ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE  HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE  April 28, 2025 4:27 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Zack Fields, Co-Chair Representative Carolyn Hall, Co-Chair Representative Robyn Niayuq Burke Representative Dan Saddler Representative Julie Coulombe MEMBERS ABSENT  Representative Ashley Carrick Representative David Nelson COMMITTEE CALENDAR  CONFIRMATION HEARING(S): Alaska Real Estate Commission Susan Wilcox - Soldotna - CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives Lori Lindsay - Soldotna - CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED Board of Marital & Family Therapy Chantal Cohen - Anchorage - CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED HOUSE BILL NO. 193 "An Act establishing a paid parental leave program; relating to unemployment benefits; relating to the collection of child support obligations; and relating to the duties of the Department of Labor and Workforce Development." - HEARD & HELD HOUSE BILL NO. 192 "An Act relating to the payment of unemployment compensation benefits; relating to a penalty for late unemployment benefit payments; relating to inflation adjustments to unemployment benefit amounts; relating to an insured worker's availability for work; and providing for an effective date." - HEARD & HELD HOUSE BILL NO. 161 "An Act relating to minimum paid sick leave requirements; and providing for an effective date." - HEARD & HELD CONFIRMATION HEARING(S): Holly Steiner - Palmer Stacia Miller - Valdez - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION  BILL: HB 193 SHORT TITLE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS; PAID PARENT LEAVE SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HALL 04/15/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS 04/15/25 (H) L&C, FIN 04/16/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124 04/16/25 (H) Heard & Held 04/16/25 (H) MINUTE(L&C) 04/23/25 (H) L&C AT 9:00 AM BARNES 124 04/23/25 (H) Heard & Held 04/23/25 (H) MINUTE(L&C) 04/25/25 (H) L&C AT 9:00 AM BARNES 124 04/25/25 (H) 04/28/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124 BILL: HB 192 SHORT TITLE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) EISCHEID 04/14/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS 04/14/25 (H) L&C, FIN 04/25/25 (H) L&C AT 9:00 AM BARNES 124 04/25/25 (H) 04/28/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124 BILL: HB 161 SHORT TITLE: PAID SICK LEAVE EXEMPTION SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) RUFFRIDGE 03/28/25 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS 03/28/25 (H) L&C, FIN 04/14/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124 04/14/25 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED -- 04/16/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124 04/16/25 (H) Heard & Held 04/16/25 (H) MINUTE(L&C) 04/28/25 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM BARNES 124 WITNESS REGISTER ACTION NARRATIVE 4:27:25 PM CO-CHAIR CAROLYN HALL called the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting to order at 4:27 p.m. Representatives Coulombe, Burke, Fields, and Hall were present at the call to order. Representatives Saddler arrived as the meeting was in progress. ^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S): CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):    ^ALASKA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION ALASKA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION    ^BOARD OF CERTIFIED DIRECT-ENTRY MIDWIVES BOARD OF CERTIFIED DIRECT-ENTRY MIDWIVES    ^BOARD OF MARITAL & FAMILY THERAPY BOARD OF MARITAL & FAMILY THERAPY    4:28:48 PM CO-CHAIR HALL announced that the first order of business would be confirmation hearings on the governor's appointees to various boards and commissions. 4:29:03 PM }LORI LINDSAY, MD, Appointee* Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives* Soldotna, Alaska* Testified as an appointee to the Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives.{ testified as an appointee to the Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives. She stated that she had been practicing for 36 years and has lived in Soldotna for the past 8 years. She further stated that she had a strong interest in providing pre- and post-natal care in supporting both the mother and the child. She further stated that she had travelled internationally to promote and teach midwifery, stating that she had taught a variety of subjects, including bleeding after birth, preeclampsia survival, and helping newborns breathe. CO-CHAIR HALL invited questions from committee members. 4:30:24 PM }SUSAN WILCOX, Appointee* Real Estate Commission* Soldotna, Alaska* Testified as an appointee to the Real Estate Commission.{ testified as an appointee to the Real Estate Commission. She stated that she has lived in Alaska for 46 years, primarily in Kenai and Soldotna. She stated that she was retired and identified her past work experience, including service to the cities of Kenai and Soldotna and the State of Alaska. She stated that she has volunteered on many boards, including Alaska's Junior (indisc.) Board , and her local United Way board. She noted that there was so southcentral peninsula representation on the Real Estate Commission. She stated that she could bring her prior public service and knowledge of boards to the Real Estate Commission. CO-CHAIR HALL invited questions from committee members. [The confirmation hearings were set aside and brought back before the committee later in the meeting.] HB 193-UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS; PAID PARENT LEAVE  4:32:01 PM CO-CHAIR HALL announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 193, "An Act establishing a paid parental leave program; relating to unemployment benefits; relating to the collection of child support obligations; and relating to the duties of the Department of Labor and Workforce Development." 4:33:09 PM }JEN GRIFFIS, Vice President of Policy & Advocacy* Alaska Children's Trust (ACT)* Anchorage, Alaska* gave a PowerPoint, titled "House Bill 193: Unemployment Benefits; Paid Parental Leave Analysis & Modeling."