MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Commerce and Labor
Seventy-second Session
May 8, 2003
The Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor was called to order by Chairman Randolph J. Townsend, at 8:12 a.m. on Thursday, May 8, 2003, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. The meeting was videoconferenced to the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, Room 4412, 555 East Washington Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman
Senator Warren B. Hardy II, Vice Chairman
Senator Ann O'Connell
Senator Raymond C. Shaffer
Senator Joseph Neal
Senator Michael Schneider
Senator Maggie Carlton
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Scott Young, Committee Policy Analyst
Courtney Wise, Committee Policy Analyst
Kevin Powers, Committee Counsel
Makita Schichtel, Committee Secretary
Maryann Elorreaga, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Lori T. Ashton, Lobbyist, Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
Robert A. Ostrovsky, Lobbyist, Nevada Resort Association and City of Las Vegas
Susan Fisher, Lobbyist, Barrick Gold Corporation
John M. Vergiels, Lobbyist, Nevada Financial Services Association
Alfredo Alonso, Lobbyist, Money Tree, Incorporated
Michael Alonso, Lobbyist, Nevada State Board of Opticians
Samuel P. McMullen, Lobbyist
Raymond C. McAllister, Lobbyist, Professional Firefighters of Nevada
Don Jayne, Lobbyist, Nevada Self Insured Association
John Sande III, Lobbyist, Nevada Bankers Association
Phyllis Kale, Administrative Assistant, Division of Financial Institutions, Department of Business and Industry
Terry Johnson, Labor Commissioner, Office of Labor Commissioner Department of Business and Industry
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 48.
ASSEMBLY BILL 48 (1st Reprint): Provides expressly that certain provisions related to labor include persons unlawfully employed. (BDR 53-601)
Senator O'Connell said it appeared there were conflicting laws. Employers were required to ascertain a prospective employee could legally work in Nevada, prior to employment. However, if the employer hired the employee prior to receiving documentation, the employer was obligated to pay the employee for time worked even if it was later determined the employee could not legally work in Nevada.
Lori T. Ashton, Lobbyist, Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters, said under federal law, an employer had to obtain documentation which established a prospective employee could legally work in the United States. She said A.B. 48 addressed the enforcement of provisions in Nevada law related to such things as wages and hours, workers' compensation, and income taxes, without consideration of alien status of employees. She said some employers had exploited illegal employees by hiring them and then refusing to pay them for hours worked.
Senator Hardy said he supported the intent of the bill but was concerned about a state law that required an employer to pay an illegal employee when federal law prohibited hiring an illegal employee.
Senator Neal said the labor commissioner had tried, unsuccessfully, to deal with the issue through regulation and needed the support of a statute.
Chairman Townsend asked if an employer unknowingly hires a nondocumented worker and subsequently pays the worker, as required by Nevada law, was that prima facie evidence of violation of federal law?
Kevin Powers, Committee Counsel, said, "At this stage I couldn't answer that question. That would require me to investigate the federal law much more closely to determine what evidence was needed."
Chairman Townsend said he thought everyone was in agreement on the intent of the bill but the question about the relationship between federal law and Nevada law should be answered.
Ms. Ashton said she was aware of situations when employees had been terminated from their employment and, at hearing, were not able to get "back pay," for time not worked, because they were not legally able to work in the United States.
Robert A. Ostrovsky, Lobbyist, Nevada Resorts Association and City of Las Vegas, said employers faced overlapping jurisdictions all the time. Federal law and Nevada law were sometimes in conflict. He said he agreed with Mr. Powers' statement the federal law would need to be reviewed to determine if compliance with Nevada law could result in violation of federal law.
Senator Hardy said the issue was employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. He said he would like to see an amendment, which said, "If the employee fraudulently obtained work through false identification, the law would not apply." Employers should not have to pay employees under that circumstance.
Senator O'Connell said she knew of an employer who hired an employee before the necessary documentation had been presented. The employer told the employee he could not be paid until the information was submitted. The employee filed a claim against the employer for nonpayment of wages and the employer was fined.
Mr. Ostrovsky said the employer made the error of hiring an employee before obtaining the proper documentation, which was in violation of law. He said the employee performed labor, however, and should have been paid.
