Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workers Compensation Firefighters topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah House rejects bill creating presumptive workers—-compensation coverage for firefighter cancers
Summary
After lengthy debate about costs, legal standards and advisory review, the House voted 38-35 against HB150, which would have created a rebuttable presumption that certain cancers in firefighters were job-related.
Get email alerts on the Workers Compensation Firefighters topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Utah House on the floor defeated House Bill 150, which would have created a rebuttable presumption that certain cancers and related illnesses in firefighters were work-related for workers' compensation purposes. Sponsor Representative Joseph Murray said the measure would align Utah with roughly 20 other states and address cases in which firefighters face conflicting determinations from private insurers and the workers' compensation system.
"This is a bill that is pointed at a group of people who are exposed to health and physical hazards every day they go to work," Murray said on the floor, noting other jurisdictions have adopted similar presumptions. He told colleagues the bill was intended to help emergency responders who may otherwise be left to pursue private litigation.
Opponents said the measure posed legal and fiscal risks and urged more study. Representative Snow noted the bill creates a class of claimants with a shifted burden of proof — from the worker to the fund — and urged caution. Representative Alexander noted the Workers' Compensation Advisory Council had not fully evaluated the proposal and cited a Labor Commission letter urging the Legislature to withhold action. Representative Urquhart clarified that the bill would create a "rebuttable presumption" requiring carriers or employers to show an alternative cause if they wish to deny a claim.
After extensive floor debate and questions about constitutional and fiscal consequences, the House voted 35 yes and 38 no; the bill failed and will be filed. Lawmakers who opposed the bill said they favored further review by advisory bodies and clearer fiscal analysis before adopting a presumption with statewide liabilities.
