Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Monique Priestley (Clerk)]: We are live.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: Good morning, everyone. This is the Brahma House Committee on Commerce and Economic Development. It is Thursday, 03/26/2026 at 09:05 in the morning. We're beginning our day today, continuing our discussions on S-one 173, which is an act relating to vocational rehabilitation. So we have Matt Piper and Amanda Arnold with us from Higher Ability. Matt, Amanda, good morning. Thank you for joining us.

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: Good morning. Great to be here.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: So I think we know that HireAbility provides a prescreening for workers, injured workers that may require vocational rehabilitation. And so I guess we'd like to committee we need committee would better would like to better understand FireAbility's role in in the pre screenings, how they work. Do you have any data on how many people that you look at and how many of those are then sent on to to Voc Rehab and others that that that may not that are determined not to need Voc Rehab.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: Good good morning, and thank you again for having us. I'm Nat Piper with HireAbility Vermont and work for the state of Vermont, happily so, and I am the business legislative and community outreach manager, and I will pass this over to Amanda in just a moment. We do some data, and we're happy to share the process, and, of course, any questions that we can answer here today, or if there's questions that we can't answer, but we can certainly track them down and get back to you on. So thank you, everyone, so very much. And I'd like to just turn it over to Amanda at this point. And good morning, Amanda. Nice to see you.

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yeah, good morning. Thanks for having I us this think we'll be able to answer some of your questions here today, and then there's probably a bit more follow-up that we can do to get you some specific data on some of the questions you have. But to give kind of a general overview of the process that an injured worker might experience is that the report comes in, we have a centralized staff person who fields all of those screenings, and then we have a few counselors throughout the state that are assigned each screening and do a follow-up call both with the injured worker and the employer to get a bit more information about the situation that happened, any medical intervention that's happened with the injured worker, if there's sort of an expected timeline on when this person might be able to return to work, if the employer has suitable work while the injured worker is in recovery or seeking medical attention. And so all of that sort of gets compiled into a nice narrative summary. I think there was an example that had gotten passed around hopefully to the committee as well. If not, we can share one with you. But all that's compiled. And then I don't have the data. I don't know, Nat, if you were sort of thinking you might have some on the percentage of participants that we reach out to that are deemed eligible for vocational rehabilitation services and the percentage that are in recovery, have recovered, or just don't meet that eligibility requirement. But that's certainly something we can follow-up with for more specifics. But that's kind of the 10,000 foot view of how this works. But I'd pause there for Nat if you want to add anything or if anybody has any questions.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: You're muted, Matt.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: I'd tell you, five years of Zoom meetings, I'll figure it out. You give me five years, I'll get the data done. So we have a bit of data, and you may seek more. We may have more data to offer, but this was from someone in our admin role who just is crackerjack and said, The screenings completed in calendar year 2025 were 139. Total found eligible to receive an entitlement assessment to VR was 53. Total not found eligible to receive an entitlement assessment to VR was 86. It appears that we currently have five counselors doing the screening. And then we have two individuals, Wendy Madigan and Sarah Jane Burlington, that share the admin, the administrative services that are associated with this. I think that one of the things that Diane Domas, who was our director, had sent over to us as well, workers' comp regs require an injured worker, and I apologize for reading this, I cannot commit it to memory, so I'm just going to read this to the committee. Workers' comp regs require injured worker to be screened for a VR entitlement assessment at least ninety days post injury. The Department of Labor asked We are in statute of vocational rehabilitation, so DOL asked DVR, that's us, to pick up this work because we have no conflict of interest, and that's one key element. Then we do have qualified staff who can conduct the assessments. There are only three possible outcomes from the screening process. The worker is expected to return to their old job or equivalent. The worker is not expected to return to their old job and should be referred for VR entitlement assessment. Or the third, medical treatment is not complete. Review again in ninety days. The last piece that she sends along is once our report is completed, the report is sent to the Department of Labor, the injured worker, and the insurance company. The insurance company also receives an invoice, and we have a nominal fee to provide this service. So that's kind of what we have, but I think Amanda, correct me if I'm wrong, you maybe have, I don't know if you have done, Amanda was a counselor prior to being the deputy director, so I forgot to mention that. But have you done this before, Amanda? If they have more in-depth questions, we might be able to answer some more for them.

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yeah, I'd certainly welcome any questions. I did a bit of this as a counselor. That was quite a while ago now, although I think the process is still very similar to how it was back then, because it's a pretty basic and straightforward process. But I think the way that Nat has described it is exactly how it sort of moves along through the chain.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: Matt, thank you. Could you We don't have anything in writing. Can you repeat those numbers for us? I didn't have my pen in my hand when you started Sure.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: And if it would help the committee, I can also email some of this over before close of business today, if that would help as well.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: That would be great. If you could do both.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yes, certainly. Screenings completed in the calendar year of 2025 is one hundred and thirty nine. The total number found eligible to receive an entitlement assessment to VR is 53. That left a total that was not found eligible to receive an entitlement assessment to VR at 86. And again, we currently have five counselors performing this and two individuals in our admin team that have to provide the duties that come along with that.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: And these are those initial screenings that have to happen in that first ninety days?

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: That's my understanding. Amanda, is that your understanding as well?

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yes, that's correct.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: Okay.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: And then, so you said that there are three categories?

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yes.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: So you have eligible was 53, and then there are two other categories.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: So the categories, so yes, well, there's three possible outcomes, right? So let's review the outcomes one more time, is that when we do the screening process, so we had 53 that were eligible to receive the assessment.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: Yep.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: That left 86 of that 139 that were found not eligible to receive the assessment. When you look at the three possible outcomes from the screening process, it's either returning to your old job or an equivalent position, not expected to return to the old job and should be referred for the VR entitlement assessment, or medical treatment is not complete, review again in ninety days. Again, I'm more than happy to send this along, and I'm assuming, I do have the right email to send it to, so I'll make sure we get this over to you. Amanda did refer to, there is a PDF of an example, I believe, that we can also provide with those numbers, if that helps.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: Sorry, this is brand new to me, so I just want to make sure I really understand it. Those 53 people who were found eligible are now eligible for the screening that will put them into one of those three categories. But the ones who are ineligible, those 86 folks, what happens to them? How does that And if I don't understand it, correct me.

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: So the 86 are likely falling into that category where they're expected to return to their work or an equivalent. So therefore don't necessarily need vocational rehabilitation services.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: What would happen to, a worker that returns to their employer, the same employer, but can't return to the same job and that are offered a job that's paying less money?

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: I think that's especially when the private VR companies get involved, because the goal is that the worker returns to the same level of work, meaning the same similar earnings to what they had been doing. And so that could be returning to work for their same employer doing something in a different capacity, but at a similar wage. And if that's not possible, then we would they would be supported to look elsewhere so that they were doing something, earning a similar wage.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: I'd like to just make the distinction that, again, Amanda and I work for the State of Vermont for the Division of Book Rehab hireability. When you get into the private rehab world, I think our goals are the same. We have a common goal. We want people to go to work, but our process differs, I would say, quite a bit. There's Yes, quite a difference between public sector voc rehab, which is us, and then private sector rehab, which is not us, candidly.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: Understood. But in the pre screening, I mean, you would have to determine that in pre screening that they're they can return to their employer, but in a different job because they're not able to perform the same job. And then, so then it becomes whether or not they're in the same wage level or not. So if they're not in it, if they're in the lower wage level, at that point, would would you would you recommend Voc Rehab?

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yes, of course.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: Okay. And I think, you know, a proposition in s one seventy three is to eliminate prescreening and just to go to to private rehab facilities. And so I'm just wondering, you know, does does hire ability feel that the prescreenings are valuable?

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yeah. I think what we have seen is that because we have no conflict of interest, the prescreenings are a very objective way to look at what's happening both for the injured worker and whether there's a place at their previous employer that they could return to. And so I think when we eliminate the prescreenings, we run the risk that everyone could seek private vocational rehabilitation, which in some cases, any support to help people go back to work is not a bad thing. But I think that it lacks sort of the very non partisan objective overview of what's happening for both parties involved. I think as long as there's not a bottleneck, we don't want to delay the process for someone to return to work. And so far, with capacity that we have to do the screenings, we haven't seen a significant bottleneck in that process for the injured worker.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: Great. Did you testify in Senate Economic Development on S-one 173?

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: We have not done.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: K. Questions? Other questions?

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: In

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: Can you tell us the counselors that are doing the pre screenings, the kind of education that they receive? Do they have certifications? Are there certain, you know, how I guess, how does that what kind of qualifications do the counselors have?

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: I'd have to go back and look. That's something I'd like to follow-up on. So I don't misquote, but they all at least have their bachelor's degree. All of our counselors are required to take at least core courses in rehabilitation counseling. Many are certified rehabilitation counselors, but I can't say with certainty that all five that are currently doing these screenings have that credential. So I'd like to get back to you on that if that's okay.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: Yeah, that'd be great.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: We can have that for you to close business today.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: Yes. Okay. Good. Thank you can send that to Megan Canelo. That would be great. Our our staff person is out this week, and so Megan's taking on that. So thank you.

[Nat Piper (Business, Legislative, and Community Outreach Manager, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yep. No problem. Thank you.

[Herb Olson (Member)]: Herb? Herb Olson, sorry

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: for the pitcher, like, and

[Herb Olson (Member)]: back then. So I'm sorry. I I came in late. So if my question has been answered, I apologize. The bill that came out from the Senate would propose change in terms of eliminating the screening. And my sense from the testimony that we heard was didn't always appear to have a useful purpose. And I'm hearing from you that it might have a useful purpose. I think the broader question was, that I had in my mind anyway, is how can we get folks who have been injured to the right people earlier than the process would require now. In other words, now you got screening, and then there's a ninety day period or a limit, I can't remember exactly, before they would be able to get to voc rehab. And I think the issue that was raised, I don't know how to answer it, but the issue was raised about how that process can be shortened up for those who could really benefit from Voc Rehab earlier, because I think the testimony is the earlier someone It's a big if, I guess. If someone is in need of that, the earlier that you get them involved, the more successful it's gonna be. So. Sure.

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yeah, the screening has to happen before ninety days post injury. So it could certainly happen sooner than ninety days. I think it's hard to say. You know, people have personal choice in this and whether they engage in this process as well. And so, I can speak to when I was doing these screenings a long time ago, a counselor may outreach to the injured worker or an employer and play phone tag or leave multiple messages, and so that can certainly delay the process, but I'm sure there are process improvements that could be made to shorten that timeframe.

[Herb Olson (Member)]: Yeah, the ninety day period sort of sticks in my mind, whether it's a screening or VR actual services, and maybe some data would be interesting now, I guess, how many folks who could potentially benefit from VR? When do they actually get access?

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yeah, the length of time between. Yeah, we could look into that and see if we have that data.

[Herb Olson (Member)]: Between the first report of injury and something positive happened.

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yeah, we could look into that and see if we have that data for you all. So

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: Amanda, you said not a significant bottleneck. What is the caseload for one of your counselors? How does that work? I'm sure it's short, right? It's not a long engagement.

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: No, it's not intended to be a long engagement. I'm just doing quick math with 139 people served by five counselors over a calendar year. You know, that's not a significant caseload, and that's over three sixty five days. Not to say that there isn't sort of an influx. It's hard to say the rate that we get those referrals, but the counselors try to be very responsive and not let these sit. And our admin staff, Wendy and Sarah Jane, are great about following up if they feel like one of the counselors has had a case for a little while and they haven't gotten an update. And that allows the counselor to say, hey, I've reached out, haven't heard back or sort of what the status update on that is. So I think there are some nice follow-up pieces in place to keep things moving along fairly quickly.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: Okay. I think, yeah, the data that you were talking about with Rep Olson will be incredibly helpful for our committee to understand where to go forward with this bill.

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Yes. Yep.

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: Committee, other questions? Okay, thank you. We look forward to more conversations on this

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: topic. Wonderful. Thank you for having us.

[Herb Olson (Member)]: Thank you

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: for having us. A great day, guys.

[Amanda Arnold (Deputy Director, HireAbility Vermont)]: Take care.

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: Vice Chairs. Feel the Builders from Associated Industries of Vermont. Feel the need. I haven't tried enough to defend this committee for a number of years, I've been doing this for twenty five years. Back in the day, there used to always be a big bowl of chocolate candies in front of this. Just Conditions are maybe worth it. There is some chocolates in here. It's a new hierarchy. There

[Herb Olson (Member)]: may not be any more peach.

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: Oh no, there are peach somewhere. Thank you very much. Maybe speak to Phil. AIB has always taken a particular interest in both workers' comp and unemployment insurance because they are kind of a unique public policy or public programs insofar as they are intended to try to benefit both employers and employees. They involve a great deal of trust and a public trust to maintain a balance and be both effective, but also cost effective. I think you've heard quite a bit about how workers' comp costs have been going in relatively good directions in recent years. That's the case, but it's also the case that Vermont remains a very expensive state for workers' compensation. Even though a lot of the trends up and down are national trends and our relative position is still expensive, and so we always try to be very cautious about changes that may affect costs, even if it's very slightly, or increase some uncertainty in the market. That being said, obviously, we have is a very important part of workers' compensation. It benefits all parties. And so we certainly want to see it work as effectively and cost effectively as possible. To that end, I think we're very supportive of this bill, the working group, I think, has a lot of questions, but it's clear we could see the work done to delve into those themes and come up with that. However, at this point in time, I do have concerns about section one levels. I think conceptually, structurally for the system, the idea of having an e screening or initial screening step is generally a good practice to have in almost any kind of system of that nature. I know people have raised concerns about whether it's worthwhile or whatnot, but I think looking at the numbers that the previous witnesses discussed and come up, it would seem that it is playing a useful role. I think if there were concerns about it, that might be more of a question of fixing it rather than chucking it out, because it's moving in an outside condition. Beyond that, I'm a little concerned that in the course of eliminating the initial screening language, there are concepts that are struck in the statute as well. There's a requirement for not only timeliness, but also cost effectiveness, that's kind of struck out in the course getting rid of initial screenings. There's reference to avoiding conflicts of interest, that's also a loss when you go to ACEP. So certainly those are concepts we would like to see preserved regardless of how initial screening might be performed. So there's that. And then with regard to the question of having, in a way, kind of like an open ended liability for vote rehab into the future, the way the bill poses, I just have, it's less of a hard opposition, it's more like concerned and questions. Worry about over time, the ability to make sure there's a connection between the voc rehab liability or the workers' comp policy, whether you can maintain that tie to the original injury and to suitable work availability. And also, if you're creating what is a more open ended and uncertain liability over an indefinite amount of time, I wonder, and I'm concerned about how is that going to affect how the insurance companies calculate the liability and therefore the premiums. I just think those are questions that need to be getting to further. And all of this, I think, is a way of getting to my ultimate recommendation. You do have this working group, you have all these questions about how to for, how to do Voc Rehab best. It seems much more logical or prudent to have the issues underlying the changes in section one, so they'd be part of that working group's charge and have recommendations. In theory, you could have a situation where, say, section one gets enacted and then the working group comes back and says, well, actually, no, we should do it differently. Then you have to It seems like it's kind of getting ahead of what's a very good process for the work group. That would really be our recommendation is to fold it. I don't know if you actually need to change the wording so much, if necessary, we'll fold Section one into the language of in charge of Section two.

[Michael Marcotte (Chair)]: And I

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: understand, I think the Department of Agnes others noted that as drafted, it is a pretty tight timeline, so that gives you a little more time for community to do its job better, how we would support that as well. That's it. Questions for Bill?

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: Did you testify in the Senate?

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: So we testified in previous iterations of this proposal. I did not testify on this specific bill. You weren't asked, but also, actually, the triage of trying to stay on type of things, did not take the opportunity to testify. But we certainly concurred with some of folks that did. Okay, thank you. She is. She chuckled my blow. Our

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: next person who's scheduled to testify is not scheduled to be here until ten So unless there's somebody else in the room that wants to testify. So I think we can go off live and just be back here about five minutes to ten

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: so

[Edye Graning (Vice Chair)]: that we make sure

[Bill Driscoll (Vice President, Associated Industries of Vermont)]: we