[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},"mediaId",6116411,"mediaKeyId","2732891-00e5ff21d5dc10ab351488d10230a05a","parentId",2732891,"title","Committee reviews proposed amendment to H.461 that would narrow job-protection for employees on unpaid leave","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",859480,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2732891-00e5ff21d5dc10ab351488d10230a05a&start=859&end=859","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2732891-00e5ff21d5dc10ab351488d10230a05a/thumbnail_859480.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6116411/Vermont/Committee-reviews-proposed-amendment-to-H461-that-would-narrow-job-protection-for-employees-on-unpaid-leave","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6116411-1dce3559efe6d8bf492c4280cca62948/orig.mp4?Expires=1775852915&Signature=eq2s5vBw6Re34BXDNiBylg-nHsjfFD81j74Vs8SKcNMvgY4PwluSVjMsEsuNM8H1lt23AuGp92zJB2jN00s4Dro0FxNjMYUtccj7yJUvYifLlduRtq-qd4J0GPrWX-zfm17gvR5~ZFYvGMf936mF4TpSDb2z5gtQg8ZiNtg-eiWON1h2wQx3cnvvt4-vL3pZ9i8fh6X-Kveia-6u-Hcvi5Da03jmR8Bx3ZW5-3FC~NNyx8i4Lhdl4BUfWWRxI~xAWmjoPvq6UelLoRRaWyoIeP5PMJs94ZoL4eT64no5V--Fij8LDCiARrLHBQ7djkLB9YheKXeQ8wIFtdncX42nkQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-03-21T01:57:55Z","article","The House General & Housing Committee on March 20, 2025, discussed a proposed amendment to H.461, the bill on expanding employee access to unpaid leave. Committee members were briefed that the amendment—filed and placed on the calendar—would broaden an existing statutory exception that permits employers to replace employees who perform unique services and whose absence would cause substantial economic injury.

A committee member explained the amendment is intended to add a scenario: if an employer cannot find a temporary replacement willing to take the position during the leave, the employer could hire a permanent replacement after giving reasonable notice to the employee. Committee staff described that the change would remove the requirement that the position be \"very unique\" and instead would allow replacement where the employer demonstrates it could not secure a temporary employee and that hiring a permanent replacement was the only alternative to prevent \"substantial and grievous economic injury.\" The amendment requires the employer to demonstrate that by \"clear and convincing evidence,\" as the underlying statute already requires for the existing exception.

Committee members voiced concern that, as described, the amendment would weaken job protections for employees taking parental or medical leave. One member summarized, \"So this amendment...expands the exemption...it does weaken that job protection that's currently in the statute.\" Staff noted the current statute already contains several exceptions to reinstatement, including layoffs unrelated to the leave and employees performing unique work; the proposed amendment would broaden those exceptions.

Members asked whether the proposed amendment conflicts with the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), noting Vermont law can be more protective but not contradictory to federal law. Legislative staff said they would follow up to determine compatibility with federal law.

Logistics: the amendment was placed on the notice calendar (page 923 of the day's calendar was cited in committee discussion), a straw poll had been scheduled to accommodate timing and the committee planned to hear from the amendment's proponent, Anne Donahue, after a joint assembly. No vote on the amendment occurred during the March 20 session.

Committee members stressed they wanted bill reporter Ashley to review the amendment text and that additional briefings and testimony would be scheduled before any committee decision.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House General - 2025-03-20 - 9AM","oneSentenceSummary","Committee members reviewed a proposed amendment to H.461 (expanding unpaid leave access) that would allow employers to hire permanent replacements if they cannot find a temporary worker, potentially weakening job-protection on return from leave. Legislative counsel and staff discussed statutory exceptions and federal compatibility concerns.","taxTitle","General & Housing, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",30954,"location","Vermont","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},6116416,"Committee walks through H.173, would grant higher-education employees right to strike",633,1322515,1956060,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2732891-00e5ff21d5dc10ab351488d10230a05a&start=1322&end=1956","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2732891-00e5ff21d5dc10ab351488d10230a05a/thumbnail_1322515.jpg","/articles/6116416/Vermont/Committee-walks-through-H173-would-grant-higher-education-employees-right-to-strike","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6116416-7f8b3f34004bb7eb412ae5c03d77df3d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775852916&Signature=V9PwgEKWWEYC8FgRnU4FWy0GF629NOkPXLLQ6i2XEKnySJosoHJ~48XHXZuxnsv0IyJFDiqxjE5nCC1BOp3Z~gjXdFkzLDgpEuxQ1UUKhC7p-kKZDkMB-RG3~i1lXyAqTBrJuQEW-Bp9h9deKNgsV4dn8d4DM4K5H~F-1I1KE2lUVl21wCFz-NuC5A1oeY65XQ-d20hT1oRHM58Qr4FnOxc2KuAn45t-qVRRhhbmw-uLmfwRLP1C88379dE7h-vXMNIWH3vUzLgavSdWIx9nNAEQdpgvuFqxANR-ISPqOMgrl6LKgELd~BL~Es~fp8wNoHvpu2hsM2t2iUvu78YtUA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House General & Housing Committee on March 20, 2025, heard a walkthrough of H.173, a bill that would allow employees of the Vermont State Colleges and the University of Vermont to engage in strikes by carving out an exception from existing prohibitions in the State Employee Labor Relations Act.

Sophie Zadatny of the Office of Legislative Council summarized the bill's effect: the proposed statute would remove the prohibition on strikes for those higher-education employees and would also carve out an exception so that it would not be an unfair labor practice for an employee organization to encourage those employees to strike.