Senator Neal said what needed to be taken into account was the contractual relationship formed when an employee performed a job for an employer. The employer had a common law obligation to pay the employee regardless of the employee's alien status.
Chairman Townsend said the labor commissioner would be available to testify on the bill later in the work session.
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 190.
ASSEMBLY BILL 190 (1st Reprint): Makes various changes related to contractors. (BDR 54-406)
Ms. Ashton said the provision in section 5, subsection 9, was already in Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) so adding the work "knowingly" was unnecessary. She said it would be appropriate to insert "knowingly" in subsection 10.
Senator Hardy said the term "knowingly" should be included in section 5, subsection 1. Ms. Ashton said placing the term in subsection 1 would impact other subsections.
Mr. Powers said, "Looking at the additional language being added to subsection 1, it explains or is providing clarification that it relates to any fraudulent or deceitful act. For an act to be fraudulent or deceitful, there has to be some intentional or knowingly conduct."
Senator Hardy said Ms. Ashton was correct; there was no reason to put "knowingly" in section 5, subsection 9. He said section 4, subsection 1, should clearly reflect an additional hearing would be required prior to suspension of a license. Senator Hardy said section 3, subsection 6, should be modified to, "otherwise receives notification from an official agency."
Chairman Townsend said notification of "substantiated claims for wages," as referenced in section 3, subsection 6, would come from an official agency.
Senator Neal said if the term "knowingly" was to be included in the amendment, the section should be further amended to state "knowingly" had the meaning ascribed to it in NRS.
Senator Hardy said section 5, subsection 10, should be amended to read, "knowingly submitting false information." He said the bill should note "knowingly" had the meaning ascribed to it in NRS.
SENATOR HARDY MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 190.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend closed the work session on A.B. 190 and opened the work session on A.B. 146.
ASSEMBLY BILL 146 (1st Reprint): Revises requirements for licensure as professional engineer or land surveyor. (BDR 54-496)
Senator Carlton referred to the work session document (Exhibit C. Original is on file in the Research Library.) and the amendment under tab A, proposed by Senator Mark E. Amodei, Capital Senatorial District. She said she had worked with Senator Amodei on the composition of the amendment.
Senator Hardy said if the proposed amendment resolved all of the issues of the State Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors making policy decisions, which should be made by the Legislature, he would support the amendment.
Senator Carlton said the amendment required annual reports, described the configuration of the board, and prohibited the board from denying an applicant the ability to sit for a regularly scheduled licensure examination because the board had not reviewed an application.
Courtney Wise, Committee Policy Analyst, said the first line of Senator Amodei's amendment gutted the entire bill and replaced it with new language, which strongly stated the intent of the bill.
SENATOR CARLTON MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 146.
SENATOR SCHNEIDER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend said there would be a subcommittee meeting on A.B. 220 on Monday, May 19, 2003.
ASSEMBLY BILL 220 (1st Reprint): Makes various changes to provisions governing contractors. (BDR 54-502)
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 232.
ASSEMBLY BILL 232 (1st Reprint): Requires establishment of registry of certain telephone numbers and prohibits telephone solicitors from making unsolicited telephone calls to telephone numbers included in registry under certain circumstances. (BDR 52-1073)
Chairman Townsend said the bill would be amended as a whole using the language in Senate Bill (S.B.) 255.
SENATE BILL 255 (1st Reprint): Makes various changes relating to telecommunications. (BDR 52-133)
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 232.
SENATOR O'CONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 280.
ASSEMBLY BILL 280 (1st Reprint): Revises certain provisions governing policies of insurance for motor vehicles. (BDR 57-1090)
SENATOR O'CONNELL MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE A.B. 280.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR CARLTON VOTED NO.)
*****
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 294.
ASSEMBLY BILL 294 (1st Reprint): Makes various changes related to issuance of checks by insurer for payment of industrial insurance benefits. (BDR 53-1122)
Senator O'Connell asked if there was a definition of "restrictive endorsement" in the NRS.
