Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the S89 Survivors Benefit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House committee hears evidence to expand survivors benefit for more frontline workers
Summary
Witnesses told the House Committee on General and Housing that S89 would extend a state survivors benefit now available to firefighters to other front-line state employees and some roles not covered by the federal firefighter benefit; testimony covered how state life and AD&D insurance work, participation and costs, and a treasurer proposal to let the fund hire experts to evaluate occupation-related illness claims.
Montpelier — The House Committee on General and Housing heard testimony April 2 on S89, a bill to broaden the state—mergency Personnel Survivors Benefit to additional categories of public employees, including law enforcement, corrections, family services and certain mental health workers.
Clark Collins, deputy director of benefits and wellness in the Department of Human Resources, told the committee the legislative language in S89, as drafted, would not automatically change the structure of the state—ase life insurance and accidental death and dismemberment (AD&D) programs for eligible state employees. "Our life insurance benefit ... is two times your annual salary," Collins said, and "accidental death and dismemberment would include an additional two times," creating a potential four-times-salary payout for covered accidental deaths. He said base and AD&D coverage are automatic for state employees at hire unless they choose to opt out, that premiums are salary-based and relatively small ("about a dollar or two a paycheck" for many employees), and that less than 1% of employees opt out.
Beth Basting, commissioner of the Department of Human Resources, said the state procures the coverage through a competitive bid process and recently switched carriers to The Standard. She said the state pays about 75% of the base life premium while employees pay 25%; supplemental buy-up coverage (allowing four-, six- or eight-times salary and dependent coverage) is fully employee-paid. Basting said roughly 700–800 employees participate in the supplemental program out of more than 8,000 eligible employees and that retirees who meet eligibility receive a one-time $10,000 death benefit paid by the retirement office.
Steve Howard, executive director of the Vermont State Employees Association, urged lawmakers to approve S89 on equity grounds. He said the bill would give survivors of certain state employees the same state-level recognition now afforded to many firefighters and highlighted that some categories that the Senate added are "dominated primarily by women," which he described as an equity consideration. "This is about equity with law enforcement, corrections officers," Howard said, and "it—ould be important to children or spouses who are left behind." He called the statutory $80,000 benefit modest in fiscal terms but meaningful to families.
The treasurer epartment, represented by Deputy Treasurer David Sher, supported the concept but flagged an administrative issue: the fund pays under two paths — death in the line of duty, which is generally straightforward, and occupation-related illness (for example, certain cancers or heart events), which can be harder to attribute to a job outside firefighter presumptions that exist in workers' compensation law. Sher said, "in the last two years there has been four payouts" and that the office has relied on workers' compensation presumptions when deciding firefighter cancer claims. Because those presumptions do not exist for many other job classes, Sher and his office proposed allowing the survivors fund board to pay reasonable fees from the fund to hire medical, actuarial or other experts to review occupation-related illness applications on a case-by-case basis; he offered draft language to add that authority to the statutes (proposed additions to sections 3172 and 3175).
Committee members pressed witnesses on several points: how AD&D is applied when illnesses like cancer develop over time, whether town or volunteer firefighters or non-state employees would be covered (Collins said only employees on state payroll are enrolled), and how to draw fair lines around which hazardous jobs qualify for the benefit. Several members asked whether existing federal benefits for firefighters — cited as substantial by one member — should factor into who the state covers. Howard and other proponents said the state—enefit is an equity and moral recognition that should extend to other public-facing jobs that carry elevated risk.
For the record, witnesses agreed to provide follow-up materials: Collins said he would supply the vendor's policy documentation and a written analysis of how S89 benefits interact with workers' compensation; Beth Basting said the department could provide historical payout counts and participation details; and Sher said he would transmit the treasurer's proposed statutory language. The committee broke for the floor and plans to resume the hearing after lunch with police officers expected to testify.
The hearing produced no committee vote during the recorded session. The committee will consider the treasurer's proposed language and any additional amendments as it prepares next steps.
