Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726 (2026)

Public employee strikes; equitable relief against certain strikes; effect of unfair labor practice charge on prohibited strike

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      243.726 Public employee strikes; equitable relief against certain strikes; effect of unfair labor practice charge on prohibited strike. (1) Participation in a strike shall be unlawful for any public employee who is not included in an appropriate bargaining unit for which an exclusive representative has been certified by the Employment Relations Board or recognized by the employer; or is included in an appropriate bargaining unit that provides for resolution of a labor dispute by petition to final and binding arbitration; or when the strike is not made lawful under ORS 240.060, 240.065, 240.080, 240.123, 243.650 to 243.809 and 341.290.

      (2) It shall be lawful for a public employee who is not prohibited from striking under subsection (1) of this section and who is in the appropriate bargaining unit involved in a labor dispute to participate in a strike over mandatory subjects of bargaining provided:

      (a) The requirements of ORS 243.712 and 243.722 relating to the resolution of labor disputes have been complied with in good faith;

      (b) Thirty days have elapsed since the board has made public the fact finder’s findings of fact and recommendations or the mediator has made public the parties’ final offers;

      (c) The exclusive representative has given 10 days’ notice by certified mail of its intent to strike and stating the reasons for its intent to strike to the board and the public employer;

      (d) The collective bargaining agreement has expired, or the labor dispute arises pursuant to a reopener provision in a collective bargaining agreement or renegotiation under ORS 243.702 (1) or renegotiation under ORS 243.698; and

      (e) The union’s strike does not include unconventional strike activity not protected under the National Labor Relations Act on June 6, 1995, and does not constitute an unfair labor practice under ORS 243.672 (3).

      (3)(a) Where the strike occurring or is about to occur creates a clear and present danger or threat to the health, safety or welfare of the public, the public employer concerned may petition the circuit court of the county in which the strike has taken place or is to take place for equitable relief including but not limited to appropriate injunctive relief.

      (b) If the strike is a strike of state employees the petition shall be filed in the Circuit Court of Marion County.

      (c) If, after hearing, the court finds that the strike creates a clear and present danger or threat to the health, safety or welfare of the public, it shall grant appropriate relief. Such relief shall include an order that the labor dispute be submitted to final and binding arbitration within 10 days of the court’s order pursuant to procedures in ORS 243.746.

      (4)(a) A labor organization may not declare or authorize a strike of public employees that is or would be in violation of this section. When it is alleged in good faith by the public employer that a labor organization has declared or authorized a strike of public employees that is or would be in violation of this section, the employer may petition the board for a declaration that the strike is or would be unlawful. The board, after conducting an investigation and hearing, may make such declaration if it finds that such declaration or authorization of a strike is or would be unlawful.

      (b) When a labor organization or individual disobeys an order of the appropriate circuit court issued pursuant to enforcing an order of the board involving this section and ORS 243.736 or 243.738, they shall be punished according to the provisions of ORS 33.015 to 33.155, except that the amount of the fine shall be at the discretion of the court.

      (5) An unfair labor practice by a public employer shall not be a defense to a prohibited strike. The board upon the filing of an unfair labor charge alleging that a public employer has committed an unfair labor practice during or arising out of the collective bargaining procedures set forth in ORS 243.712 and 243.722, shall take immediate action on such charge and if required, petition the court of competent jurisdiction for appropriate relief or a restraining order.

      (6) As used in this section, “danger or threat to the health, safety or welfare of the public” does not include an economic or financial inconvenience to the public or to the public employer that is normally incident to a strike by public employees. [1973 c.536 §16; 1979 c.257 §1; 1989 c.1089 §1; 1991 c.724 §28; 1995 c.286 §8; 2017 c.496 §5; 2019 c.429 §13; 2019 c.439 §3]

 

