SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE
February 8, 2005 Hearing Room C
3:10 P.M. Tapes 11 - 12
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sen. Floyd Prozanski, Chair
Sen. Roger Beyer, Vice-Chair
Sen. Charlie Ringo
Sen. Doug Whitsett
MEMBER EXCUSED: Sen. Ginny Burdick
STAFF PRESENT: Anna Braun, Committee Administrator
Karen Scoffield, Committee Assistant
MEASURES/ISSUES HEARD:
SB 147 - Public Hearing
SB 148 – Public Hearing
SB 139 – Public Hearing
Introduction of Committee Measures – Work Session
These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules. Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words. For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.
|
TAPE/# |
Speaker |
Comments |
|
TAPE 11, A |
||
|
005 |
Chair Prozanski |
Calls the meeting to order at 3:17 p.m. Opens public hearing on SB 147. |
|
SB 147 - PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
020 |
Anna Braun |
Committee Administrator. Provides an overview of SB 147. |
|
030 |
Dan Gardner |
Commissioner, Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI). Discusses and submits written testimony in support of SB 147 (EXHIBIT A). |
|
040 |
Amy Klare |
Administrator, Civil Rights Division, BOLI. Discusses support of SB 147. |
|
050 |
Chair Prozanski |
Asks for clarification regarding the start time of the timeline for when an employee may file a claim. |
|
055 |
Klare |
Answers that it is regarding when the employee has knowledge that the adverse employment action took place. Continues to discuss SB 147. |
|
080 |
Chair Prozanski |
Asks for clarification regarding Klare’s comments. |
|
082 |
Klare |
Answers clarification. |
|
085 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Inquires about the need to expand the thirty (30) day timeline. Asks for clarification regarding the beginning of the 30 day timeline. |
|
090 |
Klare |
Answers that it is thirty (30) days within the last day of harm. Comments that this is needed because many people are not aware that it is only thirty (30) days and end up missing the deadline. |
|
100 |
Gardner |
Discusses timeline in civil rights cases. |
|
105 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Comments regarding timeline in civil rights cases. |
|
110 |
Gardner |
Responds to comments from Sen. Whitsett. |
|
112 |
Klare |
Comments that they try not to use the full timelines given them. |
|
115 |
Chair Prozanski |
Asks for clarification regarding options for employees depending on what type of claim they have. Asks why the law impacted by SB 147 has a 30 day timeline. |
|
125 |
Annette Talbott |
Deputy Labor Commissioner, BOLI. Answers clarification regarding current law. |
|
150 |
William Stark |
Lawyer, Oregon Trial Lawyers Association. Discusses and submits written testimony in support of SB 147 (EXHIBIT B). |
|
170 |
Stark |
Discusses desire to move statute of limitations on SB 147 to be consistent with other discrimination statutes. |
|
205 |
Sen. Beyer |
Inquires if they would support moving all timelines to thirty (30) days. |
|
215 |
Stark |
Answers that they would not. Remarks that the longer the timeframe allows for more deliberation. |
|
240 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Inquires if there is documentation that the shorter timeframe would cause more lawsuits. |
|
245 |
Stark |
Answers that in order to protect a person’s rights, you must file a lawsuit within a timeline. |
|
247 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Asks if it could be argued that the longer the timeframe is, you could have more lawsuits. |
|
249 |
Stark |
Remarks that they should use alternative dispute resolution first rather than having to file a lawsuit within thirty (30) days. |
|
255 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Inquires as to clarification on how thirty (30) days would cause a rush of lawsuits. |
|
270 |
Stark |
States that because they do not have enough information at the thirty (30) day timeline, they cannot file a complaint with BOLI so they file a lawsuit in order to do it before the timeline is up. |
|
300 |
Sen. Ringo |
Comments that this bill is written to allow more time for attorneys to research before lawsuits are filed. |
