Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Speaker 0]: Welcome everybody to the House Committee on General and Housing, and it is still the April 2026, and we have today heard, well we had a joint hearing with our Senate of Patriots and we heard for Tick Pot Fair Housing Awareness. We spent time on three twenty eight, which is Senate bill that came to us, And what we've heard in the past, we've taken a lot of testimony on S-two 30, which is the sort of omnibus Senate bill on labor with a lot of labor issues. And one of the things that was not in the Senate bill, but which we took testimony on was extreme heat. And now I want to hear from the committee. I want to hear your thoughts. We've heard a great deal of testimony now. We took some last year and we've taken some We've taken a lot of testimony over time. A lot recently, we had at our request, our counsel, Sophie Saudetney, drafted an original bill, then we received suggestion for a shorter bill, which Sophie drafted, And we haven't done anything with this, but we really have to at this point give Sophie directions as to whether she should proceed to do more drafting or not. And you've all heard a lot, so I thought it'd be really good just to have a conversation so I can get a sense of where the committee's at. So, who would like to kick it off as to your impression so far?

[Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Member)]: Of the whole bill?

[Mary E. Howard (Clerk)]: Yeah, the whole issue. The whole

[Speaker 0]: issue. The texture. Yeah, and whether I mean, I think the operative question is, do we ask counsel, our counsel, do we give her instructions for another draft? Do we say at this point that the testimony indicates that we should not proceed for one reason or another? You know, it's really up to us. It's not in S-two 30. The question is, do we give counsel instructions to draft more, or do we, at this point, let it sit? And I really wanna know what the committee's view is. Yes, Elizabeth.

[Elizabeth Burrows (Member)]: My feeling is that we have not taken balanced testimony And that yeah. I I feel we haven't taken enough balanced testimony, and I don't, I don't necessarily feel that the don't necessarily feel that the lack of complaints is really a reason, to not, invest in more exploration of it because I my feeling is that it is entirely possible that a lack of complaints is a result of not having anything in place, not because it doesn't happen. Those are my

[Speaker 0]: thoughts. Others? I

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: feel like there are that we've heard direct testimony of lived experience of people facing dangerous situations with facing a cold or unresponsive, either because of just being misinformed of the rules or the conditions aren't met, or literally just somebody doesn't care that a water is cold. Yet, I also have heard how impractical the way that the bill is currently written, it's not possible to set up the protections that are called for in the bill. And so I feel like there's got to be a happy medium where you can say something like better education beyond, I don't know if the posters are enough at this point,

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: but whether it's

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: the complaints, how to respond to the complaints, maybe we can beef up language there, maybe we can beef up language to remedies, we can beef up languages to steps that have to be taken, a response that has turnaround time for a remedy. And then there's always the call for a study

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: option.

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: But I do agree that I think that there is an issue in certain places. We've gotten real testimony from people that have suffered from the work conditions, and we have also heard from people that say we can't possibly control the temperature in every workspace, and I get that.

[Speaker 0]: Other comments?

[Mary E. Howard (Clerk)]: Mary? I tend to agree with what already has been said. I think there are probably I've received many texts and emails from people who have had serious experience. And I'm sure there probably are a lot more because people don't want to complain because they don't wanna lose their job. I feel, you know, it is common sense, you know, when the temperature is so it's so low. I mean or if the temperature is really warm, people have to adjust. I think this bill goes a little over beyond, like, having those meters and all that. I just feel that, you use common sense, and I do feel that the employees should be educated. They should have employees, they should have the safety meetings or whatever, and say, you know, if this is the temperature and you're working and you can't tolerate it, please let your supervisor know. They also should be able to have someone relieve them so they can take breaks hearing complaints about that too. As you know, Lynn And is right next to Heiko and Killington, so there's you know, there are there are a lot of people that work there. So I would be a little weary going forth with this entire bill, although I do think that something needs to be done. There needs to be communication. There needs to be education. It should not be ignored.

[Speaker 0]: Thank you. Others? I'm just waiting.