{ began her presentation on slide 2 of a PowerPoint, titled "House Bill 193: Unemployment Benefits; Paid Parental Leave Analysis & Modeling," and gave a brief outline of the presentation, which read [original punctuation provided]: Comparative Policy Analysis Alaska H.B. 193 Bill Analysis (Prenatal-to-3 Policy Impact Center) Cost Modeling Comparison 2023 Microsimulation Model on Worker Leave (US Dept. of Labor) State-Level Program Variation Features of State Paid Family Leave Programs (Bipartisan Policy Center) DR. GRIFFIS gave an overview of the comparative policy analysis shown on slide 3, which, she stated places HB 193 into context with the 14 other statewide paid leave programs that currently exist. She explained that the comparative policy analysis covered four areas: purpose of leave, duration of leave, wage replacement, and the funding mechanism. DR. GRIFFIS moved to slide 4, and gave an overview of the cover purposes under HB 193 and comparison to other states with similar legislation, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: House Bill 193  Paid parental leave for bonding, used within 12 months   Other 14 States  bonding leave, caring for loved one with serious health condition, worker's own serious health condition DR. GRIFFIS moved to slide 5 and gave an overview of duration of leave under HB 193 and comparison to other states with similar legislation. This read as follows [original punctuation provided]: House Bill 193  26 weeks of paid leave Other 14 States  between 7-12 weeks, with 12 weeks being most common parent who gave birth can stack medical and family leave DR. GRIFFIS gave an overview of wage replacement under HB 193 and comparison to other states with similar legislation, shown on slide 6, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: House Bill 193  maximum weekly benefit of $675 Other 14 States  maximum weekly benefits range from $900-$1,681 DR. GRIFFIS gave an overview of the funding mechanism under HB 193 and comparison to other states with similar legislation, shown on slide 7, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: House Bill 193 .15% of employee wages Other 14 States  employee wages - 3 programs employer wages - 1 program split - 10 programs employee contributions range from .35% to 1.3% employer contributions range from .26% to .75% DR. GRIFFIS moved to slide 8, explaining that she was transitioning to the cost modelling comparison. She gave an overview of the cost modelling under HB 193, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Estimated Revenue .15% of employee wages = $18.9 million Cost of the Program  26 weeks of bonding leave = $30 million As currently written, the revenue in HB 193 is not  sufficient to fund the paid leave program.  DR. GRIFFIS further explained that the estimates were made using 2020 wage data scaled for wage growth in Alaska between 2020 and 2025. 4:38:29 PM DR. GRIFFIS moved to slide 9, drawing committee members' attention to a table graph representative of different potential policy adjustments to HB 193, labeled "Moving the Policy Levers." She explained that the wage replacement under HB 193 could fund an eight-week bonding leave program or a six-week bonding or caregiving/family leave program. She further explained that the two additional models shown on the table could be funded by .30 percent of employee wages instead of the currently proposed .15 percent. DR. GRIFFIS moved to slide 10, drawing committee members' attention to a table graph, labeled "Adjusting the Wage Replacement," noting that the table was representative of the impact of the adjustment of wage replacements on individual benefits and the percentage of wages required to fund the program. She noted that as wage replacement increases, the percentage of wages needed also increases. She further noted that, at a 50 percent wage replacement, it was unlikely that the program would be accessible for Alaska's lowest-income workers. DR. GRIFFIS spoke to the fourth example on the slide, a two- tiered system. She explained that tiered models make programs more accessible to lower-income workers without increasing the total cost of the program. She noted that tiered models are very common in paid leave programs. DR. GRIFFIS moved to slide 11, and identified the similarities and differences between HB 193 and similar legislation enacted in other states, which read [original punctuation provided]: What's the same?  all cover bonding, caregiving, and medical leave most cover leave for military deployment needs most split cost between employer and employee What's different? coverage of safety leave to support victims of domestic violence varies number of weeks for each type of leave varies DR. GRIFFIS moved to slide 12, and concluded her presentation, which read [original punctuation provided]: The variations in state-level program design demonstrate the opportunities Alaska has to utilize various policy levers to develop a comprehensive paid leave program that meets the needs of Alaska's families, communities, and businesses. DR. GRIFFIS concluded by thanking committee members for their time and invited questions. 4:42:40 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for the definition of bonding leave, family leave, medical, military deployment needs, and safety leave. DR. GRIFFIS responded that bonding leave, also called parental leave, was leave taken upon birth, adoption or foster replacement of a child. She defined medical leave as leave taken by one typically for one's own health as defined by the federal Family and Medical Leave Act. She defined family leave as leave taken to care for a family member and their serious medical condition. She noted that there is state variation on the definition of a "family member." She explained that safety leave typically references leave taken in situations related to domestic violence, stalking, or assault. 4:44:51 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER requested a specific definition of safety leave. