Legislature(2023 - 2024)GRUENBERG 120

01/31/2024 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY

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.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= HB 88 WAREHOUSE WORK QUOTAS TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 88(L&C) Out of Committee
-- Public Testimony --
+= HB 63 REPEAL WORKERS' COMP APPEALS COMMISSION TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 63(JUD) Out of Committee
-- Public Testimony --
+= HB 105 SEX/REPRODUCTION EDUCATION; SCHOOLS TELECONFERENCED
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
           HB  63-REPEAL WORKERS' COMP APPEALS COMMISSION                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:16:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  VANCE announced  that  the final  order  of business  would  be                                                          
HOUSE  BILL  NO. 63,  "An  Act repealing  the  Workers'  Compensation                                                           
Appeals  Commission;   relating   to  decisions  and  orders   of  the                                                          
Workers'  Compensation   Appeals  Commission;  relating   to superior                                                           
court    jurisdiction    over    appeals    from    Alaska   Workers'                                                           
Compensation  Board  decisions;  repealing  Rules  201.1,  401.1,  and                                                          
501.1,  Alaska  Rules  of Appellate   Procedure,  and  amending  Rules                                                          
202(a),   204(a)  -  (c),   210(e),  601(b),   602(c)  and  (h),   and                                                          
603(a),  Alaska  Rules  of Appellate   Procedure;  and  providing  for                                                          
an effective date."                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR VANCE opened public testimony to HB 63.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:16:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANDY  HEMENWAY,  representing  self,  testified  in opposition  to  HB
63.   He informed  the  committee  that  he had  retired  as chair  of                                                          
the  Alaska  Worker's  Compensation  Appeals  Commission.    He  cited                                                          
three  main  points:  the  Commission's  caseload,  the  Commission's                                                           
force  of legal  precedent, and  the commission's  productivity.    In                                                          
respect  to  caseload,  he  acknowledged  that  the  number  of  cases                                                          
had drastically  decreased,  due  in part  to covid.   He said it  was                                                          
reasonable  to  expect  a return  to  normal  levels  as  the economy                                                           
rebounds  and   would  therefore  be  a  mistake   to make   a  policy                                                          
decision   based  on   low  numbers.     On  the   second  point,   he                                                          
addressed   how  cases  were   handled  before   the  commission   was                                                          
created,  emphasizing   that  the  commission's  decisions   have  the                                                          
force  of legal precedent.    He cited state  statute  that gives  the                                                          
board  legal precedent  and  conveyed  the clarity  that  it provides                                                           
for  the board,  insurance  companies,  and  lawyers.   In  regard  to                                                          
productivity,   he explained  that  the  commission's   rules provide                                                           
for a  certain amount  of time  for preparing  the  record, briefing,                                                           
etcetera.  It  would  take a  year  to decide  a  case  regardless  of                                                          
the number of cases in front of the commission, he said.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:21:26 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LYN  ELLIOT,   VP  of  State   and  Government   Relations,  American                                                           
Property  Casualty  Insurance  Association,  testified  in opposition                                                           
to  HB 63.   She  made  three  points:  Firstly,  she  emphasized  the                                                          
complexity   of  workers'   compensation   law  and   the  commission                                                           
members'  knowledge,   which  reduces  the  likelihood  of  a supreme                                                           
court  appeal.    She added  that  she  would  expect  a  decrease  in                                                          
cases  if the  commission  was  doing  its job  properly.   Secondly,                                                           
the  judicial  system  has  a lack  of  resources  that  would  likely                                                          
delay  resolution  appeals,  she  posited.   Thirdly,  the  repeal  of                                                          
the  commission   would  not  support  the  intent  of  the  Workers'                                                           
Compensation Act.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR VANCE closed public testimony on HB 63.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:24:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   ALLARD  moved to  adopt  Conceptual  Amendment  1  to                                                          
HB  63,  such  that  all  references  to  2023  would  be  changed  to                                                          
2024.    There  being  no  objection,   Conceptual  Amendment   1  was                                                          
adopted.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:25:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRAY  asked what  would  happen  if  the  case  count                                                          
rose above 30.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. MCKEE deferred to Ms. Meade                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:26:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
NANCY  MEADE,  General  Counsel,  Alaska Court  System,  acknowledged                                                           
that  the fiscal  note  implied  a zero  fiscal impact  for  up to  30                                                          
cases;  however,  she did  not intend  to imply  that  31 cases  would                                                          
create  a fiscal  impact.   She reiterated  that  the  bill would  not                                                          
require  fiscal  resources  at this  time.  In  response  to a  follow                                                          
up  question,  she  explained  that  superior  court  decisions   bind                                                          
the  parties  in a  particular  case  to the  judge's  determination.                                                           
Superior  court  judges don't  make  law, she  said, adding  that  new                                                          
common  law is  decided  by the  Alaska  Supreme  Court whose  job  it                                                          
is to  resolve disagreements   on the application  of  the law and  to                                                          
make law for the state of Alaska.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
1:28:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRAY  asked  who enforced  the  precedent  created  by                                                          
the commission.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.   MEADE  said   similar   to   statute,   there  is   no  outside                                                           
enforcement  entity.    She  indicated  that any  infringement   could                                                          
be handled in court.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRAY  asked  whether  the commission  always  met  its                                                          