|
320 |
Stark |
Comments that it can take a long time to acquire information regarding cases. |
|
340 |
Joe Schaeffer |
Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Discusses support of SB 147. Discusses concerns regarding SB 147. |
|
395 |
J.L. Wilson |
National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB). Discusses concerns regarding SB 147. |
|
415 |
Sen. Ringo |
Discusses the need of having a longer timeline than thirty (30) days. |
|
440 |
Wilson |
Discusses concerns regarding timeline. |
|
452 |
Chair Prozanski |
Inquires as to what would be a compelling reason for Wilson to agree to extend the timeline. |
|
455 |
Wilson |
Discusses answer. Discusses viewpoint regarding extending the timeline. |
|
TAPE 12, A |
||
|
030 |
Chair Prozanski |
Clarifies Wilson’s concerns regarding SB 147. |
|
035 |
Chair Prozanski |
Closes public hearing on SB 147 and opens public hearing on SB 148. |
|
SB 148 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
040 |
Anna Braun |
Committee Administrator. Provides an overview of SB 148. |
|
050 |
Dan Gardner |
Commissioner, Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI). Submits and discusses written testimony is support of SB 148 (EXHIBIT C). |
|
060 |
Amy Klare |
Administrator, Civil Rights Division, BOLI. Discusses support of SB 148. Discusses Oregon Family Leave Act. Discusses and submits Oregon Court of Appeals case (EXHIBIT D). |
|
090 |
Chair Prozanski |
Inquires if BOLI would have been protected if it were not for the case Klare discussed. |
|
100 |
Annette Talbott |
Deputy Commissioner, BOLI. Answers that unless the person worked for someone who had 50 or more employees they would not be covered under the Family Medical Leave Act. |
|
110 |
Chair Prozanski |
Asks for clarification. |
|
112 |
Talbott |
Offers to return information. |
|
115 |
Chair Prozanski |
Clarifies that BOLI is trying to codify their current rule. |
|
120 |
Talbott |
Answers yes. |
|
121 |
Sen. Beyer |
Inquires if the state act allows more leave than the federal act. |
|
125 |
Gardner |
Answers clarification regarding the differences between the federal and state act. Comments regarding the Oregon Family Leave Act. |
|
135 |
Sen. Beyer |
Inquires regarding other differences between the state and federal acts. |
|
140 |
Talbott |
Answers regarding the differences between the two acts. Discusses sick child leave. |
|
170 |
J.L. Wilson |
National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB). Discusses concerns regarding SB 148. Discusses the need of clarification of language in the bill. |
|
193 |
Chair Prozanski |
Asks for Wilson’s suggestions to amend the bill. |
|
195 |
Steve Lanning |
Oregon American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). Discusses support of SB 148. |
|
210 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Asks for more details in regard to Lanning’s testimony. |
|
211 |
Lanning |
Answers question. |
|
225 |
William Stark |
Attorney, Oregon Trial Lawyers Association. Discusses and submits written testimony in support of SB 148 (EXHIBIT E). Remarks that SB 148 will assist in minimizing lawsuits. |
|
260 |
Stark |
Continues. Discusses the ability of SB 148 to clarify current statute. |
|
315 |
Sen. Ringo |
Inquires regarding language of retaliation and inquires if Stark believes that the words can be misconstrued. |
|
320 |
Stark |
Discusses the meaning of the language. |
|
350 |
Chair Prozanski |
Asks BOLI for definitions of retaliation and discrimination in their rules. |
|
360 |
Talbott |
Discusses definition of unlawful discrimination. Offers to return information regarding the definition of retaliation. |
|
387 |
Sen. Beyer |
Asks for reference of definition. |
|
390 |
Talbott |
Provides statute. |
|
400 |
Chair Prozanski |
Asks to seek judicial guidance regarding case law. Comments regarding definition. |
|
420 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Inquires regarding potential consequences regarding unfair allegations made by an employee to an employer. |
|
435 |
Gardner |
Answers that there has not been a case with the bureau of an employee retaliating against an employer to his knowledge. Discusses possible consequences. |