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER additionally requested more information regarding military deployment leave. DR. GRIFFIS stated that she would follow up with the committee with additional information about safety leave and military deployment leave. She noted that military deployment leave was related to caregiving needs that a family might experience related to military deployment. 4:45:44 PM REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE asked whether employers are required to keep employees while the state is providing paid parental leave. She queried what happens in other states and how the leave might intersect with private businesses. DR. GRIFFIS replied that it varied state-by-state. She explained that some states give employees the option to opt-out if the employee feels that they already have adequate coverage. Further, she explained that the timeline and program qualifications queried by Representative Coulombe was a "policy lever" and determined by the legislators. She further noted that typically, one must be employed for a set period of time before qualifying for a leave program. She remarked that, with a comprehensive statewide program such as HB 193, eligibility is determined by whether an employee has paid into the statewide program and could still theoretically switch jobs within the state. She noted that it differed from qualifying through an employer, as an employee would have to remain in that profession to maintain eligibility. She stated that there was more opportunity to qualify for a program like HB 193 without being tied to a specific job. 4:48:27 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether other states allow different parents to take leave in sequence. He further asked if there was limit to the number of people who could qualify. DR. GRIFFIS replied that it was dependent on how family was defined, which varied state-by-state. She stated that how far that leave might extend was dependent on how family was defined. She further responded that stacking parental leave is allowed, meaning that both parents, if eligible for the program, would each qualify for their own "bucket of parental leave". REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked how far leave extends to family members. DR. GRIFFIS repeated that it would depend on how each state defines family. She offered an example, stating that if a child had a serious medical condition post-birth, a grandparent might be able to take leave to care for their grandchild, dependent on what state. She further explained that bonding leave is typically limited to two parents, or those in parental roles. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said that he was curious what was done in other states. 4:51:23 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS opined that it was pretty normal for parents to take sequential leave in other states and nations. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified that he was referring to members of the family other than parents, such as grandparents. 4:52:13 PM }PALOMA HARBOUR, Budget Manager* Department of Labor & Workforce Development (DOLWD)* Juneau, Alaska* Answered questions during the hearing on HB 193.{ introduced herself for the public record. 4:52:22 PM }LENNON WELLER, Economist* Department of Labor & Workforce Development* Juneau, Alaska* Answered questions during the hearing on HB 193.{ introduced himself for the public record. 4:52:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE noted that the presentation stated that other states use both employer and employee wages. She offered her understanding that Alaska could not use employer wages. MS. HARBOUR replied that the legislature could create a new tax on employers to fund the program, in addition to the unemployment tax already collected. REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE asked for confirmation that the tax under HB 193 was different from the current unemployment insurance (UI) tax on employers. MS. HARBOUR confirmed that was her understanding of the proposed legislation. REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE referred to slide 7 of the PowerPoint, citing "employee contributions range from 0.35 to 1.3." She noted that HB 193 was suggesting an employee contribution of 0.15 and asked if an increase to 1.3 in employee contribution would be "too much." MS. HARBOUR replied that, currently, there was a maximum in statute on employee contribution and explained that, in order to increase the employee contributions to 1.3, the legislature would need to add a separate tax. REPRESENTATIVE COULOMBE asked for clarification that the legislature could not take any more than 0.15 of employee contributions out of the trust fund to remain solvent. MS. HARBOUR clarified that currently the trust is collecting more revenue than it needs to cover benefit costs. She explained that currently, DOLWD could take in less revenue to the trust fund and take in revenue to the program proposed under HB 193 and still remain solvent. She noted that there was only so much employee contribution currently available. 4:55:10 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS suggested that, in addition to the 0.15 employee diversion, the legislature could allow [DOLWD] to push the employer contribution into the trust fund below 1.0 and divert the difference into a parental leave fund. He additionally suggested that, when the UI trust fund is solvent, the difference could be diverted into the parental leave fund. MS. HARBOUR responded that scenario would be feasible. 4:56:12 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS suggested an amendment to HB 193 to allow the funds to "build up" for a year and give the department the ability to calculate allowable leave annually. He suggested delegating authority to DOLWD to determine that length of allowable leave under HB 193 with a ceiling. He said that ideally the fund for the parental leave program would grow over time. MS. HARBOUR replied that, dependent on how the statute was written, the Legislature could determine the length of a leave program. She stated that she did not have current data on how many employees would qualify for the proposed program under HB 193. 