Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
02/21/2017 01:30 PM House MILITARY & VETERANS' AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB126 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 126 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 126-ORGANIZED MILITIA: WORKERS COMPENSATION
1:32:18 PM
CHAIR TUCK announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 126, "An Act relating to workers' compensation
benefits for members of the organized militia."
CHAIR TUCK stated that his office has been working with the
Department of Military & Veterans' Affairs (DMVA) on changes to
Title 26 and HB 126 is part of those changes. He noted that the
bill would extend workers' compensation benefits to members of
the organized [militia] while they are participating in training
exercises. Currently, military members participating in
exercises and drills are covered by workers' compensation but
are not covered during training components. He relayed that the
issue came to light during an incident when a member of the
Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF) suffered a leg injury during a
training exercise making him unable to work [at his/her civilian
job]. Since workers' compensation does not extend to training
exercises, the injury ultimately cost the state more than double
the amount of the entire ASDF annual budget. He said that HB
126 is a cost-savings bill; extending workers' compensation
during training would not cost the state additional money and
has the potential to save the state money in the future.
1:34:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER mentioned that Alaska Statute allows a
chair to introduce a bill as a committee bill if a motion to do
so is supported by the committee. He asked when the committee
voted to introduce HB 126 as a committee bill.
CHAIR TUCK responded that the vote was on a Tuesday. He stated
that there was a blanket vote to allow the Title 26 bills to be
committee bills. He recalled that he had allowed Representative
Saddler time to consider before the vote.
1:34:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER voiced his opposition to the bill as a
committee bill being introduced without having had a specific
vote in favor of committee sponsorship.
1:34:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked Mr. Robert Doehl if he supports HB
126.
1:34:55 PM
ROBERT DOEHL, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Military &
Veterans' Affairs (DMVA), testified in support of HB 126. He
stated that the bill would put the unpaid volunteers of ASDF -
one of the most cost-effective mechanisms in the state for
providing emergency services - on par with other first
responders who are covered by workers' compensation while in a
volunteer training status. He noted that the bill addresses the
[lack of] parity by putting ASDF volunteers in the same category
as volunteer firefighters and volunteer ambulance drivers. He
offered his belief that HB 126 would increase participation and
encourage members to come out on their own time, unpaid, to be
trained to help their fellow Alaskans in a possible time of
need. He stated that although injury issues are rare - the last
one was in 2012 - HB 126 would provide a more expeditious and
cost-effective resolution when such issues arise. The bill
would avoid the costs of litigation such as attorneys' fees and
compensation for pain and suffering that is not paid by workers'
compensation.
1:36:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked for details about the vetting
process for those in training. He stated his worry that
[individuals in training] might report an existing injury as
though it were received during training.
MR. DOEHL responded that the vetting process is two-fold:
individuals are asked if they are fit to train, and they get a
sports physical by a physician if any question arises about
their fitness. He stated that the physicals are basic, similar
to scout master physicals, which certify that an individual can
perform a certain level of activity. He explained that in the
application process and during his/her service, a person must
indicate whether he/she has any physical limitations to
performing duties.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked if the aforementioned case [of
injury] is the only case in history.
MR. DOEHL answered that this is the only case the department is
aware of where a claim was made, although there have been
scrapes and bruises along the way. He remarked, "Our goal in
looking at this claim is to address this impediment for the
future ... before it could get very costly very fast in the
event of a more serious injury."
1:39:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked how many people HB 126 would cover
through workers' compensation. She remarked, "I'm always
concerned about doing what's right for the ... worker. And as
an attorney who represented workers, I was often looking for a
way to get somebody out of workers' compensation because the
benefits provided by workers' compensation are so much less than
the benefits provided through common law negligence." She asked
if most people are currently able to get compensated for their
injuries.
MR. DOEHL responded, "I think we recognize there's always that
balance between workers' compensation to a worker that provides
certainty of recovery compared to litigation and ... a tort
action which would provide for a potential greater recovery."
He expressed that with litigation there is a gamble in what a
jury would decide. He offered his belief that the number of
injury cases that would be litigated would be minimal. He
opined that [HB 126] would be more equitable in providing
recovery for injuries of ASDF members that are not economically
viable in tort.
1:41:28 PM
CHAIR TUCK drew attention to the second paragraph of the foot
note of the Department of Administration's fiscal note,
identified as HB126-DOA-DRM-02-16-17, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
The organized militia has approximately 76 members and
DMVA anticipates 2 days a month for training as well
as 4 days a year for exercises. This limited exposure
should add very little, if any, additional risk to the
division's workers' compensation selfinsured program;
therefore, Risk Management submits a zero fiscal note.
1:42:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked how much of an ASDF member's time
is considered training and what the other conditions of service
are.