[Emilie Krasnow (Ranking Member)]: I am not inclined to move forward to with it at this point, knowing that OSHA is drafting their recommendations, which then will inform VOCA so that VOCA can preheat their standards and then follow-up on it. They lack that at the moment. It's extremely difficult to legislate specific numbers for this hazard, is individuals' tolerances for heat and cold vary widely. One person can work 95 degree weather in a hayfield for hours, another person wilts at 80, And we saw yesterday, or the last time we looked at data, saw that Minnesota's definition of a high temperature is 70. Well, in Minnesota, I can understand why they might feel that way. I have there's not enough reasonable exemptions for agriculture, for construction sites, for forestry as is. And I I hesitate I can only name off the top of my head two specific employers that have been cited as examples of being problematic. I can't introduce regulations that will impact hundreds, if not thousands of employers. Rather approach these specific situations differently, and I think that is a place for organized labor to be not not legislation.

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: Others?

[Speaker 0]: I would appreciate hearing from others.

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: I'm not inclined to move forward with this language and this bill. I think, while again, the bill is beautifully written, Sophie, I don't think this addresses the problem at hand. Similarly to what Emilie had said earlier, that we can't necessarily legislate for one person, we can't legislate for one or two bad actors. And I think, I really like to address things via themes, and I'm just not sure this, the language that we're looking at, it is going to fix the themes that we continue to hear. I'm not inclined, again, to move forward with this language. I think there are a lot of unintended consequences. I'm also not inclined to put a study

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: in. Peace

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: and thank you.

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: But

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: I think we can all agree that there's more work to be done, but it's not this bill, it's not this language. And I think it needs to be done in partnership with the Department of Labor, understanding what OSHA is going to come down and say. I think in a hypothetical world, were we to move forward with the language that we have, even the broader numbers, we would have to put so many exclusions in here, it would be Swiss cheese. And I think, again, it wouldn't address the issues. I think we would have to exclude construction, agriculture. And at that point, if we're putting in those types of exclusions, the language would be in my personal opinion. I've talked to constituents about this. I'm in Franklin County. There's a lot of farms up there. And most of my farmers have laughed in my face saying, What's gonna happen to the cows? We can't take a break. A cow can't not get milked because it's hot or cold. And so, it would be my preference that we do not move forward with this language in this bill.

[Speaker 0]: Others. Debbie? Well, I mean, it's like I agree with everything that's been said. And, you know, if you set it up, even if you don't use the thermometers because of the expense, somebody is gonna have to be recording constantly, like what's going on, what's the temperature right now outside. We had charts, we looked at charts with temperatures and it's I mean, you can if let's say your job is to put docks and boat lifts out mid May, you could have a hot day in May, but the water's not hot. You got extreme you know, maybe you wear waders, but then you go a little too deep and the waders go up the wall. You know? There's just so many as Ashley said, there's so many different scenarios. It's like, who are you going to influence? People do have different tolerances. So, that's just my 2¢ on that one. Others? I guess

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: I'm the outlier. I suppose, I

[Saudia LaMont (Member)]: don't think we've taken, I guess, balanced testimony, so to speak. And also, I don't see, based off the testimony, It's hard for me to see a justification for not moving forward with this because it's gonna be harder for employers. We talk about the animals and the humans that need to care for those animals, but the animals are held in captivity. I mean, there's a whole, there's just lots of things there. And to not take care of the humans that are required to care for the animals, but care more about animals than humans, it's problematic for me in some aspects. But, yeah, that's just my 2¢. And I don't think that that was really the heart of the bill. I feel like that's taken up a lot of conversation for the past week, but I don't feel like the bill did more than that. So I'm

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: a little bit,

[Saudia LaMont (Member)]: I'm just trying to figure out, it's hard when you have these conversations spread out over such a long period of time for one bill to then try to make it make sense and bring it forth, but only the most recent conversations are the most relevant in your mind. But from when we were introduced, I mean, I would not be opposed to hearing more and finding ways to adjust the language to meet the need, but if that is not possible, then understood.