Mr. Powers said:
Mr. Chairman, just in response, that is correct there is no statutory definition of "restrictive endorsement," however, the Uniform Commercial Code, which this state has adopted, does speak of "restrictive endorsement." Ultimately, though, the term is recognized in the common law. It's recognized as "any condition that is imposed on the negotiation of a check." In other words, in this circumstance is what I understand the insurers do, is upon endorsement of the check the disabled worker is acknowledging that they are still disabled. And that is a condition of them endorsing, and therefore, negotiating the check.
SENATOR O'CONNELL MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 294.
SENATOR HARDY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 369.
ASSEMBLY BILL 369 (1st Reprint): Revises provisions governing trade practices between suppliers and dealers of certain equipment and machinery. (BDR 52-1059)
Chairman Townsend said he would hold A.B. 369 until the next work session so the sponsor of the bill, Assemblyman Thomas J. Grady, Assembly District No. 38, could have the opportunity to present the bill.
Chairman Townsend closed the work session on A.B. 369 and opened the work session on A.B. 429.
ASSEMBLY BILL 429 (1st Reprint): Makes various changes relating to net metering and renewable energy. (BDR 58-779)
Chairman Townsend said there were two proposed amendments under tabs A and B of the work session document (Exhibit C). He said the amendment under tab A would be better suited to a different bill because it addressed distributive generation and did not apply to renewable energy. He referred to the amendment under tab B and the proposed language submitted by Fred J. Schmidt, Lobbyist, Southern Nevada Water Authority.
Scott Young, Committee Policy Analyst, said Mr. Schmidt's provisions, which were in green, addressed the energy recovery systems and including them in the definition of renewable energy.
Chairman Townsend read from the proposed amendment under section 8.5, which defined a "qualified energy recovery process."
Mr. Powers said:
Mr. Chairman, before the committee makes a final motion, I have a technical amendment that I need to discuss as well. In A.B. 429, section 6, this section, in identical language, is in A.B. 296 and the committee amended this particular section in A.B. 296, which is to become effective on January 1, 2004. So my advice to the committee is either to make the identical amendment to section 6 that we made in A.B. 296, and make section 6 effective 1/1/2004 or just remove section 6 from this bill.
ASSEMBLY BILL 296 (1st Reprint): Provides multiplier for electricity generated by certain renewable energy systems for purpose of calculating compliance with portfolio standard for renewable energy. (BDR 58‑1163)
Senator Carlton asked if "a qualified energy recovery process" applied to the Qualifying Facilities referenced in the amendment under tab A and if "pumped hydro-generation" meant pumped storage. Chairman Townsend said pumped hydro-generation was different from pumped storage.
Mr. Powers said:
And just for clarification, Mr. Chairman, that provision is providing that a qualified energy recovery process does not include pumped hydro-generation. It's written somewhat circular but it says, "A qualified energy recovery process specifically excludes energy, lost or otherwise, from processes whose primary purpose is the generation of electricity, including by not limited to, engine-driven generation or pumped hydro-generation."
Chairman Townsend said the intent was to clarify what qualified as renewable under the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards.
Susan Fisher, Lobbyist, Barrick Gold Corporation, said Barrick was considering moving a generating facility to Elko because they already had to pump water out of the mine. The water was used for irrigation but could also be used to generate electricity.
Mr. Powers said:
Mr. Chairman, so in sum, the process that was just testified to is included in the definition of "qualified energy recovery process." However, pumped hydro-generation is excluded from the definition of "qualified energy recovery process." So the amendment is to provide or include the type of facility that Barrick is using into the renewable energy portfolio provisions but to not include pumped hydro-generation.
Chairman Townsend said the committee had decided, several years ago, not to include hydro-generation in the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards to encourage the development of geothermal, wind, solar, and biomass sources of energy.
Ms. Fisher said the public would benefit from the Barrick project. She said Barrick could generate up to seven megawatts of power, which would be seven megawatts that Sierra Pacific Power Company would not have to purchase on the open market or generate.
Chairman Townsend said he recommended dealing with the bill and Mr. Schmidt's amendment without consideration of the amendment under tab A.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 429.
SENATOR SHAFFER SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend said A.B. 431 would be held until the next work session.
ASSEMBLY BILL 431 (1st Reprint): Establishes program to provide incentives for installation of certain solar energy systems. (BDR 53-723)
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 433.