30-day time constraint when issuing a decision.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE  answered  no;  however,  both  parties  always  agreed  to                                                          
pushing the 30-day time limit for various reasons.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:30:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   CARPENTER  asked  how  the  members  of  the hearing                                                           
panel  -  composed  of  a labor  member,   management  member,  and  a                                                          
full-time attorney - were appointed.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MCKEE  shared  his  belief   that  the  governor  appointed   the                                                          
commissioners.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CARPENTER  sought  to  confirm  that should  the  bill                                                          
pass,  the  [Alaska]  Supreme  Court  would establish   precedent  for                                                          
the industry.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. MCKEE answered yes.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   CARPENTER   asked   whether   there   was  value   in                                                          
resolving   cases  establishing   precedent  by  the  Alaska  Supreme                                                           
Court,  as opposed  to establishing  a commission  prior  to reaching                                                           
the Alaska Supreme Court.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS.   MEADE  said   that   would  be   a  judgement   call   for   the                                                          
legislature to make.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE    CARPENTER   asked   whether   the  subject    matter                                                          
expertise  at  the  commission   positively  or  negatively  impacted                                                           
the  length  of time  it take  to  resolve  a case  when  compared  to                                                          
the same case going to the Supreme Court.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE indicated   that in  general,  the court  takes  longer  to                                                          
resolve  cases  compared  to the  appeals  commission.    In response                                                           
to  a  follow  up  question,   she  confirmed  that  to  set  binding                                                           
precedent  for  the industry,  the  Alaska Supreme  Court  would  need                                                          
to be  involved.   She  declined to  opine on  the value  to industry                                                           
or laborers.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:35:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   ALLARD   inquired   about   the  expertise   of   the                                                          
commissioners   and  the  necessary  qualifications   to  sit  on  the                                                          
commission.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. MCKEE said no particular expertise was required.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   ALLARD  asked  whether  there  had  been  complaints                                                           
about commissioners lacking legal expertise.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MCKEE answered  no,  adding  that  cases were  supposed  to  take                                                          
less  time to  go through  the  commission;  however,  the commission                                                           
was taking  as  long as  the superior  court,  even with  the drop  in                                                          
cases.    He countered   the  idea  that the  low  case  count  was  a                                                          
result  of the pandemic,  indicating  that  fewer cases  had become  a                                                          
pattern.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   ALLARD  asked  whether  Ms.  Meade  was  saying  that                                                          
sitting  judges and  attorneys  don't have  the knowledge  or whether                                                           
they  don't  have the  time.   She  asked  Ms. Meade  to  clarify  her                                                          
prior  indication  "that  sometimes  judges  don't  know  ... because                                                           
they're not an expert in it."                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE  acknowledged  that  most judges  do not have  a background                                                           
in  workers'  compensation   law;  however,  when  presented   with  a                                                          
case,  a judge's  duty  is to  learn  that  area of  law to  make  the                                                          
best  decision  necessary.   She  added  that these  cases  are  often                                                          
more  time  consuming  than  other  matters  due  to complex  medical                                                           
records in many instances.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   ALLARD  asked whether  cases  would  take  longer  to                                                          
process  if responsibility  was  transferred  from the  commission  to                                                          
the Supreme Court.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE  shared  her  understanding  that  it  would  take longer;                                                           
however,    some   cases   have   strict    deadlines   with    severe                                                          
consequences,  such  as criminal  cases,  expedited  cases, and  Child                                                          
in Need of Aid (CINA) cases.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:42:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ALLARD  asked  whether within  the  commission,  there                                                          
was a timeframe for the appeals process.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. MCKEE offered to follow up with the requested information.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:42:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CARPENTER   shared his  understanding  that  the  bill                                                          
would  save the  state roughly  $480,000  per  year.   He asked  which                                                          
fund  the money  would go  back to  or whether  it would  be consumed                                                           
by other things.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MCKEE  stated  his  belief   that  it  would  go  back  into  the                                                          
commission's  fund,  which was  currently  being filled  with general                                                           
fund (GF)  dollars  to cover  any remaining  deficit  from the tax  on                                                          
insurance claims.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
1:43:59 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   CARPENTER  asked  how  the  court  would  respond  to                                                          
the increased caseload.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE stated  that  the court  system  would watch  the caseload                                                           
and if  justified,  come to the  legislature  to ask  for a new  judge                                                          
to take on the increased work.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:46:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ALLARD  moved  to report  HB 63,  as amended,  out  of                                                          
committee  with  individual   recommendations  and  the  accompanying                                                           
fiscal  notes.     There  being   no  objection,   CSHB  63(JUD)   was                                                          
reported out of the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                         

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB 63 - APCIA Letter of Opposition.pdf HJUD 1/31/2024 1:00:00 PM
HB 63
HB 63 - Andy Hemenway Letter of Opposition.pdf HJUD 1/31/2024 1:00:00 PM
HB 63