      243.730 [1963 c.579 §3; 1973 c.536 §3; renumbered 243.662]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: Am. Fed'n of State v. Exec. Dep't, 628 P.2d 1228 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Am. Fed'n of State v. Exec. Dep't, 628 P.2d 1228 (Or. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 20× “2d 547 , the legislature expressed its policy choice in ORS 243.726 when it specified those absolutely forbidden from striking as "any policeman, *1240 fireman or guard at a correctional institution or mental hospital.”
Martin v. Montezuma-Cortez Sch. Dist. Re-1, 841 P.2d 237 (Colo. 1992). · cites it 5× “200 (b) (1990) (prohibiting police, fire, correctional facility and hospital facility employees from striking); Haw.”
Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty., & Mun. Employees, Locals 626 & 2831 v. Lane Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 607 P.2d 1212 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 11× “2 See ORS 243.726. On September 20, 1979, the county filed a combined complaint/petition with the ERB alleging that the then proposed strike was illegal under the provisions of ORS 243.”
Ahern v. Oregon Pub. Employees Union, 988 P.2d 364 (Or. 1999). · cites it 2× “After mediation failed to resolve the differences between the county and OPEU, OPEU gave ERB notice of its intent to strike, ORS 243.726(2)(c), and the bargaining unit went on strike against Jefferson County in February 1998.”
State Ex Rel. Dwyer v. Dwyer, 698 P.2d 957 (Or. 1985). “490(1)) to violations of orders declaring strikes by public employees unlawful (ORS 243.726(4)). We express no opinion about whether novel problems can be brought within the purview of traditional criminal contempt proceedings and thereby avoid a jury trial.”
Wy'East Educ. Ass'n v. Oregon Trail Sch. Dist. No. 46, 260 P.3d 626 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “712(2)(d); ORS 243.726(2)(c). *197 On October 19, 2005, the district notified bargaining unit members that, if the strike occurred as announced and they did not return to work by November 7, they “will be ineligible to receive district fringe benefits for November (applied to…”
City of Canby v. Canby Police Assoc., 680 P.2d 1033 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “782) in designating an “appropriate bargaining unit” which consists of dispatchers, who are employes who may strike, ORS 243.726(1), and police officers, who are forbidden by ORS 243.”
Johnson v. Portland Assn. of Teachers, 346 Or. App. 561 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 19× “We conclude that petitioners are not “injured par- ties” under ORS 243.672, and thus lack standing to pursue their claim.”
Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, Locals 626 & 2831 v. Lane Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 612 P.2d 759 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 12× “In so doing, we assumed that the ERB had determined that the strike was not in violation of a statute, ORS 243.726, as opposed to being in violation of the parties’ collective bargaining agreement.”
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. State, 535 P.2d 1385 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 4× “" OSEA argues the last passage from the agreement is a cross-reference to ORS 243.726(2) which provides it "shall be lawful for" most public employes "to participate in a strike after" certain procedures have been followed, such as good faith bargaining, mediation, factfinding…”
Circuit Court v. AFSCME, Local 502-A, 657 P.2d 1237 (Or. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “If a strike creates a danger to the welfare of the public, as would almost certainly be the case were juvenile court employees to strike, the public employer concerned may petition the circuit court for relief, which must include an order that the labor dispute be submitted to…”
Reiman v. Eugene Educ. Ass'n, 759 P.2d 295 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “For an Order declaring ORS 243.726 unconstitutional under either the Oregon Constitution or the United States, or both, insofar as ORS 243.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(1) — 5 cases
Am. Fed'n of State v. Exec. Dep't, 628 P.2d 1228 (Or. Ct. App. 1981). “2d 547 , the legislature expressed its policy choice in ORS 243.726 when it specified those absolutely forbidden from striking as "any policeman, *1240 fireman or guard at a correctional institution or mental hospital.”
Martin v. Montezuma-Cortez Sch. Dist. Re-1, 841 P.2d 237 (Colo. 1992). “200 (b) (1990) (prohibiting police, fire, correctional facility and hospital facility employees from striking); Haw.”
City of Canby v. Canby Police Assoc., 680 P.2d 1033 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “782) in designating an “appropriate bargaining unit” which consists of dispatchers, who are employes who may strike, ORS 243.726(1), and police officers, who are forbidden by ORS 243.”
Ass'n of Oregon Corr. Employees v. State, 164 P.3d 291 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
State of Oregon, Dep't of Human Resources, Mental Health & Developmental Disability Servs. Div. v. AFSCME Council 75, 866 P.2d 498 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(2) — 4 cases
Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty., & Mun. Employees, Locals 626 & 2831 v. Lane Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 607 P.2d 1212 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “2 See ORS 243.726. On September 20, 1979, the county filed a combined complaint/petition with the ERB alleging that the then proposed strike was illegal under the provisions of ORS 243.”
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. State, 535 P.2d 1385 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). “" OSEA argues the last passage from the agreement is a cross-reference to ORS 243.726(2) which provides it "shall be lawful for" most public employes "to participate in a strike after" certain procedures have been followed, such as good faith bargaining, mediation, factfinding…”
Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, Locals 626 & 2831 v. Lane Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 612 P.2d 759 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “In so doing, we assumed that the ERB had determined that the strike was not in violation of a statute, ORS 243.726, as opposed to being in violation of the parties’ collective bargaining agreement.”
Johnson v. Portland Assn. of Teachers, 346 Or. App. 561 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). “We conclude that petitioners are not “injured par- ties” under ORS 243.672, and thus lack standing to pursue their claim.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(2)(a) — 1 case
Martin v. Montezuma-Cortez Sch. Dist. Re-1, 841 P.2d 237 (Colo. 1992). “200 (b) (1990) (prohibiting police, fire, correctional facility and hospital facility employees from striking); Haw.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(2)(b) — 2 cases
Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty., & Mun. Employees, Locals 626 & 2831 v. Lane Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 607 P.2d 1212 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “2 See ORS 243.726. On September 20, 1979, the county filed a combined complaint/petition with the ERB alleging that the then proposed strike was illegal under the provisions of ORS 243.”
Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, Locals 626 & 2831 v. Lane Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 612 P.2d 759 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “In so doing, we assumed that the ERB had determined that the strike was not in violation of a statute, ORS 243.726, as opposed to being in violation of the parties’ collective bargaining agreement.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(2)(c) — 2 cases
Ahern v. Oregon Pub. Employees Union, 988 P.2d 364 (Or. 1999). “After mediation failed to resolve the differences between the county and OPEU, OPEU gave ERB notice of its intent to strike, ORS 243.726(2)(c), and the bargaining unit went on strike against Jefferson County in February 1998.”
Wy'East Educ. Ass'n v. Oregon Trail Sch. Dist. No. 46, 260 P.3d 626 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “712(2)(d); ORS 243.726(2)(c). *197 On October 19, 2005, the district notified bargaining unit members that, if the strike occurred as announced and they did not return to work by November 7, they “will be ineligible to receive district fringe benefits for November (applied to…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(3) — 3 cases
Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty., & Mun. Employees, Locals 626 & 2831 v. Lane Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 607 P.2d 1212 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). “2 See ORS 243.726. On September 20, 1979, the county filed a combined complaint/petition with the ERB alleging that the then proposed strike was illegal under the provisions of ORS 243.”
Circuit Court v. AFSCME, Local 502-A, 657 P.2d 1237 (Or. Ct. App. 1983). “If a strike creates a danger to the welfare of the public, as would almost certainly be the case were juvenile court employees to strike, the public employer concerned may petition the circuit court for relief, which must include an order that the labor dispute be submitted to…”
Johnson v. Portland Assn. of Teachers, 346 Or. App. 561 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). “We conclude that petitioners are not “injured par- ties” under ORS 243.672, and thus lack standing to pursue their claim.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(3)(a) — 2 cases
Am. Fed'n of State v. Exec. Dep't, 628 P.2d 1228 (Or. Ct. App. 1981). “2d 547 , the legislature expressed its policy choice in ORS 243.726 when it specified those absolutely forbidden from striking as "any policeman, *1240 fireman or guard at a correctional institution or mental hospital.”
Ahern v. Oregon Pub. Employees Union, 988 P.2d 364 (Or. 1999). “After mediation failed to resolve the differences between the county and OPEU, OPEU gave ERB notice of its intent to strike, ORS 243.726(2)(c), and the bargaining unit went on strike against Jefferson County in February 1998.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(4) — 3 cases
State Ex Rel. Dwyer v. Dwyer, 698 P.2d 957 (Or. 1985). “490(1)) to violations of orders declaring strikes by public employees unlawful (ORS 243.726(4)). We express no opinion about whether novel problems can be brought within the purview of traditional criminal contempt proceedings and thereby avoid a jury trial.”
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. State, 535 P.2d 1385 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). “" OSEA argues the last passage from the agreement is a cross-reference to ORS 243.726(2) which provides it "shall be lawful for" most public employes "to participate in a strike after" certain procedures have been followed, such as good faith bargaining, mediation, factfinding…”
Johnson v. Portland Assn. of Teachers, 346 Or. App. 561 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). “We conclude that petitioners are not “injured par- ties” under ORS 243.672, and thus lack standing to pursue their claim.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(4)(a) — 1 case
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. State, 535 P.2d 1385 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). “" OSEA argues the last passage from the agreement is a cross-reference to ORS 243.726(2) which provides it "shall be lawful for" most public employes "to participate in a strike after" certain procedures have been followed, such as good faith bargaining, mediation, factfinding…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.726(6) — 1 case
Johnson v. Portland Assn. of Teachers, 346 Or. App. 561 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). “We conclude that petitioners are not “injured par- ties” under ORS 243.672, and thus lack standing to pursue their claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.