|
445 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Clarifies question. |
|
460 |
Gardner |
Remarks that a case would be dismissed by BOLI if an unfair allegation is made. |
|
TAPE 11, B |
||
|
035 |
Chair Prozanski |
Closes public hearing on SB 148. Opens public hearing on SB 139. |
|
SB 139 - PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
040 |
Anna Braun |
Committee Administrator. Provides an overview of SB 139. |
|
045 |
Dan Gardner |
Commissioner, Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI). Discusses and submits written testimony in support of SB 139 (EXHIBIT F). |
|
050 |
Annette Talbott |
Deputy Commissioner, BOLI. Discusses support of SB 139. Discusses public employer and criminal whistle blowing laws. |
|
075 |
Talbott |
Discusses the ability of SB 139 to address whistle blowing retaliation more clearly. |
|
100 |
Talbott |
Discusses a standard of proof that BOLI uses regarding civil rights complaints. |
|
150 |
Sen. Whitsett |
States appreciation of clarification. |
|
155 |
Sen. Beyer |
Inquires regarding non wage claim complaints. |
|
160 |
Talbott |
Answers question regarding non wage claim complaints. |
|
165 |
Sen. Beyer |
Inquires as to how many complaints were dismissed. |
|
170 |
Talbott |
Offers to return information. |
|
175 |
Gardner |
Answers that BOLI first sends a demand letter to try to get employers into compliance before invoking civil penalties. |
|
180 |
Sen. Beyer |
Inquires as to how many complaints are regarding farmworkers. |
|
185 |
Gardner |
Answers question. Discusses farmworker rules and protection. |
|
205 |
Sen. Beyer |
Clarifies answer given by Gardner. |
|
210 |
Gardner |
Re-clarifies answer. |
|
215 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Comments regarding response to rule change. Discusses knowledge of concern of agricultural workers regarding mandatory break periods. |
|
235 |
Gardner |
Discusses response to Whitsett’s comments. Emphasizes desire for all workers to take break periods. |
|
270 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Inquires regarding agricultural employee’s rest periods. |
|
280 |
Gardner |
Answers that an administrative rule exempted agricultural workers and it has now been changed to remove them from exemption. |
|
290 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Inquires if employers are required to enforce the rest periods. |
|
300 |
Gardner |
Answers that employees have a legal right to take the rest break, but they are not forced to take it. |
|
310 |
Chair Prozanski |
Interjects that farmworker rights will be on the agenda next week and can be discussed then. Comments regarding workers rights to a rest period and they can choose to exercise it or not. |
|
320 |
Gardner |
Answers that if the worker chooses not to take a rest period, they cannot file a complaint with BOLI. |
|
335 |
William Stark |
Lawyer, Oregon Trial Lawyers Association. Discusses and submits written testimony in support of SB 139 (EXHIBIT G). |
|
375 |
Stark |
Continues. Discusses ability of SB 139 to allow the employer and employee to discuss wages without having to seek outside sources. |
|
415 |
Lisa Trussell |
Associated Oregon Industries, (AOI). Discusses concerns regarding SB 139. Discusses desire to speak with BOLI regarding the bill. |
|
TAPE 12, B |
||
|
020 |
Chair Prozanski |
Clarifies purpose of Trussell’s desire to meet with BOLI. |
|
025 |
Trussell |
Answers that they met once before, but will work together in the future. |
|
035 |
Chair Prozanski |
Closes public hearing on SB 139 and opens work session for introduction of committee measures. |
|
INTRODUCTION OF COMMITTEE MEASURES - WORK SESSION |
||
|
040 |
Anna Braun |
Committee Administrator. Introduces LC 178 (EXHIBIT H) and LC 2333 (EXHIBIT I). |
|
045 |
Sen. Beyer |
MOTION: Moves LC's: 178, 2333 BE INTRODUCED as committee bills. |
|
|
|
VOTE: 4-0-1 EXCUSED: 1 - Burdick |
|
|
Chair |
Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED. |
|
050 |
Chair Prozanski |
Closes work session for introduction of committee measures and adjourns meeting at 4:43 p.m. |
EXHIBIT SUMMARY