Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Uninsured Employers Fund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers debate UEF solvency bills as insurers and fund oppose changes to board makeup
Summary
Sen. Bridal and insurers presented bills to shore up the Uninsured Employers Fund with a 0.5% assessment increase, board composition changes and operational clarifications; UEF leadership opposed altering the board balance of labor and management representation.
Sen. Pamela Bridal introduced a package of measures aimed at stabilizing the Maryland Uninsured Employers Fund (UEF) and improving its governance. Senate Bill 695 would expand the UEF board from three to five members and specify experience requirements (property/casualty and finance expertise), impose reserve requirements, and add oversight language. Senate Bill 219 increases the assessment on insured employers by 0.5 percentage points (bringing the total assessment to 1.5%) to replenish UEF reserves. Senate Bill 227 makes administrative changes to how overpayments and credits are handled.
Chesapeake Employers and IWIF supported the package, saying the measures reflect a compromise to avoid repeated legislative bailouts. Carmine D’Alessandro (Chesapeake Employers) described the bills as the product of a legislative work group and urged passage. The Maryland Defense Counsel and municipal representatives also supported the package as increasing stability while protecting “good actor” employers.
Michael Burns, director of the UEF, testified against changing the statutory board makeup. Burns said the current board — historically labor, management and a public member — ensures the fund’s mission to protect workers whose employers failed to obtain insurance. He argued replacing the labor seat with insurance industry expertise would remove worker representation and risk industry capture. Burns recommended either adopting both or none of several amendments (sections L and M in committee text) and warned that giving the Workers’ Compensation Commission direct operational oversight of UEF would be legally improper because the commission is an adjudicatory body.
Sen. Bridal said the measures were developed in a work group and aimed to improve reserves and oversight so “good actors” are not continually assessed for others’ failures. Testimony included a request that the UEF report on the viability of terminating current third‑party administrator contracts and monitoring provisions.
Ending: The bills drew support from carriers and municipalities and opposition from UEF leadership over board composition and statutory oversight. No committee votes are recorded in the transcript on these bills.