ASSEMBLY BILL 433: Makes various changes to provisions regulating persons providing check-cashing and deferred deposit services. (BDR 52-935)
Mr. Young said the proposed amendment was behind the cover sheet for A.B. 433 in the work session document (Exhibit C).
Chairman Townsend reviewed changes in the amendment in section 2, subsection 2, paragraph (a), which limited a processing fee to $10 for canceling a contract.
John M. Vergiels, Lobbyist, Nevada Financial Services Association, said he had met with Senator Townsend and Assemblyman David F. Brown, Assembly District No. 22, the sponsor of the bill, to discuss the issue. They thought the fee would not be collectable in most cases.
Chairman Townsend asked if it was common for a person to enter into a deferred-deposit transaction and then rescind the transaction.
Alfredo Alonso, Lobbyist, Money Tree, Incorporated, said it was rare for his clients to have a transaction rescinded and his client did not charge a fee when they did occur. He said he would oppose a mandatory processing fee.
Chairman Townsend said it appeared the intent was to limit the amount of the processing fee, not to make a fee mandatory.
Kevin Powers said, "You are reading it correctly Mr. Chairman. I think what Mr. Alonso is getting at it would need to read, 'May charge the person a processing fee not to exceed $10.'"
Chairman Townsend referenced section 5, subsection 2, and read, "… the registrant may collect on two such return check fees of $25 regardless of the number of times the check is presented for payment."
Mr. Vergiels said the section had been shortened. The fee could only be processed twice. If a check did not clear a customer's account because of insufficient funds, the registrant would be charged $25 and the charge would be passed on to the customer.
Mr. Vergiels, Mr. A. Alonso, and the committee discussed the new language in sections 6 through 8 of the proposed amendment.
Chairman Townsend suggested a meeting between Mr. Vergiels, Mr. A. Alonso, and Assemblyman Brown to discuss the changes in the amendment. He said A.B. 433 would be addressed at the next scheduled work session.
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 452.
ASSEMBLY BILL 452 (1st Reprint): Makes various changes regarding dispensing opticians. (BDR 54-541)
Senator Carlton said the proposed amendments allowed for an apprenticeship program and addressed administrative fines.
Michael G. Alonso, Lobbyist, Nevada State Board of Opticians, said the apprenticeship program had been put back into the amendment. He said section 4 was based on NRS 637.125, which describes the parameters of supervision of apprentice dispensing opticians. Failure to comply with statutory requirements would result in administrative fines.
Senator Neal asked if the public would be happy with the amendment.
Mr. M. Alonso said the intent of the amendment was to increase the standards for dispensing opticians and to monitor and discipline employers of dispensing opticians. He said the bill would benefit the public.
Samuel P. McMullen, Lobbyist, said he was speaking on behalf of Lenscrafters and thought the public would agree with the amendment. He said the bill gave authority to the Nevada State Board of Opticians to regulate employers of dispensing opticians and apprentice dispensing opticians. Mr. McMullen said Lenscrafters was developing a course of study for dispensing opticians. He said the information regarding that project might be helpful to the committee.
Senator Hardy asked to be kept informed about the progress of the program development. He said it was important to protect the integrity of an apprenticeship program.
Mr. McMullen said the provisions allowing the board to adopt regulations had been put into the bill to help ensure the integrity of apprenticeship programs.
Senator Carlton said Mr. McMullen had provided information regarding the apprenticeship program. It appeared to be a good program.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 452.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 451.
ASSEMBLY BILL 451 (1st Reprint): Provides that certain forms of cancer contracted by firemen are occupational diseases under certain circumstances. (BDR 53-1197)
Chairman Townsend said the bill had been brought forward as the result of concerns about how employers could handle workers' compensation claims for the development of cancer. The intent of the bill was to afford a self-insured employer or the insurer of an employer the opportunity to rebut workers' compensation claims for the development of specific types of cancers. He said involved parties had met with Mr. Powers to craft language, which would meet the concerns of all involved. Chairman Townsend said the result of those efforts was the proposed amendment to A.B. 451 submitted for the committee's consideration (Exhibit D).