Zadatny explained current processes for public-sector bargaining in Vermont: higher-education employees currently follow a multi-step impasse process—mediation, fact finding and then a last-best-offer procedure that can be decided by an arbitrator or the Vermont Labor Relations Board. She contrasted that with other statutes that already allow strikes: the Municipal Employees Relations Act allows strikes but imposes guardrails, including a restriction that a strike generally cannot occur sooner than 30 days after delivery of a fact-finder's report, and it allows courts to enjoin strikes that endanger public health, safety or welfare.

Zadatny also summarized the teachers' statute, which permits strikes but gives school boards the statutory ability to impose a contract after following required procedures; she cautioned that the teachers' framework is complex and rare in practice. Committee members asked whether the bill specifies at what point in the bargaining process a strike could occur; Zadatny said H.173 does not set a specific timing trigger and simply provides that a right to strike would exist for the named categories of higher-education employees.

Members were told the committee plans to begin hearings on H.173 next week and to call witnesses. No formal action or vote occurred during the session.

The committee heard a question about which other state employees have strike rights; staff said municipal employees and teachers have statutory strike rights, while most other state employees do not. The committee indicated it will schedule testimony to explore guardrails that might accompany a new statutory right to strike for higher-education employees.","Committee heard a legal overview of H.173, which would carve out an exception allowing employees at Vermont State Colleges and the University of Vermont to strike. Legislative counsel explained existing state labor statutes and guardrails in other statutes.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},6116421,"Rep. Connor Casey introduces Extreme Temperature Worker Protection Act to House General & Housing Committee",645,64610,709615,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2732891-00e5ff21d5dc10ab351488d10230a05a&start=64&end=709","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2732891-00e5ff21d5dc10ab351488d10230a05a/thumbnail_64610.jpg","/articles/6116421/Vermont/Rep-Connor-Casey-introduces-Extreme-Temperature-Worker-Protection-Act-to-House-General-Housing-Committee","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6116421-71bdd4a41a79d6d47c24970a79e23a49/orig.mp4?Expires=1775852916&Signature=EUSnGSmDG56zin~erwy18mUTc2Y7MDguifM7~36jNLB2ARKJqyEXXelo0rVXrL6yYjP7go7c5Gm4Ko3YR5M-2wbiKSZWuUQsMENm2Jf0Y76r2NHZVzDoVzy03fCbWZdIEk8Y1mLThfgptbZCQhesQG2ABNF8TvN1sDT93hr6IwQF~80WEQhnAgSoUjd-j~y9Bgz1F1zaWv2CKZIa7Ho67MTTqNzs6hM4HbF~C8KmjC-A8c506eZHKezsQTpAsib9tB6pI9tIkRTv6qbUfljg8kuPydQbtxKLOju9wFgCsXHRFQyz3v4pT~uH6I0ZJJv5vIXDH~yG6wBHJr71x~AY9Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Connor Casey introduced a short-form bill on March 20, 2025, to the House General & Housing Committee seeking to create an \"Extreme Temperature Worker Protection Act\" to protect workers from heat- and cold-related illness and death.

Casey said the bill is intended to cover workers across indoor and outdoor workplaces and to require employers to assess temperature risks, provide drinking water and shade or warmth, allow paid cool-down or warm-up breaks and train supervisors to spot signs of heat and cold stress. \"This is a bill designed to protect workers in Vermont to face the risks of extreme heat or cold while on the job,\" Casey said when he presented the short form.

The committee was told the version before members is a short form. Sophie Zadatny of the Office of Legislative Council said the short form as filed would create an act that requires employers to create a plan to evaluate and control temperature-related hazards, but the drafting and regulatory triggers would be fleshed out later. \"Right now, OSHA doesn't have specific heat or cold standards...it really is what they do is they have a clause that's reactive,\" Zadatny said, describing the federal rulemaking timeline and differences between statute and administrative rules.

Zadatny summarized federal and other-state activity: the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued a proposed heat injury and illness prevention rule in July 2024 with a comment period that closed Jan. 14, 2025, and a public hearing scheduled for June 16, 2025; that federal proposal applies to heat only and would be triggered when employees are exposed to temperatures over 80 degrees Fahrenheit for more than 15 minutes in any 60-minute period. She also described variations in other states' approaches: California's heat standard (indoor 82°F/ outdoor 80°F) went into effect June 2024; Colorado has an agricultural rule triggered at about 80°F; Minnesota has separate indoor thresholds for heat and cold by work intensity; Oregon and Washington have other targeted rules.

Zadatny advised the committee that Vermont operates a state OSHA plan and that a Vermont rule that is more protective than federal OSHA would require Vermont rulemaking and consultation with the Department of Labor and VOSHA. She recommended that, if the committee moves forward, it consult employers and employees and the Department of Labor to determine whether to place direction in statute or ask an agency to promulgate administrative rules.

Committee members asked whether the bill would cover independent contractors and noted drafting questions about specific temperature triggers and whether the protections should be statutory or regulatory. Casey said he expects committee drafting to determine triggers and scope and offered to provide draft language from model statutes passed in other states.

The committee did not take formal action on the bill during the session. Members heard the short-form introduction and an administrative overview and were told the filing would move into drafting and stakeholder review before any recommendation or vote.

The committee is likely to request input from the Department of Labor, VOSHA, employer and employee representatives, and to track the federal OSHA rulemaking as it proceeds to public hearing in June 2025.","Representative Connor Casey introduced a short-form bill that would create an Extreme Temperature Worker Protection Act to require employers to plan for and reduce worker exposure to extreme heat and cold. Legislative counsel said the filing is short form and federal and state rulemaking detail will shape final requirements.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee reviews proposed amendment to H.461 that would narrow job-protection for employees on unpaid leave

Committee walks through H.173, would grant higher-education employees right to strike

Rep. Connor Casey introduces Extreme Temperature Worker Protection Act to House General & Housing Committee