4:57:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE BURKE queried the results of a stress test on the UI trust fund. MS. HARBOUR replied that [DOLWD] did an analysis down to 0.4 percent, based on experience rating. She stated that, upon completion, she would follow up with the analysis for the committee. 4:59:08 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether benefits would differ based on how long a person had been employed. MS. HARBOUR offered her understanding that it did not matter how long an employee had been working or how much they had given in contributions. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for the minimum qualifications. CO-CHAIR HALL deferred to Mr. Walsh. 5:00:17 PM }TRISTAN WALSH, Staff* Representative Carolyn Hall* Alaska State Legislature* Juneau, Alaska* Answered questions on behalf of Representative Hall, prime sponsor of HB 193.{ answered questions on behalf of Representative Hall, prime sponsor of HB 193. He offered his belief that the qualifying period under HB 193 was identical to unemployment insurance, which required applicants to earn $2500 total in four of the five previous quarters of employment. He stated that he would double-check and follow up with the committee. 5:01:05 PM CO-CHAIR HALL referred to page 3, line 17 for the answer to Representative Saddler's question. She cited, "An employee who is paid at least $2,500 in wages during at least two of the calendar quarters of the employee's base period is eligible to receive paid parental leave beginning the first day of absence from work for a qualifying purpose under AS 23.10.715." CO-CHAIR HALL announced that HB 193 was held over. ^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S): CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):    ^ALASKA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION ALASKA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION    ^BOARD OF CERTIFIED DIRECT-ENTRY MIDWIVES BOARD OF CERTIFIED DIRECT-ENTRY MIDWIVES    ^BOARD OF MARITAL & FAMILY THERAPY BOARD OF MARITAL & FAMILY THERAPY    5:02:09 PM CO-CHAIR HALL announced that the next order of business would be the confirmation hearing on the governor's appointee to the Board of Marital & Family Therapy. 5:02:40 PM The committee took an at-ease from 5:02 p.m. to 5:06 p.m. 5:06:18 PM }CHANTAL COHEN, Appointee* Board of Marital & Family Therapy* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified as an appointee to the Board of Marital & Family Therapy.{ testified as an appointee to the Board of Marital & Family Therapy. She began her testimony by stating that she was a licensed marriage family therapist and supervisor, and a licensed professional counselor (LPC) supervisor. She stated that she applied because she believed it was important to ensure the highest level of the care for the public as a clinician. She additionally stated that she applied because of her belief in the importance of giving back to her community. CO-CHAIR HALL invited questions from committee members. After ascertaining that there were no questions, she moved to the next agenda item. [The confirmation hearing was set aside and brought back before the committee later in the meeting.] HB 192-UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS  5:07:45 PM CO-CHAIR HALL announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 192, "An Act relating to the payment of unemployment compensation benefits; relating to a penalty for late unemployment benefit payments; relating to inflation adjustments to unemployment benefit amounts; relating to an insured worker's availability for work; and providing for an effective date." 5:08:21 PM }REPRESENTATIVE TED EISCHEID* Alaska State Legislature* Juneau, Alaska* As prime sponsor, presented HB 192.{ as prime sponsor, presented HB 192. He began his presentation on the second slide of a PowerPoint [included in the committee file], titled "HB 192: Unemployment Benefits," which read [original punctuation provided]: The mission of Alaska' state unemployment insurance program is to: Provide temporary wage replacement for individuals who lose a job through no fault of their own; to protect employers against the dispersal of a trained workforce while temporary shutdowns are necessary; to facilitate reemployment; and to help stabilize the economy. REPRESENTATIVE TED EISCHEID noted that HB 192 was particularly important in the face of federal layoffs, changes in the size and scope of the federal government and workforce, and massive departures in Alaska due to education funding issues and pension benefit issues. He asserted that unemployment insurance is a unique safety net for Alaska residents. He explained that, due to federal requirements, payroll taxes paid by employers are put into the UI trust fund. He explained that Alaska additionally puts taxes collected from Alaska workers into the trust fund. He stated that, because contributions are required to be a percentage of individual workers' salaries, the contributions are essentially inflation-proof. He also noted that funds deposited into the UI trust fund can only be used to pay for unemployment benefits, which protects the fund from reappropriation. He further explained that, because Alaska Statute (AS) sets the payment amounts for insured workers and because the weekly benefit table in AS is not adjusted annually, there is no comparable inflation-proofing effect in the payments issued to workers claiming unemployment insurance. REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID referred to the third slide and gave an overview of the benefits of unemployment insurance (UI), which read [original punctuation provided]: Unemployment insurance helps Alaskans bridge the gap between jobs and helps ensure they are able to successfully get back to work after periods of unemployment. In calendar year 2024, 19,651 Alaskans (or about ` out of every 50 Alaskans) qualified for and received as least one unemployment insurance weekly benefit payment after being separated from employment Employer and employee contributions organically increase over time as wages increase, yet unemployment benefit payouts have not increased in sixteen years REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID stressed that unemployment insurance was not a handout and was not intended to function as a replacement salary. REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID moved to the fourth slide and began to describe the provisions under HB 192, which read [original punctuation provided]: Increases the weekly benefit amount that qualifying unemployed Alaskans receive for the first time since 2009. 