Legislature(2015 - 2016)BARNES 124
04/06/2016 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
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 | |
| HB372 | |
| HB234 | |
| SB148 | |
| SB142 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 234 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 148 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 142 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 372 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 148-REPORTING WORKPLACE INJURIES
4:23:24 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the next order of business would be
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 148(L&C), "An Act relating to the
reporting of workplace injuries to the division of labor
standards and safety; and providing for an effective date."
4:23:54 PM
JOE THOMAS, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Labor & Workforce Development (DLWD), advised that
proposed SB 148 amends current workplace accident reporting
requirements to include reporting of incidents involving the
loss of an eye or an amputation. These amendments are necessary
to comport with the federal workplace accident reporting
standards effective January 1, 2015. Alaska operates an
approved state plan under the Federal Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970, which requires that states maintain
standards that meet the federal standards at a minimum, and AS
18.60.030 established that Alaska maintain requirements that are
at least as effective as those adopted by the U. S. Department
of Labor. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) made changes to the accident reporting requirements under
federal regulation 29 CFR 1904 related to the reporting of
industrial accidents resulting in an amputation or the loss of
an eye, and notified the state that failure to maintain
equivalency could jeopardize federal funding as well as the
state's jurisdiction over occupational safety and health.
Alaska seeks to maintain said jurisdiction and the associated
funding. Mr. Thomas restated that SB 148 brings Alaska's
workplace accident reporting standards up to the federal
standard, and urged for the committee's support.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES asked whether the definition of amputation
includes digits, an ear, or another body part.
MR. THOMAS opined that amputation is any loss of any body part.
4:26:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX referred to page 2, lines 7-9, Section 1,
which read as follows:
The subsection does not apply to an employer that
first receives information of a fatality, [OR] in-
patient hospitalization, loss of an eye, or amputation
more than 30 days after the accident.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX questioned how an employer would not be
aware of an accident or fatality for more than 30 days
afterward.
MR. THOMAS agreed and said any employee/employer could provide
notice to DLWD.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether it is an excuse if the
president of a company denies knowledge but the job foreman knew
about it.
MR. THOMAS said his assumption is that, as long as there were
people on the job who knew of an accident, the employer is
expected to know, depending upon the severity of the situation.
4:28:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked for an example of circumstances
under which an employer would not know about an accident for 30
days.
MR. THOMAS suggested an employer, or the owner of a company, may
be on vacation in a locale where they are unable to be contacted
by a superintendent. In further response to Representative
LeDoux, Mr. Thomas explained that the term employer is used to
indicate that anyone on the job can report an incident.
Generally, the owner of a company would be made aware of an
accident during some period of time, but the supervisor on the
job would call an ambulance and report a workplace accident to
DLWD.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked what happens if a supervisor doesn't
report it.
MR. THOMAS opined the law would hold the employer responsible
for not reporting.
CHAIR OLSON advised that in the case of an amputation or loss of
an eye, the hospital would call the employer and the insurance
company to confirm the person is an employee, and that there is
insurance coverage by workers compensation insurance.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX restated her interest in knowing the
purpose of the exception for an employer who does not receive
notice within 30 days after an accident, which seems
unreasonable.
MR. THOMAS said, although that situation may never arise, the
wording is based upon federal language and was used to ensure
compliance.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES asked whether the word employer includes
the superintendent.
MR. THOMAS said yes, that is the interpretation by DLWD.
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES surmised that it would include anyone at
the company or the next person down from the top of the list of
job titles.
MR. THOMAS answered yes.
4:32:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX suggested an employer may not be aware of
a situation at a remote site.
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER asked for statistics on this type of
accident in Alaska.
MR. THOMAS said he was unsure of the variety of accidents to
this degree. However, this calendar year there have been three
fatalities, and he offered to provide further information to the
committee.
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER recalled an incident that occurred in a
trench in Anchorage last summer, and asked for clarification
that there have been only three [job related] fatalities in
2016.
MR. THOMAS stated last calendar year included the aforementioned
fatality and two others. In further response to Representative
Colver, he said the other two fatalities were an accident at
CMI's shop in Anchorage, and the death of a health care worker
in a long-term care home. At the CMI shop a jack failed and a
worker was crushed.
4:34:45 PM
CHAIR OLSON opened public testimony. After ascertaining no one
wished to testify, closed public testimony.
4:35:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES moved to report CSSB 148(L&C), Version 29-
GS2801\W, out of committee with individual recommendations and
the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSB
148(L&C) was reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee.