NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
SPONSOR: |
Papen |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
|
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Workers’ Comp for State Defense Force |
SB |
739/aSCORC |
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Collard |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
NFI |
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Responses
Received From
Workers’
Compensation Administration
Department
of Military Affairs
SUMMARY
Synopsis of SCORC Amendment
The
Senate Corporations and Transportation Committee removes the section of the
bill pertaining to state-ordered militia “traveling directly to or from that
duty,” as discussed below.
Synopsis of Original Bill
Senate Bill 739 extends workers’ compensation
benefits to members of the state defense force when the members are on
“state-ordered militia duty” or are traveling “to or from that duty.” The “employer” under state law would be the
Department of Military Affairs.
OTHER
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
The Workers’ Compensation Advisory Council
tabled this bill at the last meeting, but the council is anticipated to endorse
it at the next meeting on
Significant
Issues
This bill is similar to Section
FISCAL
IMPLICATIONS
There is no appropriation or significant fiscal
impact associated with this bill.
ADMINISTRATIVE
IMPLICATIONS
The Department of Military Affairs indicates
this bill will increase state defense force efficiency, recruitment and
membership because members serving in an authorized duty status would have
confidence of insurance coverage if injured on the job. The department also indicates a small
increase in the responsibility of the administration for workers’ compensation
claims.
The Workers’ Compensation Administration indicates
that the coverage for the state defense force is limited, so the likelihood of
significant administrative impacts is small.
TECHNICAL
ISSUES
The Department of Military Affairs has spoken with
the sponsor and notes on page 1, lines 19 and 20, “or is traveling directly to
or from that duty” should be deleted.
OTHER
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
The Department of Military Affairs indicates
this bill would provide for Worker’s Compensation coverage for state defense
force members who could be injured when activated by the adjutant general or
the governor. The state defense force has not been placed on state-ordered
militia duty for over 20 years. There are currently 85 state defense force
members; they average 52.5 years of age. The department also notes there is no
history of state-ordered militia duty, therefore it is difficult to project
workers’ compensation claims. However, assuming 85 state defense force members
were activated on state-ordered militia duty for an entire year, the department
would expect five or six workers’ compensation claims for that period. The Department of Military Affairs supports
enactment of this legislation.
The
Workers’ Compensation Advisory Council has had a process in place for several
years for the review of proposed legislation affecting the workers’
compensation system, pursuant to its statutory mandate. The prior council had a series of public
meetings during the summer of 2002 where legislative proposals for this session
were discussed. At the council’s
request, proposals involving changes to workers' compensation benefits were
analyzed for their costs by the Workers' Compensation Administration research
staff, the National Council on Compensation Insurance and New Mexico Mutual
Casualty Company. This proposal has
never been submitted to or reviewed by either the former or current Workers’
Compensation Advisory Council. It is the position of the current Workers’
Compensation Advisory Council that, at the present time, it opposes this
bill. The bill will likely be reviewed
on February 26.
KBC/njw:sb