5:14:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID moved through the fifth, sixth, and seventh slides and continued to describe the provisions under HB 192, which read [original punctuation provided]: Increases the weekly supplemental allowance that qualifying unemployed Alaskans receive for each of up to three dependents, for the first time since 2009. Implements an annual unemployment benefit adjustment, and ties the benefit adjustment increment to the average percentage of increase of the urban Alaska Consumer Price Index over the most recent three-year period Requires timely payment of benefits to ensured workers on weeks that include a holidy Requires DOL&WD to issue prompt payment to unemployment recipients following successful appeal of a denied claim Requires that payments to insured workers continue uninterrupted in instances where additional information is requested but the claimant is unable to reach the call center Removes a one-week waiting period at the beginning of the benefits period and extends the benefit period to cover the week or weeks prior to receiving a first paycheck upon reemployment REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID moved to the eighth slide and final slide and explained the unemployment insurance trust fund, which read [original punctuation provided]: The Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund pays out benefits when an insured worker successfully applies for unemployment The parameters for use of the UITF are spelled out in Federal Law (Section 3304(a)(4) of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act), and require that states use UITF funds only for paying UI benefits In FY2024 the UITF brought in $165.9 million in revenue and only paid out $43.5 million in benefits In September 2024, the UITF balance was $724.4 Million, or $186.2 Million more than the statutory target reserve ratio of 3.3% of taxable wages REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID concluded by stating that HB 192 was a common-sense piece of legislation that would protect Alaska residents and "safeguard the economic wellbeing of Alaska's workers, families, ... community, and ... economy." 5:17:42 PM }MEREDITH TRAINOR, Staff* Representative Ted Eischeid* Alaska State Legislature* Juneau, Alaska* Gave sectional analysis on behalf of Representative Eischeid, prime sponsor of HB 192.{ gave sectional analysis [included in the committee file] on behalf of Representative Eischeid, prime sponsor of HB 192, which read as follows [original punctuation provided]: Section 1. Amends AS 23.20.340(d) to require timely payment of weekly benefits during weeks that include a holiday, and implements a penalty payment requirement for late payments to eligible insured workers; Section 2. Amends AS 23.20.340(f) to require a 24-hour payment deadline for payments determined to be due to successful claim appellants where said payments had been withheld while the individual's claim underwent the appeal process; Section 3. Adds a new subsection to AS 23.20.340 that requires the department to develop a contingency plan for occasions when the call center volume is exceeded, and requires timely payment of weekly benefits for claimants who are unable to reach the claim center as requested in response to their weekly claim filing; Section 4. Amends AS 23.20.350(d) to inflation-proof the weekly benefit amount table established in statute; Section 5. Amends AS 23.30.350(f) to inflation-proof the established dependent benefit allowance established in statute; Section 6. Adds a new subsection to AS 23.20.350 to include an annual weekly benefit amount adjustment based on the urban Alaska Consumer Price Index for the prior three years; Section 7. Amends AS 23.20.360 to begin the reduction of benefits following a period of unemployment as of the week the insured worker receives first payment of wages; requires the insured worker to provide accurate documentation of the date of return to employment, and provides a mechanism for recovery of any overpayment to the Unemployment Trust Fund; Section 8. Amends AS 23.20.375(a) to eliminate the waiting week period between an insured worker's initial claim for benefits and receipt of initial claim payment; Section 9. Amends AS 23.20.378(a) to allow an insured worker to claim unemployment benefits during a limited period of travel provided either: the insured worker was permitted to work remotely during their base period of employment, or the insured worker has accepted an offer of work that begins after the period of travel, and they provide documentation that an earlier start date was unavailable. Section 10. Amends AS 23.20.378(c) to remove the waiting week credit period from statute. Section 11. Amends AS 23.20.378 by adding a new subsection that allows the department to collect information about a worker's remote work history when the worker files a benefit claim; Section 12. Amends AS 23.20.379(a) to remove the waiting week credit from statute relating to voluntary separation and discharge for misconduct; Section 13. Amends AS 23.20.379(b) to remove the waiting week credit from statute relating to insured workers who have not met the requirements for unemployment benefit payment; Section 14. Amends AS 23.20.379(e) to remove the waiting week credit from statute relating to insured workers discharged for commission of felony or theft; Section 15. Amends AS 23.20.382(a) to remove the waiting week credit from statute relating to vocational training or retraining courses; Section 16. Amends AS 23.20.382(b) to remove the waiting week credit from statute relating to the insured worker's participation in training and retraining approved under U.S. code; Section 17. Amends AS 23.20.382(d) to remove the waiting week credit from statute relating to the insured worker's participation in training and retraining approved under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998; Section 18. Amends AS 23.20.383(a) to remove the waiting week credit from statute relating to stoppage of work during labor disputes; Section 19. Amends AS 23.20.520(7) to remove the waiting week credit from statute relating to the definition of "claimant"; Section 20. Repeals AS 23.20.375(b) and AS  23.20.520(22).  