Mr. Powers said:
The amendment before you is essentially … the bill as it is now is a one-section bill and this amendment completely replaces the section in the bill. So this is how the bill will look if the amendment is adopted. And then on page 2, that represents the new language that I drafted after being provided with the information by the parties and Mr. Young. And essentially, what the amendment does is addresses the existing statutory framework, which requires the injured employee to prove a series of elements to achieve the rebuttable presumption. And then, once the rebuttable presumption is achieved by the employee, then the insurer can present evidence to rebut that presumption. So what this amendment does for one of those elements, and if you look on page 1 of your amendment, page 1 lines 13 through 17, one of the elements requires the injured employee to prove or that it is demonstrated that he was exposed while in the course of his employment to a known carcinogen that’s as defined by the two agencies and that the carcinogen is reasonably associated with the disabling cancer. So that's one of the elements that the injured employee would have to prove. On page 2, what subsection 2 does is make a legislative policy determination for that particular element that these types of carcinogens shall be deemed to be known carcinogens that are reasonably associated with the specific cancer that's listed through paragraphs (a) through (g) as listed on page 2. It makes clear in subsection 3 of the proposed amendment that that's not an exclusive list. That an employee, on a case-by-case basis, can meet a burden of proof to show that a known carcinogen is reasonably associated with a disabling cancer.
Senator O'Connell said an employee had testified that he had to keep proving the same disability. That was not only very wearing on the employee but totally unnecessary. She asked if the amendment addressed such a situation.
Raymond C. McAllister, Lobbyist, Professional Firefighters of Nevada, said the problem that employee had encountered was establishing the reasonable association between the cancer from which he suffered and the known carcinogens to which he had been exposed. He said the amendment would help establish the reasonable association, but would not expedite the process if an employer rebutted a claim. Mr. McAllister said if insurers accepted some of the claims as reasonable associations, some cases could be accepted more readily.
Senator O'Connell said employees would not always have enough time to get through the claims process. Mr. McAllister said he agreed but did not know how the situation could be remedied.
Chairman Townsend said the amendment was the result of an important effort made by all the involved parties. He said everyone should have an opportunity to respond.
Don Jayne, Lobbyist, Nevada Self Insured Association, said he had worked with Mr. McAllister and Assemblyman John Oceguera, Assembly District No. 16, on the language in the amendment. He said he agreed with and supported the changes in the bill.
Mr. Ostrovsky said he had reviewed the amendment and it met the intent of the committee to provide for a rebuttable presumption. He said he agreed the amendment would not solve the problem of the lengthy appeals process.
Chairman Townsend said Senator O'Connell had raised an important issue. The appeals process should not be lengthy in cases where timing was critical to a medical issue.
Mr. Jayne said a previous bill had provided for the accumulation of statistics, by the Division of Industrial Relations, regarding workers' compensation provisions unique to firefighters and police. He suggested expansion of the process to include data to be evaluated by members of the Legislature.
Chairman Townsend asked for insurers of firefighters and law enforcement personnel to provide suggestions for language to be included in NRS, which would advise administrative hearings officers, appeals officers, district court judges, and Nevada Supreme Court judges to treat time-sensitive claims as priorities.
Mr. Ostrovsky offered to help work on the amendment. He said there were long standing concerns over the lengthy process at the appeals officer level. Past attempts to solve the problem had been unsuccessful. He suggested imposing binding time limits on appeals officers.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 451.
SENATOR O'CONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend said A.B. 453 would be heard at the next scheduled work session.
ASSEMBLY BILL 453 (1st Reprint): Makes various changes to provisions relating to insurance. (BDR 57-546)
Chairman Townsend opened the work session on A.B. 493.
ASSEMBLY BILL 493: Provides for money collected by Commissioner of Financial Institutions and Division of Financial Institutions of Department of Business and Industry to be deposited to and expended from the Fund for Financial Institutions. (BDR 55-463)
Chairman Townsend said he did not understand the need to create a separate fund. He said he had asked for an amendment to be prepared, which had nothing to do with creating a fund. The amendment would address assessments of licensees for the costs of administrative investigations.
John Sande III, Lobbyist, Nevada Bankers Association, said the bill was not necessary to set up a separate fund. The Division of Financial Institutions had a general fund for paying expenses. The amendment would provide for all financial institutions to pay their assessments early in the year so there were sufficient funds to pay expenses throughout the year, including assessments from the Office of the Attorney General.
