Labor and Public Employees Committee hears broad slate of worker-protection bills; survivors press limits on nondisclosure agreements

The Connecticut General Assembly’s Labor and Public Employees Committee held a public hearing March 3 on a wide package of worker‑protection bills, hearing federal‑compliance and workforce governance testimony from agency officials, survivors’ accounts and union pleas for stronger safeguards across health care, building services and schools.

Kelly Marie Velez Velaris, chief workforce officer and vice chair of the Governor’s Workforce Council, told the committee the state’s workforce board is currently out of compliance with federal WIOA requirements and said raised Bill 346 would add business members, include a vocational rehabilitation representative and cap membership at 61 to restore a business majority and allow Connecticut’s WIOA plan to proceed. “Without this approval, federal WIOA funds are at risk,” Velez Velaris said, citing annual WIOA funding of roughly $30–$34 million.

Survivors and advocates urged limits on nondisclosure agreements. Janelle Grant, who described herself as a survivor of workplace assault, testified — through counsel — in support of SB 355, which would void NDA provisions that bar employees from disclosing conduct they reasonably believe to be discrimination, harassment, retaliation or assault. Grant described being prevented from speaking about alleged misconduct and urged the committee to remove procedural barriers that require some claims to be exhausted at the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO) before court access. An attorney testifying with Grant argued NDAs and mandatory arbitration can “function primarily to protect the employer, not the employee.”

Cheryl Sharp, deputy executive director of CHRO, joined support for SB 355 and separately endorsed SB 345 (breastfeeding in the workplace) and SB 353 (reasonable workplace accommodations for menopause). Sharp said narrowing statutory ambiguity — for example explicitly allowing employees to express breast milk at the time it is needed rather than only during a scheduled break — would reduce litigation and better protect workers.

Unions pressed several bills intended to protect low‑wage service workers and building‑service employees when contracts change hands. SEIU 32BJ and other witnesses supported SB 358, a 90‑day retention provision for building service workers following contractor transitions and a required notice to employees. Testimony from members and union representatives recounted cases where entire crews were displaced overnight and argued the measure mirrors successful laws in other states.

Paycheck transparency and payroll rules drew bipartisan attention. Representative Liz Linehan and other witnesses described House Bill 53 86 to require clearer pay‑stub information and called out pay‑code complexity and differentials that can hide wage errors. Contractors and building trades backed SB 356, which would require electronic certified payroll filing and daily site logs for certain public projects; construction witnesses and municipal members asked for clarifications on portal buildout, data security and timing of submissions (proposal language under discussion would require daily logs filled out and submitted weekly, with electronic certified payrolls uploaded monthly and phased in by December 2027).

Health‑care worker safety and compensation featured across testimony. Dozens of nurses, health‑care union leaders and public‑safety representatives supported sections of HB 5003 that would provide wage continuation for assaulted health workers, add safety flags to the statewide health information exchange so critical safety information follows patients, and extend survivor health benefits for families of certain public servants. Witnesses said workers’ compensation (typically about 75% wage replacement) does not fully make assaulted workers financially whole and that a targeted statutory fix could reduce the risk that injured staff leave the field.

Education witnesses — school teachers, union leaders and labor attorneys — urged adoption of a just‑cause standard and binding neutral arbitration for teacher terminations (bills including SB 351). Attorneys representing unions described the current tenured‑teacher hearing system, in which a hearing officer’s finding is only a recommendation to the local board, and said that practice denies teachers the same due process given to other public employees. Several witnesses described teachers who resigned rather than pursue hearings because board decisions can later overturn hearing‑officer recommendations.

Business groups and insurers offered counterpoints. The Connecticut Business and Industry Association and the Insurance Association cautioned that some bills (notably SB 355 on NDAs and statutory expansions of compensable time in SB 345) could create broad litigation risk or operational burdens. Industry testimony urged clearer drafting, safe harbors and cost estimates for implementation (for instance, for an electronic payroll portal in SB 356).

Committee chairs and members repeatedly pressed witnesses for specifics and asked agency representatives to follow up with implementation details, cost estimates and drafting suggestions. The hearing paused for a weather‑related recess; the committee said it will continue remote testimony and follow up work during its next meetings.

What’s next: No formal votes occurred during the hearing. Committee members asked sponsors, agencies and stakeholders to submit technical fixes and cost information ahead of markup. Several members signaled bipartisan interest in narrower compromise language on NDAs, breastfeeding and service‑worker retention; other proposals will likely need more drafting to address concerns about funding, data security and administrative feasibility.

Ending: The committee recessed for weather and signaled plans to reconvene remotely to finish remote testimony and collect written technical comments before advancing bills to the next stage.