Section 21. Sets an effective date of July 1, 2025. 5:22:13 PM }PALOMA HARBOUR, Budget Manager* Department of Labor & Workforce Development (DOLWD)* Juneau, Alaska* Answered questions during the hearing on HB 192.{ answered questions during the hearing on HB 192. She spoke to the indeterminate fiscal note associated with the proposed legislation. 5:23:43 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for the definition of the waiting week creditas it was mentioned in Sections 10 and 19 of the sectional analysis. He asked what would happen if the "waiting week" were to be abandoned. MS. HARBOUR explained that Alaska required a "waiting week," which was the first week that a claimant files with the state. She emphasized the importance of the "waiting week" and spoke to the way it served to identity verification. She said that an individual would have to wait a certain amount of time before they could be paid for a claim, which was currently a six-week waiting period. 5:30:12 PM CO-CHAIR HALL opened public testimony on HB 192. 5:30:28 PM }LAURA STATS, representing self* Juneau, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 192.{ testified in support of HB 192. She began her testimony by sharing her experience in speaking with federal employees who were impacted by the current presidential administration's actions and emphasized the importance of federal employees in the state. She said that the proposed legislation would not cost the state any extra money and encouraged the committee's support of HB 192. 5:32:42 PM }MICHELLE BITTNER, representing self* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 192.{ testified in support of HB 192. She spoke to the challenging job market that currently existed for all workers due to the uncertain economy, federal layoffs, and stock market downturns. She shared an anecdote about her son who worked in construction wherein he was let go due to the lack of available work for him and spoke to the way that HB 192 would address the problems she had just spoke to. 5:36:04 PM CO-CHAIR HALL, after ascertaining that there was no one else who wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 192. 5:37:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID noted that the core legislative intent of HB 192 was to work to increase the current unemployment insurance benefit payout which had been stagnant since 2009. He said that the proposed legislation would offer a variety of reforms and offered that HB 192 could be amended in future hearings. 5:38:59 PM MS. TRAINOR commented that the waiting week period removal was not with the intention of a person being paid before approval. She said that the waiting week period would begin after an individual was approved for unemployment benefits. 5:42:04 PM CO-CHAIR HALL announced that HB 192 would be held over. HB 161-PAID SICK LEAVE EXEMPTION  5:42:17 PM CO-CHAIR HALL announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 161, "An Act relating to minimum paid sick leave requirements; and providing for an effective date." 5:42:39 PM CO-CHAIR HALL opened public testimony on HB 161. 5:43:01 PM }LAURA STATS, representing self* Juneau, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. She asserted that HB 161 constituted government overreach. She reported that Ballot Measure 1 was supported by 58 percent of Alaska voters in 2024. She stated that Ballot Measure 1 was scheduled to go into effect in July of 2025. She asserted that HB 161 was introduced on the assumption that voters were unaware of what they were voting for regarding Ballot Measure 1. She asserted that HB 161 would overpower freedom of speech. She encouraged committee members to vote no on HB 161 and "protect due process." 5:45:34 PM }BRADEN GARRET, Operations Manager* Whistle Hill* Soldotna, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. He stated that Whistle Hill was comprised of five businesses, with two more scheduled to open in June of 2025. He stated that, without HB 161, many small businesses will face increased costs from Ballot Measure 1. He asserted that if Ballot Measure 1 passes as is businesses running on "razor-thin" margins would close. He asserted that HB 161 was meant to alleviate rising costs that businesses were facing. He asserted that some businesses would lay-off employes, cut hours, increase costs to consumers, or close and illustrated his point with some anecdotes about small businesses. He urged committee members to vote yes and consider the implications of voting no on HB 161. 5:48:40 PM }PAUL THOMAS* Owner, Alaska Cache Liquor* Juneau, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ He stated that as a small business owner, he runs all aspects of his small business, including payroll, accounting, ordering, stocking, hiring & firing of employees, et cetera. He asserted that, without HB 161, Ballot Measure 1 would be burdensome to his small business. He stated that he anticipated hits to his employee profit- sharing plan and asserted that sick leave for a "true small business" would be harmful to it. 5:50:27 PM }HEIDI HEINRICH, Co-Owner* Lucky Wishbone* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ She stated that many businesses across the country continue to suffer from the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. She further asserted that Alaska-owned small businesses suffer the most, with high shipping costs where businesses often receive lower-quality products. 5:52:32 PM }GENE WHITE, representing self* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ He stated that he was a retired electrician and worked in construction. He provided an anecdote about injuring himself on the job and shared his understanding that the proposed legislation would not help those working in trades like himself. He discouraged the committee's support of the proposed legislation. 5:54:52 PM }ANNETTE MARLEY, representing self* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. She stated that she had been involved in public health since 1995. She urged the committee to vote against HB 161, noting that it would exclude businesses with 15 to 50 employees from paid sick leave. She encouraged committee members to consider benefits of paid sick leave, including: reduction of the spread of infectious diseases, shifting of healthcare from emergency to outpatient settings, decreased likelihood of injury at work, et cetera. 5:57:59 PM }MICHAEL CERVANTES, Owner* The Banks Alehouse* Fairbanks, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. He stated that, were HB 161 not come to pass, his restaurant would absorb an expense of approximately $21,000, the equivalent of one full-time employee. He said that small businesses should "continue to thrive, not shut their doors." 6:01:22 PM }SHANNON CARROLL, Director* Government Affairs, Trident Seafoods* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. He stated that Trident Seafoods has been operating in Alaska since 1994 and spoke to her understanding that Ballot Measure 1 would not impart any benefits upon businesses, employees, or fishermen in the state. He emphasized the need for enough workers to process the fisheries needs of the state. 6:03:42 PM }APRIL COOLEY, President* Cooley's Tax & Accounting Inc.* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She stated that her business has been operating for 13 years and serves 30 to 40 small businesses in Alaska. She identified the sick pay provision as her primary concern of Ballot Measure 1. She noted that many of her clients have dynamic pay structures. She shared concerns regarding the costs of compliance and administration. She said that there was nothing in current statute to define how sick pay was administered. 6:05:53 PM }NICOLE KIMBALL, Vice President* Pacific Seafood Processor's Association* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She explained that Pacific Seafood Processor's Association (PSPA) processes seafood for communities across the state, noting that the majority of their 20,000 plus workers across the state are seasonal. She stated that she was testifying primarily in support of the seasonal employee exemption for sick pay HB 161. 6:08:56 PM }SARAH OATES HARLOW, President* Alaska CHARR* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She spoke to the annual income of over $3 billion dollars from the hospitality and food services industry in Alaska. She said that profit margins have been in the 1-2 percent range after the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and said that she could not continue to deflect increased costs to consumers. 6:12:29 PM }ABBY FREDRICK* Director of Communications, Silver Bay Seafoods* Juneau, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She raised her concern that the proposed legislation could increase overhead costs for businesses and cause operational challenges for small businesses. 6:14:46 PM }ADRIENNE SWEENEY, AJ's Old Town Steakhouse* Homer, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She spoke to the enormous pressures and supply chain issues that have battered small businesses in Alaska since the COVID-19 pandemic. She said that the paid sick leave mandate did not account for the realities that small businesses were faced with. She said that it was difficult for small business owners to make decisions about eliminating vacation pay or part-time employees and encouraged the committee's support of the proposed legislation. 6:17:17 PM }COREY BOYD, Co-Owner* Senders* Fairbanks, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. profit margins. He said that small businesses would not be able to raise consumer prices enough to accommodate mandated paid sick leave and would have to cut operational hours. 6:19:39 PM }LAILE FAIRBAIRN, President* Locally Grown Restaurants* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. He said that his business already provided paid time off with a 401k retirement and health insurance. He said that Ballot Measure 1 did not take into account small businesses or the hospitality industry. He said that restaurants with less than 50 employees do not have the resources to provide sick leave. 6:22:28 PM }ALICIA AMBERG, Executive Director* Associated General Contractors of Alaska* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She said that the impacts of the new paid sick leave requirements would be sweeping and emphasized the lack of regulations surrounding the implementation of mandatory sick leave. 6:23:50 PM }LAURA MCDONNELL, Owner* Caribou Crossing* Juneau, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She said that HB 161 was designed to support family owned small businesses in Alaska and spoke to the difficult nature of the sick leave requirements mandated by Ballot Measure 1. 6:25:50 PM }JULIE CLEATON, Board Member, Alaska Public Health Association* Wasilla, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She emphasized the importance of paid sick leave in Alaska and urged support of sick leave without a cash- out option. 6:27:42 PM }MICHAEL FLINT, representing self* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He said that the proposed legislation was "offensive" to voters who already approved Ballot Measure 1. He asserted that companies and small businesses could afford to offer paid sick leave to their employees. He emphasized the importance of worker's benefits like paid sick leave and discouraged the committee's support of HB 161. 6:29:16 PM }REBECCA OWENS, representing self* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. She said that the greed of businesses did justify the burden of offering employee benefits and discouraged the committee's support of HB 161. 6:30:51 PM }JOELLE HALL, President* Alaska AFLCIO* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He said that the intent of the proposed legislation was to undo the will of the voters in the previous election. He asserted that HB 161 was "constitutionally dubious" and discouraged the committee's support of HB 161. 6:32:38 PM }TRISTIAN SAMMONS, representing self* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He said that he was "appalled that restaurant owners would allow employees to come into work sick" and emphasized the importance of paid sick leave. He discouraged the committee's support of HB 161. 6:34:38 PM }SCOTT CRASS, representing self* Fairbanks, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He said that the proposed legislation would erode public trust in the electoral system in Alaska. 6:35:51 PM }ABEL BULT-ITO, representing self* Fairbanks, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He said that Alaskan parents shouldn't have to choose between losing a day of pay to stay with their sick child or going into work. He said that the proposed legislation would remove workers benefits for those most likely to not already have employee benefits and discouraged the committee's support of HB 161. 6:37:54 PM }GARRETT SAVORY, representing self* Fairbanks, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He said that he did not want to consume food prepared by sick workers and emphasized that he did not like the manner in which the proposed legislation was "pinning citizens against small businesses." 6:38:59 PM }BRONSON FRYE, President* Building & Construction Trade Council* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. She said that the proposed legislation sought to weaken the existing employer benefit laws and discouraged the committee's support of HB 161. 6:41:15 PM }DONOVAN RUSSONIELLO, representing self* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He said that paid sick leave was an item that made Alaska a more attractive state to work in and said that it was "essential" for working families in Alaska. He emphasized that many working Alaskans did not have time to call into the current committee hearing because they were working, while the industries supporting the legislation were able to testify. 6:44:01 PM }VINCE BELTRAMI, representing self* Cooper Landing, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He argued that HB 161 was tantamount to repealing Ballot Measure 1 and said that the exemption for employers with less than 50 staff members effectively repealed Ballot Measure 1. He discouraged the committee's support of HB 161. 6:46:30 PM }DONNA PHILLIPS, representing self* Girdwood, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. She said that people should not be spreading disease at work and said that only after the COVID-19 pandemic did nurses begin to stay home from work when they were feeling under the weather. 6:48:26 PM }LAURA BONNER, representing self* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. She argued that a higher minimum wage and mandatory paid sick leave should apply to all employers in the state. 6:50:19 PM }PATRICK FITZGERALD, Political Coordinator* Teamsters 959* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in opposition to HB 161.{ testified in opposition to HB 161. He said that the policies of Ballot Measure 1 had not yet been implemented and spoke to the numerous benefits on workers that employer's benefits offer. 6:51:50 PM }HEIDI SORRELL, Executive Director* Soldotna Chamber of Commerce* Soldotna, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She said that she would not be able to hire seasonal staff if HB 161 were not to become law and said that Ballot Measure 1 mandated paid sick leave without clear guidelines. She said that businesses had no way to verify if employees were actually sick and spoke to the thin profit margins that small businesses in Alaska operate under. 6:53:42 PM }CAROLINA STACEY, Owner, Lucky Wishbone & Owner* Kindred Spirits Coffee* Anchorage, Alaska* Testified in support of HB 161.{ testified in support of HB 161. She said that the increased cost to small businesses that Ballot Measure 1 put onto small businesses in Alaska was unsustainable and urged the committee's support of HB 161. 6:55:52 PM CO-CHAIR HALL, after ascertaining that there was no one else who wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 161. 6:55:59 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS passed along comments on behalf of Mr. Dan Sumner. [HB 161 was held over.] 6:56:15 PM CO-CHAIR HALL discussed amendment deadlines for various legislation. ^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S): CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):    ^ALASKA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION ALASKA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION    ^BOARD OF CERTIFIED DIRECTY-ENTRY MIDWIVES BOARD OF CERTIFIED DIRECTY-ENTRY MIDWIVES    ^BOARD OF MARITAL & FAMILY THERAPY BOARD OF MARITAL & FAMILY THERAPY    6:57:06 PM CO-CHAIR HALL announced that the final order of business would be the confirmation hearings on the governor's appointees to various boards and commissions. CO-CHAIR HALL stated that the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee has reviewed the qualifications of the governor's appointees and recommends that the following names be forwarded to a joint session for consideration: Lori Lindsay, Board of Marital & Family Therapy; Susan Wilcox, Alaska Real Estate Commission; and Chantal Cohen; Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives. She said that signing the report regarding appointments to boards and commissions in no way reflects an individual member's approval or disapproval of the appointee, and the nomination is merely forwarded to the full legislature for confirmation or rejection. 6:57:29 PM ADJOURNMENT  There being no further business before the committee, the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 6:57 p.m.