Chairman Townsend said it made sense to assess those members that used the services of the Attorney General instead of a general assessment for all members.
Senator O'Connell asked if the attorney general was billing for past services that had not been properly billed.
Phyllis Kale, Administrative Assistant, Division of Financial Institutions, Department of Business and Industry, said the attorney general assessment went back to fiscal year 2000.
Senator O'Connell asked if bills from the attorney general's office reflected a billed amount associated with a performance of duty. Ms. Kale said no billing or breakdown of charges was submitted. The division was given notice when an assessment had been deducted from the budget.
Chairman Townsend said he had requested an amendment because of the situation with the assessments. The amendment would require fair and accurate assessments.
Chairman Townsend presented Bill Draft Request (BDR) R-1287.
BILL DRAFT REQUEST (BDR) R-1287: Directs Legislative Commission to conduct interim study of geoexchange technology. (Later introduced as Senate Concurrent Resolution (S.C.R.) 37.)
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO INTRODUCE BDR R-1287.
SENATOR O'CONNELL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
Chairman Townsend called a recess of the work session at 10:09 a.m. and reconvened the work session at 10:30 a.m.
Chairman Townsend reopened the work session on A.B. 48. He asked if an employer paid an employee for work and then discovered the employee was not documented, had the employer violated a federal law.
Terry Johnson, Labor Commissioner, Office of Labor Commissioner, Department of Business and Industry, said federal law would be violated only if an employer knowingly and willfully hired a worker who was not eligible to work in the United States.
Senator O'Connell asked if an undocumented employee could file a claim for unemployment insurance benefits and if the employer would be penalized if he had hired an employee believing the employee could legally work in the United States.
Mr. Johnson said an employer is required to verify a prospective employee's eligibility to work in the United States prior to hiring the employee. He said if an employer had acted in good faith to try to verify an employee's eligibility to work in the United States, the labor commissioner often dismissed claims for benefits from an employee.
Senator O'Connell said she wanted to be sure employers had due process if they had acted in good faith trying to verify an employee's eligibility to work in the United States, and later learned the employee was not eligible but paid the employee for time worked.
Mr. Johnson said he could not say what the federal government would enforce. He said his opinion was if an employer could demonstrate a good-faith effort to verify eligibility of an employee to work in the United States, penalties for hiring and paying the worker might be waived.
Senator Hardy asked if there should be a provision in the amendment, which would prevent an employee from receiving unemployment insurance benefits if the employee had used false information to obtain employment.
Mr. Johnson said the Legislature might want to make a policy statement that enforcement of labor laws would not be enforced if an employee had provided fraudulent documents to establish employment eligibility.
Senator Hardy said he thought more research of the federal law was needed. He said if employers felt there was too much liability they would stop hiring employees that were potentially illegal aliens.
Chairman Townsend said there may be other bills that could be amended to reflect consequences if an employee obtained employment illegally.
Mr. Johnson said he agreed with Senator Hardy; additional time was needed to evaluate the federal law and the appropriateness of adding the language suggested by Senator Hardy.
Senator Neal asked if Mr. Johnson had dealt with undocumented workers on a regulatory basis. Mr. Johnson said he had entered administrative decisions, which stated an employee must be paid for time worked whether or not they were documented employees. He had not been involved in administrative regulations.
Senator Hardy said if an employee performs work they should be paid. If an employee obtained employment fraudulently, the employee should not be able to draw unemployment insurance benefits or be rehired.
Senator Neal asked if Senator Hardy's recommendation would affect Mr. Johnson's order.
Mr. Johnson said Senator Hardy's statement regarding payment for work performed was consistent with his decision. He said NRS 612.448 addressed eligibility for unemployment insurance benefits based on an employee's alien status. Mr. Johnson said he did not think the recommended language would harm the enforcement position of the labor commissioner.
SENATOR HARDY MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 48.
SENATOR CARLTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
*****
There being no further business before the committee, Chairman Townsend adjourned the work session at 10:54 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Maryann Elorreaga,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Randolph J. Townsend, Chairman
DATE: