Committee hears bill to let port payroll agent collect paid-leave premiums for dock workers

The Labor & Commerce Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 5191, a proposal to change how paid family and medical leave (PFML) premiums are collected for longshore and waterfront workers who perform work for multiple employers. Committee staff described the bill as one that would recognize an employer representative — the Pacific Maritime Association — as the reporting and premium-collection entity for dock workers covered by collective bargaining arrangements so workers are not charged premiums multiple times in a given wage year.

Susan Jones, committee staff, summarized the existing PFML system and the mechanics the bill would change, including that premiums are assessed on wages up to the Social Security taxable wage base and that employers currently report quarterly. Jones said the fiscal note estimates about $5 million in cash receipts to the family medical leave trust fund for fiscal years 2025–29 and implementation expenses of approximately $30,000; she said Employment Security Department (ESD) expects a small increase in revenue where impacted union members would be considered employees of a large employer rather than small employers that are exempt from employer premiums.

Supporters from the maritime industry and the union testified they have long used a single weekly paycheck administered by the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) as a payroll agent to avoid excessive tax withholdings and to simplify pay for workers who work across multiple employers. Kristin Olivera, senior legal counsel for PMA, explained that PMA has operated as a payrolling agent for federal and state tax reporting since 1949 and said the statutory change would align PFML collection with long-standing payroll practice. “The primary purpose of SB 5191 is to benefit the dock workers by protecting them from making premium overpayments,” she told the committee.

Labor representatives also supported the bill. Cameron Williams, representing the ILWU Coast Longshore Division, and Dan McKissen, president of the Washington Area District Council, said the change would prevent overcollection of premiums and simplify administration for employers and workers; McKissen read a member’s account describing delays in receiving PFML benefits because the program did not recognize PMA as the employer for certain administrative steps.

ESD staff briefed the committee on PFML basics, eligibility and rates. Commissioner Cammie Feek and John Matz (assistant director, Leave and Care Division) explained that employees qualify for PFML after meeting an hours threshold (820 hours in the qualifying period) and that ESD calculates an annual premium rate (0.92% for 2025 as stated during the work session). ESD staff told senators the bill would simplify administration and that implementation costs would not be large; they also noted the change could move some workers from small-employer exemptions into the large-employer base, which is the reason for the fiscal-note revenue estimate.

Committee members asked ESD whether other industries have similar multi-employer payroll arrangements that should be considered for a broader fix; ESD said it would follow up with data. Senators also asked about any material programmatic or fiscal impacts. ESD staff indicated program impacts are limited and administrative work to implement the change is modest; the fiscal note reflects a small increase in receipts due to employer-size classification changes for affected workers.

The committee closed the public hearing after supporters and agency staff testified; there was no committee vote recorded at the hearing. Sponsors and staff said they would follow up on any technical drafting issues and any potential similar situations in other industries.

— Ending — No final committee action was taken during the hearing; staff and sponsors will continue technical work and follow-up with ESD on implementation questions.