Legislature(2009 - 2010)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/11/2010 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB63 | |
| SB278 | |
| SB190 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | SB 63 | ||
| = | SB 278 | ||
| = | SB 190 | ||
SB 278-LEAVE FOR MILITARY SPOUSES
9:30:43 AM
CHAIR MENARD announced the next order of business to come before
the committee would be SB 278.
SENATOR MEYER moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute
(CS) for SB 278, labeled 26-LS1034\S, as the working document.
There being no objection, version S was before the committee.
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, sponsor of SB 278, said his staff has
addressed the concerns raised by committee members in the
previous hearing. He noted that version S did not address all
details as requested and therefore an amendment would also be
presented.
GEORGE ASCOTT, Staff to Senator Wielechowski, explained the
changes to SB 278. After consulting Superintendent Carol Comeau,
and reviewing other states' laws, SB 278 now requires 14 days of
advance notice from employees wanting to take unpaid leave
during a military spouse's leave from a combat zone. This change
is reflected on page 2, lines 11-14, page 4, lines 3-6, and page
6, lines 4-7.
9:34:33 AM
At the suggestion of Superintendent Comeau, page 3, lines 14-16,
allows an employer, required to post a summary or abstract of AS
23.10.435, to do so by electronic means.
The concern about allowing employers to request documentation
that the individual's spouse is actually on combat leave is now
addressed in three places for the three different types of
employees covered: page 2, lines 15-18, page 4, lines 7-10, and
page 6, lines 8-11.
MR. ASCOTT said Version S has a drafting error on page 4, lines
1-2, which gives employers the right to extend the leave if they
wish. This was not the sponsor's intention; rather it was to
follow other states requirement that employers continue
providing medical and other benefits during the employee's
leave, at the expense of the employee. Amendment [26-LS1034\S.1]
fixes this.
AMENDMENT 1
OFFERED IN THE SENATE
TO: CSSB 278( ), Draft Version "S"
Page 4, following line 6:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(d) If the employee who requests leave is
covered by medical insurance that is provided
through the employer, the employer shall allow
the employee to continue the coverage without
interruption during the leave. The employee shall
pay the expense of continuing medical insurance
coverage during leave under this section unless
the employer and the employee agree otherwise."
Reletter the following subsections accordingly.
Page 4, line 11:
Delete "(b) - (d)"
Insert "(b), (c), and (e)"
Page 4, line 17, following "leave":
Insert "except as provided in (d) of this
section"
Page 5, line 7:
Delete "(g)"
Insert "(h)"
9:37:33 AM
MR. ASCOTT said version S, page 5, line 3 and lines 7-10 makes
the penalties for employers who do not allow this time off
mirror the penalties for not allowing employees to go to jury
duty. This is applied to the private sector.
On page 3, lines 21-23 apply SB 278 to employees who work 20 or
more hours per week in the private sector. To protect seasonal
businesses, these lines also change SB 278 to apply to employers
with 20 or more employees for 20 or more calendar weeks of the
year. To protect rural schools, SB 278 now would only apply to
specific schools, rather than districts, with 20 or more
employees. Mr. Ascott said he discussed this with John Lamont,
superintendent of the Lower Yukon School District, and Bill
Woodford, superintendent of the Yukon Flats School District.
This change was not properly relayed in Version S but is fixed
with Amendment [26-LS1034\S.2].
AMENDMENT 2
OFFERED IN THE SENATE
TO: CSSB 278( ), Draft Version "S"
Page 2, line 1:
Delete "a teacher who is employed by an employer
that employs"
Insert "a person who is employed as a teacher at
a school where"
Page 2, line 2, following "employees":
Insert "are employed"
9:40:25 AM
MR. ASCOTT said due to a recent Supreme Court decision, it was
suggested SB 278 apply to domestic partners in the public
sector. This change occurs on page 2, line 4, page 3, line 2,
page 5, lines 27-28, and is defined on page 6, line 29.
Finally, page 2, lines 9-10 and page 6, lines 2-3 clarify that
SB 278 applies in the middle of a deployment, not at the end of
deployment.
SENATOR KOOKESH asked if a teacher in a small school, with only
one or two teachers, is prohibited from taking this leave.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI replied that is not the intent.
SENATOR KOOKESH said he wanted to make sure the intent is on the
record. Most of the schools in his district are one or two
teachers and he does not want them to be penalized.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he is happy to change the language in
the next committee. The intent is to provide some level of
protection for rural schools after a concern was raised in the
last hearing. Version S tries to protect a school that could not
get a substitute teacher and would have to shut the school down.
The intent is to say small, rural schools can exclude themselves
but they are not prohibited from working out an arrangement with
the teacher.
SENATOR KOOKESH said his reading of the bill language does not
tell him that and would not tell a rural teacher that.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he is happy to tweak the language to
address Senator Kookesh's concern.
MR. ASCOTT said a small school is not prohibited from granting
the leave.
SENATOR KOOKESH said version S does not say that.
CHAIR MENARD asked Senator Wielechowski to consider changing
that and making an amendment to adopt.
SENATOR KOOKESH said he has no problem moving SB 278 with the
understanding that the sponsor will work on it. He would like to
see the revised language.
9:44:18 AM
SENATOR KOOKESH continued saying he is thinking of simple
language such as, "in the event that there is less 20 teachers,
something should be worked out between the employer and the
employee".