MR. DOEHL responded that in terms of this discussion, statuses
for an ASDF member would be: state active duty such as an
operational mission, for which workers' compensation already
applies; uncompensated weekend training including travel to and
from the training event; and volunteer time in preparation for
training or administrative functions for ASDF. He stated that
ASDF has many members who volunteer their time so weekend
training events are more effective; he noted that it is a
minimal amount of time.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for clarification whether someone
activated through state active duty is covered by workers'
compensation and someone training or traveling to or from
training is not covered by workers' compensation because he/she
is not compensated for that time.
1:45:10 PM
MR. DOEHL answered, "That is correct under the status quo."
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for clarification whether the
volunteer status is also uncompensated and is not covered by
workers' compensation.
MR. DOEHL responded, "That is correct."
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether the bill would provide
workers' compensation coverage for weekend training.
MR. DOEHL answered yes.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked how often members go to weekend
training. He asked what portion of a person's participation in
ASDF the bill would cover.
MR. DOEHL answered that most individuals train one weekend a
month - 24 days a year - and go into state active duty less than
once every year. The bill would extend coverage for 24 days per
year per ASDF member.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked if that amount is the same as the
Alaska National Guard.
MR. DOEHL answered that although the guard is also part of the
organized militia, [guard members] do not qualify for workers'
compensation benefits while drill training because there is a
federal process comparable to workers' compensation in the event
of an injury.
1:46:54 PM
CHAIR TUCK pointed out that Sections 2 and 3 of HB 126 include
workers' compensation for any time a member of the organized
militia is compensated with pay.
1:47:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER noted that in the private industry there
are different hourly rates of workers' compensation depending on
the task performed. He asked how much the workers' compensation
coverage under HB 126 would cost the Department of Military &
Veterans' Affairs per hour, per member.
1:48:41 PM
SCOTT JORDAN, Director, Division of Risk Management, Department
of Administration, answered questions regarding HB 126. He
stated that it is difficult to determine [the cost] because the
members of the organized militia would be part of a group with
limited exposure. He remarked, "We don't have a mechanism to
charge them any premium other than if they have a claim, then we
can put it on their claims experience premium. But as far as
just an exposure of these individuals, there is no ... mechanism
for us to charge a premium." He explained that the organized
militia members would be in the same group as public safety,
search and rescue, ambulance drivers, or [Emergency Medical
Technicians] (EMTs) in unincorporated cities. He noted that the
members would be covered but there would not be a premium per
individual. In response to a question, he clarified that there
is no premium charged for this group.
1:50:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether ASDF members are currently
covered by the State of Alaska's self-insurance.
MR. JORDAN responded, "That's correct."
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked how HB 126 would change that.
MR. JORDAN answered that under HB 126, ASDF members would be
covered during training missions, which are currently not
covered.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked if ASDF members are compensated for
training time.
MR. JORDAN stated that he does not know.
1:50:32 PM
CHAIR TUCK drew attention to HB 126, page 1, line 13, to page 2,
line 5, which read as follows:
A member of the organized militia who, while
performing duties under 14 AS 26.05.070 or training
under AS 26.05.100, including transit to and from the
member's home of record, suffers an injury or
disability in the line of duty is entitled to all
compensation and benefits available under AS 23.30
(Alaska Workers' Compensation Act). For a member of
the Alaska State Defense Force, compensation and
benefits under this subsection are provided as though
the member were a state employee.
CHAIR TUCK noted that Sections 2 and 3 of HB 126 clarify that
compensation and benefits are provided as though the member were
a state employee.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER noted that AS 26.05.100 describes times
when ASDF is activated. He stated his doubt that the benefit of
protection against risk could come without a cost.
MR. JORDAN responded that [the coverage] isn't without a cost.
He remarked,
Our premiums ... are calculated by what we call
exposure and experience; exposure is just the
individuals. These individuals ... have very limited
times where they are covered by the State of Alaska as
employees. ... They don't show up as [full-time
equivalencies] (FTEs) on the department's ... budget
each year, so there's no way for us to calculate a
premium for these individuals. If they have a claim,
however, that claim amount will then show up as
experience on ... our cost of risk allocation out to
the department. That cost of risk allocation is 80
percent of the premium. So, if there is a claim, then
yes they would get a premium - they'd see a premium in
the next year, but they don't see a premium just for
having these 76 individuals on a limited basis as
state employees.
1:52:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ offered her understanding that the
members of ASDF are unpaid volunteers.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER responded that the members are currently
volunteers while in training, but if the governor activates the
ASDF, then they are paid.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ outlined that during training, members
of ASDF are not paid and there is not a formula to determine
compensation or risk experience. She noted that because the
bill deals with a small amount [of workers' compensation
coverage], there is no fiscal impact. She expressed her desire
to ensure that members are cared for, especially in the event of
an individual getting injured while in the service for the State
of Alaska enough to not be able to work. She acknowledged that
there is ambiguity in the future costs of HB 126, but she stated
that a zero fiscal note is accurate without knowledge of future
costs.
1:54:46 PM
MR. JORDAN responded that on the experience side, members would
have medical and time-loss [coverage]. He explained that there
is a calculation process for injured individuals which could
come up with a time-loss compensation amount and medical
coverage amounts to "just what the medicals cost."
