Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Worker Misclassification topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel favors more detailed misclassification reporting language but ties it to funding
Summary
Conference committee members indicated a preference for the House’s more detailed reporting language on worker misclassification but said the report should not be adopted unless funding is provided for new reporting duties.
Conference members discussed language requiring a report on worker misclassification, with the House draft offering more specific metrics and the Senate appearing inclined to accept the House approach — but members said funding must follow any expanded reporting duties.
Representative Greenman, who recalled the task force that produced the recommendations, said the House language “details out the specific metrics” and reflected the work of the misclassification task force. The House authors and the Department of Labor, DEED and Department of Revenue had been involved in crafting that language, she said.
Why it matters: The report would track and analyze contractor/employee misclassification — an issue that affects tax collection, worker protections and benefit access. Authors argued more detailed reporting would help target enforcement and policy decisions.
Committee action: Senators and House members signaled a preference for the House language’s descriptive reporting framework but repeatedly tied adoption to available funding. Chair McEwen and others said they were reluctant to adopt the language formally if the committee could not provide resources for the additional reporting work.
Next steps: Authors and the Department of Labor were asked to confer — with counsel if appropriate — to propose final language and a funding approach the committee could consider alongside appropriation targets.
