Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Workers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmaker proposes expanding presumptive cancer coverage for firefighters, removing age cap
Summary
Representative Chris Taylor introduced H 661 to add larynx, pharynx and trachea cancers to the firefighters' presumptive list and to remove the age‑65 limit while retaining a 10‑year diagnosis window and a tobacco exclusion; members asked about evidence, insurance and jurisdictional fit.
Representative Chris Taylor introduced H 661 to expand Vermont’s workers’ compensation presumption for firefighter cancers to include cancers of the larynx, pharynx and trachea and to remove an existing age‑65 cap on when a diagnosis may be presumed work related.
"H 661 makes two straightforward updates to Vermont's presumptive cancer statute for firefighters," Taylor said as he introduced the measure, explaining that the additional cancers affect the same respiratory pathway and are plausibly linked to occupational smoke and carcinogen exposure. The bill would keep the existing requirement that the cancer be diagnosed within 10 years of a firefighter's last injurious exposure and would preserve a tobacco‑use exclusion: the presumption does not apply if the firefighter used tobacco within 10 years of diagnosis.
Committee members asked several technical and policy questions: how the presumption interacts with workers' compensation evidence standards (the statute shifts the burden to the employer/carrier to rebut by preponderance of the evidence), whether volunteer or paid firefighters are covered, how smoking or vaping would be assessed, and potential insurance premium impacts for employers and carriers. Sophie Zatney noted guardrails in the draft, including initial screening and a five‑year Vermont service requirement prior to diagnosis.
Members discussed jurisdictional routing because workers' compensation bills sometimes go to a different committee; the chair said staff would consult with clerk and other chairs about whether to retain the bill in General & Housing or request transfer. Several members signaled interest in taking testimony from insurers or subject‑matter experts on actuarial or premium impact before a markup.
Next steps: The chair will consult about committee jurisdiction and whether to take testimony; no vote or formal action was taken at the walk‑through.