1:55:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX assessed that there is a zero fiscal note
because the state is self-insured, meaning that the state does
not really get charged anything. She noted that if someone gets
hurt, then the state would pay benefits and medical expenses.
She offered her understanding that paying a lot of workers'
compensation claims could cost less than one major personal
injury claim. She noted that it might "all wash out in the
end," which could be why the fiscal notes don't mention the
costs. She indicated that the fiscal notes account for paying
insurance, although the state doesn't actually pay for it, but
the notes don't take into account what the state would pay if
there is a claim. She expressed her confusion about the zero
fiscal note.
1:57:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER offered his understanding that the fiscal
notes accurately describe costs in the first year but there
could be additional costs in the following years which are not
reflected in any fiscal note.
1:57:42 PM
MR. DOEHL explained that the department can pay for [injuries]
through workers' compensation or litigation. The department has
determined that it is cheaper to pay with workers' compensation
for the reasons highlighted by Representative LeDoux and has
assessed a zero cost impact. He noted that there has only been
one injury in the last five years.
1:58:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PARISH considered that because workers'
compensation would only be extended to a small population, HB
126 would have no cost without an injury and would cost the
state less [in the event of an injury] than the current process
of litigation. He asked how much the last claim cost the State
of Alaska.
1:59:37 PM
MR. JORDAN answered that the previous claim was $63,000 and is
the only claim of which he is aware.
2:00:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER referred to a previous comment that the
state would pay [for compensation for an injury] through
workers' compensation or litigation. He noted that the last
claim cost the state $63,000, and he asked what the state would
have paid [had the injury been paid] through workers'
compensation.
MR. JORDAN responded that he can't answer the question because
the Division of Risk Management was not involved in the
settlement. He offered his understanding that the settlement
involved medical and time-loss expenses.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER reiterated his question: What would the
state have paid had the injury gone through workers'
compensation?
2:01:46 PM
CHAIR TUCK explained that the state currently doesn't pay
anything until an injury is litigated; the legal costs, medical
claims, restitution, and possible retraining vary on a case-by-
case basis. He stated that HB 126 would cover ASDF members
during training. He noted that there may never be a set rate
for the coverage because members of ASDF would be part of a
larger group of employees, which would make it hard to isolate
the effect of one set of individuals.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER noted that the process is different from
the private industry where payment is always in advance.
2:03:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX responded to Representative Parish's
comment. She explained that if an individual is covered by
workers' compensation, then there is no option for litigation
later on: Workers' compensation is the sole remedy. She noted
that workers' compensation is supposed to be guaranteed - a
benefit over litigating a claim where damages might be larger
but are uncertain. She remarked, "In reality, workers'
compensation, in my experience, has not been a sure thing. I've
never seen a claim which was not controverted almost
automatically." She said she is not impressed with the workers'
compensation system on behalf of employees and acknowledged it
has problems for employers as well.
2:04:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER offered his understanding that Alaska's
workers' compensation costs are among the highest in the nation.
He noted that the administration's stated goal is to add 250
more members to ASDF. He asked if the additional members would
cause different predictions in the cost to the state.
2:05:03 PM
MR. JORDAN answered probably not. He explained that it would
depend whether the new members do more training and exercises
than members are doing. The members are currently covered if
called [to active duty] by the governor. He reemphasized that
HB 126 would extend workers' compensation to the limited number
of days of additional training.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER offered his understanding that the
administration envisions adding three battalions in the Bush
farther from emergency services, where risks would be higher.
He asked what provisions are currently in place to address the
death of a member during training and how those provision might
change under HB 126.
MR. JORDAN explained that if a member died during a call-out by
the governor, he/she would be covered by workers' compensation
death benefits. He noted that members in training are currently
not covered by workers' compensation; therefore, a fatal
accident in training would not be covered.
2:06:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked whether rates would increase if
there is an injury in the future.
MR. JORDAN answered yes.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked if the [legislature] can revoke
coverage in the future if rates become too high.
MR. JORDAN responded that if HB 126 passes, the state would be
required to cover members of ASDF during training missions.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER noted that injuries have happened and
could happen again.
2:08:12 PM
CHAIR TUCK explained that the state is self-insured and pays the
direct costs as injuries happen. He asked whether covering
injuries through workers' compensation is the preferred way to
pay.
2:08:41 PM
CHAIR TUCK opened public testimony on HB 126. After
ascertaining that there was no one who wished to testify, he
closed public testimony.
2:09:25 PM
CHAIR TUCK announced that HB 126 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB126 Fiscal Note-MVA-COM 2.17.17.pdf |
HMLV 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 126 |
| HB126 Fiscal Note-DOLWD-WC 2.17.17.pdf |
HMLV 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 126 |
| HB126 Sponsor Statement 2.17.17.pdf |
HMLV 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 126 |
| HB126 Fiscal Note-DOA 2.20.17.pdf |
HMLV 2/21/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 126 |