The new Connecticut legislative session kicked off this week, and there are lots of expectations as to what bills may stand a chance of consideration this year.
I recently sat down with Chris Davis, Vice President of Public Policy with the Connecticut Business and Industry Association (CBIA), to discuss what issues are likely to be
Earlier this week, Governor Ned Lamont issued a press release supporting Senate Bill 12 which would dramatically expand the scope of the state’s current Paid Sick Leave law.
Currently, Paid Sick Leave is available to “service workers” at certain employers with 50 or more employees. Passed in 2011, the law requires that these workers receive
The 2018 session of the General Assembly started last week and increasing workplace training is a top priority for passage.
Indeed, it is not surprising that we’re starting to see the first proposed legislation to address the number of harassment claims that have been making headlines the last six months.
Governor’s Bill 5043 sets up
My law partner, Gabe Jiran, talks today about whether it’s all that easy to change the terms of a collective bargaining agreement. Is it just as easy as a vote? Or does it require something more? The answer has implications for all employers.
With all of the talk about the financial difficulties faced by the
The Connecticut General Assembly is back in session and with significant budget deficits looming, it’s not going to be an easy year for legislators.
From a labor and employment law session, once again it will be interesting to see what will be seriously considered.
A Bloomberg Law article late last week suggested that Democrats in
The dust has finally settled from the close of the Connecticut General Assembly on Wednesday. And it’s time to take a look at the last few days to see what employment law bills passed.
(I’ll tackle the changes that have been made to the CHRO in a post later today.)
As I’ve noted in
The snow may have stalled work in the state for a few days, but the Connecticut General Assembly is now in full swing with bills now being discussed and debated.
So far, the list of bills filed before the Labor & Public Employee Committee is small but that is expected to grow soon with bills
One of the bills that passed the Connecticut General Assembly last year was a bill that would have limited the scope and use of noncompete agreements.
But as I noted in a post last summer, Governor Malloy vetoed that piece of legislation.
In his veto message, however, he signaled a willingness to agree to
The short session of the Connecticut General Assembly is set to begin on February 5, 2014.
But the jockeying for items to get on the agenda is well under way. The Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities is circulating a proposed bill that would followup on a failed bill from last year’s term.
I previously discussed this proposal in a post last May.
At the time, the proposed bill was thought to be close to passage, but time ran out in the session before it could be picked up. Earlier versions the bill proved quite troublesome; this latest version still has issues that haven’t been addressed and it’s important for employers to speak up now before the changes are put into place.
So what are some of the changes this bill would bring?
Changes to “Mental Disability”
The bill expands the definition of a “mental disability” to not only “mental disorders, as defined in the most recent edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s ‘Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders’”, but also to including having “a record of or regarding a person as having one or more such disorders”.
Put aside, for the moment whether including everything in the new DSM5 is worthwhile. The more troubling issue is that the proposed law would continue to cover “regarded as” claims for mental disabilities. The references to a “past history” of mental disability in existing law being removed by this bill are less significant because a “record” of disability would now be covered.
Why is that problematic? Becaues that the definition is inconsistent with how a “physical” disability is treated; where is the reference to being “regarded” as having a physical disability?
Rather than continue to treat mental and physical disabilities as distinct from each other, the legislature should take its cues from the ADA and match its definitions accordingly. Otherwise, we’ll continue to have three different standards to analyze disability claims — one for ADA claims, and two for state disability-related claims.Continue Reading Legislative Preview: Will the CHRO Bill Get Passed This Year?
The dust is still settling from the mad dash that is the end of the Connecticut General Assembly session.
I’ll have more in the upcoming days as events warrant, but here’s a quick look at a few items that I’ve been tracking in recent weeks.