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI committed to having his staff work with
Senator Kookesh's staff, or to working directly together. He
asked Mr. Dan Wayne, the drafter of SB 278, if he believes the
language about rural teachers prohibits them from taking this
leave.
DAN WAYNE, Attorney, Legislative Legal Services, said SB 278,
and not amendment S.2, says a person who can take military
spouse leave is a teacher employed by an employer that employs
any combination of 20 or more full-time, part-time and temporary
employees. This language could be interpreted as prohibiting
others from doing so.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he would work with Mr. Wayne to fix
this language.
SENATOR PASKVAN said page 3, lines 4-5 reflect a period of war
declared by the U.S. Congress. Currently, Congress has deferred
to the President exercising executive power but not under a
declaration of war. He asked if SB 278 does not apply to any
current ongoing conflict.
9:48:00 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI replied the intent of SB 278 is to cover
periods of conflict and four active conflicts are currently
ongoing. On page 3, lines 6-8 address that.
MR. WAYNE confirmed this.
SENATOR PASKVAN said he understands that page 3, lines 6-8 apply
if a person is a member of the Army Reserve ordered to active
duty. However, the applicability of SB 278 seems to be limited
to a declaration of war by the U.S. Congress for a member of the
regular Army or Air Force.
MR. WAYNE said Senator Paskvan's point needs to be looked at.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reiterated that SB 278's intent is to
include all military members.
SENATOR FRENCH said he believes SB 278 covers all military
members as drafted. He referred to page 3, paragraph
(2)(A)and(B) and said these lines mean that a period of military
conflict is a period of war in which a member of a reserve
component is ordered to active duty. It does not say this only
applies to those members but rather that if a member of a
reserve component is ordered active duty, then you are in a
period of war. The language could be made clearer.
AL TAMAGNI, SR., representing himself, Anchorage, said he is not
sure that the drafting of SB 278 parallels the October 28, 2009
National Defense Authorization Act.
9:52:18 AM
MR. TAMAGNI referred to page 1, line 1, reading "private sector
employees". He asked why this does not cover nonprofit
organizations and unions.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said SB 278 applies to teachers, government
employees and for-profit employees. He said if the committee
wishes to extend SB 278 to apply to other organizations, he
would be happy to do that.
MR. ASCOTT said the intent is that no one be exempted from SB
278.
MR. WAYNE said "private sector employee" is a broad category
that can include employees of nonprofits and employees who are
members of unions in the private sector. The language about
private employees begins on page 3, lines 18-20 and reads: "as
an employer, other than the federal or state government or the
government of a political subdivision of the state". This seems
to pick up everybody.
MR. TAMAGNI pointed out that page 3, line 19, reads "every
person" with no reflection of entity. He would like to add in
the word "entity" and would like page 1, line 1 to encompass
non-profits employees of unions.
MR. WAYNE said the Legislature uses a definition of "person"
that includes corporations, unions and other entities other than
natural persons.
MR. TAMAGNI said corporations are treated differently for
political contributions; it is not a standard throughout. He
said a lot of small employers in Alaska, such as himself, would
like clarification for the common business person.
9:57:49 AM
SENATOR FRENCH said the use of the word "person" in state law
applies to unions, corporations and many other entities.
SENATOR PASKVAN referred to the earlier mention of a recent law
brought up by President Obama and asked if SB 278 is compatible
with that recent law.
MR. ASCOTT said before the Family Medical Leave Act, Five Days
Exigency Leave stipulated that when a member of the National
Guard or reserves is back from a tour of duty or on leave, a
person can take five days of leave to spend time with a family
member. This law did not include members of the regular armed
forces but it has been expanded to include members of the
regular armed forces. SB 278 is not in conflict with federal
law.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if federal law allows five days leave and
SB 278 allows ten.
MR. ASCOTT replied that is correct.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked why ten days was chosen.
MR. ASCOTT said SB 278 was based on New York's law allowing ten
days.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said some states have upwards of 30 days
when employees number 50 or more. In trying to understand the
business needs of the community, ten days seemed reasonable.
10:01:45 AM
SENATOR PASKVAN referred to page 5, line 24 and said employees
of the Alaska Railroad Corporation seem to be excluded.
MR. ASCOTT reported that the drafter said Alaska Railroad
employees are considered private employees and fall under the
private employees category.
SENATOR PASKVAN said the Alaska Railroad Corporation is a
specifically established entity under Alaska law.
MR. WAYNE said Alaska Railroad employees, under statute, are not
considered to be government employees for most purposes,
including these leave statutes.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said Alaska Railroad is excluded under
Section 5 of SB 278 but is included as a private employer under
other sections of the bill.
10:04:17 AM
SENATOR FRENCH moved to adopt Amendment 1 [26-LS1034\S.1]. There
being no objection, the motion carried.
SENATOR FRENCH moved to adopt Amendment 2 [26-LS1034\S.2]. There
being no objection, the motion carried.
SENATOR FRENCH moved to report SB 278, 26-LS1034\S as amended,
from committee with individual recommendations and accompanying
zero fiscal note.
SENATOR KOOKESH objected to ask what the next committee of
referral is.
CHAIR MENARD answered Labor and Commerce.
SENATOR KOOKESH removed his objection.
CHAIR MENARD announced that without further objection, CSSB
278(STA) moved from Senate State Affairs Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|