Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workplace Safety Extreme Temperatures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rep. Connor Casey introduces Extreme Temperature Worker Protection Act to House General & Housing Committee
Summary
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.
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.
