 |
|
     |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
||||||||||||
PIAVT 2017 legislative wrap-up
By Sarah Coli, Esq.
The two-year session of the state Legislature began Jan. 4. The legislative process is similar to that of the federal government. Each state congressman/congresswoman introduces legislation into their respective house, where it goes through the committee process and then a floor vote. In order for a bill to pass, it must be read three times to the representative body in order to introduce the bill. then they must vote on any amendments and vote on the final version of the bill.
Once the Senate or the House has voted on the bill, it moves through the same process in the opposite house. Should the opposite house make any substantial changes, the bill returns to its originating chamber for a vote on the amendments. If the amendments are not accepted, then a Committee of Conference is created to meet and resolve the differences.
In the time since the legislative session began, the state Senate and House of Representatives have introduced hundreds of bills on various topics. PIAVT has been tracking several proposals that could affect insurance producers as both employers and producers.
A bill that would lay out a paid-family-leave plan (H.196) passed the House earlier this month. The House version creates two types of family leave that run concurrently for applicable employers. The first is the family-medical leave that allows for 12 weeks unpaid leave for employees whose employers have 10 or more employees that work an average of 30 hours a week. The second is parental and family-leave insurance, which allows for six weeks of paid leave to all employees who have been employed for at least 12 months. For both types, leave is granted for family situations such as pregnancy; birth, adoption or foster-care placement of a child; or the serious illness of an immediate family member. The Senate is expected to take on the proposal in January.
A proposal (H.143) that would impose insurance requirements for ride-hailing companies passed the House Feb. 10. The minimum liability coverage proposed in the House version during Phase 1, which is when the driver is logged onto the ride-hailing app and is available to accept a ride request, is $50,000 per person for bodily injury or death $100,000 per incident for bodily injury or death, and $25,000 for property damage. During Phases 2 and 3, which begin when the driver accepts a ride request and terminates when the passenger has exited the vehicle, the liability limits increase to $1 million combined single limit.
The Senate received the proposal in February, and its Judiciary Committee released proposed amendments in April. These amendments included increasing the proposed minimum liability limits during Phase 1 to $100,000 per person for bodily injury or death, $300,000 per incident for bodily injury or death and $25,000 for property damage. During Phases 2 and 3, the liability limits remain $1 million combined single limit. The committee also increased the minimum uninsured/underinsured motorists requirements to $1 million and included a $10,000 medical payments coverage minimum limit. The Senate’s proposal was ordered for a third reading on May 5 and is pending a final vote. Should the limit requirements remain as proposed, the proposal will return to the House in January for reconsideration.
PIAVT also is tracking H.119, which would change the current definition of independent contractor for workers’ compensation purposes. The proposal has been referred to the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee, in which it has been read once and no further action has been taken.
One proposal moved through both chambers rather quickly this session. H.85 passed the House in March and recently passed the Senate. Gov. Phil Scott signed the bill into law May 1. The bill strengthens Vermont’s captive insurance laws in a variety of areas, including accounting principles, governance standards, expanded dormancy qualifications and the addition of agency captives. An agency captive is a reinsurance company controlled by an insurance agency or brokerage. This agency captive then receives a share of the premiums written through a reinsurance agreement with a traditional insurer, and also is obligated to pay its share of claims. The idea behind the proposal is to create long-term relationships between the agency and the insured by aligning their interests in such areas as risk appetite, selection, pricing, loss control and claims management.
The Legislature adjourned May 18, 2017, and will resume its session in January 2018. 7/17
