 98.
“The double standard feels like discrimination,” Galaviz said. “This is political targeting.”
Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud
The reasoning behind that political targeting was on full display in Monday’s House Affairs Committee meeting, where the bill advanced to the House floor despite stiff public opposition. Lawmakers were transparent about their dislike of IEA’s affiliation with the National Education Association and NEA’s support of Democratic candidates.
“I’m looking at this website,” said Rep. Bruce Skaug (R-Nampa), referring to the NEA’s website, “and it looks like it’s all about DEI, promoting DEI.”
Rep. Clint Hostetler (R-Twin Falls) was even more blatant and inaccurate, saying “teachers’ unions, overwhelmingly — to the point of about 95 percent — have contributed to the Democrat party.”
IEA Political Director Chris Parri’s committee testimony against the bill pointed out the truth: IEA is non-partisan and includes members from both the Republican and Democratic parties. During 2024’s general election, as is typical, IEA members endorsed a bi-partisan slate of candidates.
In his testimony, IEA Executive Director Paul Stark pointed out the flaws in creating legislation designed specifically to attack certain groups.
“There’s a large issue here with what’s called ‘viewpoint discrimination’ under the Constitution,” said Stark, an attorney. “This legislation appears, again, to target only the Idaho Education Association because it doesn’t approve of its viewpoints.”
Unions, Administrators Speak Out for IEA
Standing united in opposition were the Professional Fire Fighters Association, the AFL-CIO and some members of the Fraternal Order of Police. They packed the committee room, forcing legislative staff to hurriedly open another room for overflow.
Shaun Laughlin of PFFI defended release time in his testimony, saying that union members serve essential functions — functions legislators could see if they removed the “stigma of being a union representative.”
In addition, education allies from the Idaho School Boards Association and the Idaho Association of School Administrators voiced their concerns over the bill. Andy Grover of IASA said his organization had a long history of neutrality about union-related legislation, but HB 98 had galvanized their opposition.
“We’re all true believers in local control,” he said. “This bill will strip our ability to manage our finances and our employee relations.”
“It was very heartening to see the support from our allies and our union brothers and sisters,” IEA’s Parri said. “Their presence shows that we have strong backing. This is one of the strengths of the labor movement — we’re there for each other when it counts.”
Watch the Floor Debate
Watch what legislators had to say about the union busting bill.
