Legislature(1993 - 1994)
1993-03-15 Senate Journal
Full Journal pdf1993-03-15 Senate Journal Page 0804 SB 69 SENATE BILL NO. 69 "An Act prohibiting employers from discriminating against individuals who use legal products in a legal manner outside of work" was read the second time. Senator Taylor moved for the adoption of the Judiciary Committee Substitute offered on page 688. Senator Adams objected, then withdrew his objection. Senator Duncan objected. Senator Duncan called the Senate. The call was satisfied. The question being: "Shall the Judiciary Committee Substitute be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: SB 69 Adopt Judiciary Committee Substitute? YEAS: 11 NAYS: 8 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Donley, Frank, Halford, Jacko, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor Nays: Adams, Duncan, Ellis, Kelly, Kerttula, Little, Salo, Zharoff Excused: Lincoln and so, the Judiciary Committee Substitute was adopted. 1993-03-15 Senate Journal Page 0805 SB 69 CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 69(JUD) was read the second time. Senator Little offered Amendment No. 1 : Page 1, lines 1 - 2: Delete "who use legal products in a legal manner outside of work." Insert "based on the use of legal products." Page 1, line 5: Delete "FOR LAWFUL" Insert "BASED ON THE" Page 2, after line 15: Insert a new subsection to read: "(c) An employer may not refuse to hire, discharge, or otherwise discriminate against an individual with respect to compensation, privileges, terms, or conditions of employment because the individual does not use a lawful product." Reletter the following subsections accordingly. Senator Little moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 1. Senator Kelly objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 1 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 69 (JUD) Second Reading Amendment No. 1 YEAS: 15 NAYS: 4 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Ellis, Frank, Halford, Jacko, Kerttula, Leman, Little, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Duncan, Kelly, Sharp, Taylor 1993-03-15 Senate Journal Page 0806 SB 69 Excused: Lincoln Duncan changed from "Yea" to "Nay". and so, Amendment No. 1 was adopted. Senator Adams offered Amendment No. 2 : Page 2, line 14: Delete "where" Insert "if the employer communicated the standards of conduct to the employee before the employee engaged in the activity giving rise to the disadvantage to the employee and if" Senator Adams moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 2. Senator Taylor objected. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 69 (JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 10 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Donley, Duncan, Ellis, Jacko, Kerttula, Little, Salo, Zharoff Nays: Frank, Halford, Kelly, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp, Taylor Excused: Lincoln and so, Amendment No. 2 failed. 1993-03-15 Senate Journal Page 0807 SB 69 Senator Salo offered Amendment No. 3 : Page 2, lines 11-15 Delete Subsection 3 Senator Salo moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 3. Objections were heard. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 3 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 69 (JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 3 YEAS: 9 NAYS: 10 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Adams, Duncan, Ellis, Kelly, Kerttula, Little, Salo, Taylor, Zharoff Nays: Donley, Frank, Halford, Jacko, Leman, Miller, Pearce, Phillips, Rieger, Sharp Excused: Lincoln and so, Amendment No. 3 failed. Senator Rieger offered Amendment No. 4 : Page 2, line 5 after "use" insert "or lack of use" Senator Rieger moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 4. Senator Duncan objected, then withdrew his objection. There being no further objection, Amendment No. 4 was adopted. 1993-03-15 Senate Journal Page 0808 SB 69 Senator Little offered Amendment No. 5 : Page 1, line 5 Insert "OR NON-USE" after LAWFUL USE Senator Little moved for the adoption of Amendment No. 5. Senator Taylor objected, then withdrew his objection. There being no further objection, Amendment No. 5 was adopted. Senator Taylor moved and asked unanimous consent that CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 69(JUD) am be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading and placed on final passage. Without objection, it was so ordered. CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 69(JUD) am was read the third time. The question being: "Shall CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 69(JUD) am "An Act prohibiting employers from discriminating against individuals based on the use of legal products" pass the Senate?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSSB 69 (JUD) am Third Reading - Final Passage YEAS: 9 NAYS: 10 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Donley, Duncan, Jacko, Kelly, Phillips, Rieger, Salo, Sharp, Taylor Nays: Adams, Ellis, Frank, Halford, Kerttula, Leman, Little, Miller, Pearce, Zharoff Excused: Lincoln and so, CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 69(JUD) am failed. Senator Pearce gave notice of reconsideration.