[Speaker 0]: Anybody else?

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: I think that I'm just reading the purpose section, it says nearly three out of four workers who die from exposure to extreme temperatures in the workplace, die in the first week of their employment before they've had an opportunity to acclimatize to the conditions. And so that does make me think that there's definitely room for education and some obligation to ensure that there be some sort of check-in education, some sort of preventative measures, right? That could be education, could be like, do you have a right to breaks, or if you don't have a water bottle, or if you don't have a jacket. Just to have some sort of agreement. Now, I don't know where that little piece of data came from, to me it screams, this is something that maybe can actually be resolved much more gently, if it's about an initial introduction to a workplace that you're unfamiliar with.

[Speaker 0]: Okay, yes.

[Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Member)]: Just to follow-up, is that through legislation or through

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: Sure, of course, that's the question.

[Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Member)]: No, no, I'm just curious what you should have in mind. If that could be done in like, if, yeah, what you're working.

[Speaker 0]: There's always rule making too, yeah.

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: As someone who's written training and done hours and hours and hours of onboarding for different organizations, I don't see that as something that should be legislated. I've written training and onboarding for blood borne pathogens. That is something that should be done, that kind of, if you're somewhere where you're going to need a coat or it's going to be hot, That is something that should be done during the onboarding process of your employment.

[Speaker 0]: And

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: I don't think that's something that should be legislated from us. I think that, I mean, every industry is different, every employer is different, so to legislate that, I'm not sure what it would be. I think there are best practices. I think that, again, BOCES, should be looking at what BOCES says.

[Saudia LaMont (Member)]: And again, should we be

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: addressing maybe the information that's coming from BOCES? I think I would be much more comfortable going in that direction

[Saudia LaMont (Member)]: than with this direction.

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: I think based

[Speaker 0]: on

[Leonora Dodge (Member)]: the fact that this is a complaint based sort of like things get resolved or not resolved after somebody complains about it, I think that that's where we can, I mean, I think that that's the only place that we really can, you know, so I think it's that problematic to say, alright, in the resolution of the complaint, can there not be a look back to say, what type of onboarding or what type of equipment was offered? And hopefully educate employers to say, This is a really important part of contract, not the just contract, but the actual onboarding, as you said. And I know that you know, teachings do a lot of videos. Yes.

[Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Member)]: I was just going to say, regardless of what the committee decides, I think that these conversations are really important. And like, clearly, there's a lot of attention around this issue now that we've taken testimony and raised awareness of it. So employers, employees now are aware of these issues. And, you know, if we don't move forward with it, it still is, you know, people have heard about it now and they're on notice. Like, the legislature may not act, but we know that we could, right? So that's

[Speaker 0]: Saudia, did you have another thought?

[Saudia LaMont (Member)]: Yeah, you know, so I was just trying to reflect over the conversation, trying to like pull the conversations and then I'll come back. But I think for me, what the things that stood out during these conversations, went and looked up like the bulbs, and I'm not saying, I don't think we legislate and mandate all of the reforms and the work plans. That's not what I'm saying. I'm specifically speaking to breaks and the laws. And I say that because I feel like people with good work ethic are not gonna I know more people who work and don't take breaks, right? Than people who take excessive breaks. And I think when you don't have the legislation or the laws that say, actually, no, I'm entitled to a break, it is much easier for an employer to then not offer a break or to get upset when the employee that doesn't take a break finally takes one to then be like, Oh my gosh, you took your fifteen minute break. And so I feel like when you don't have that legislation in place and that accountability, so to speak, it's better to have the accountability and know that most people, I don't foresee people abusing that. I have heard about people who don't get to take breaks, within the current workforce that we already have, right, as of now. We've heard about that, we've heard the testimony. And so for me, it would feel more comfortable if we said, we found a balance, right, about how to navigate that. If it were, and I'll say hearing from the employers, we didn't hear, I looked up the bulge costs, they're like $20 to dollars to $50 I looked up the cost of the thermometers. We didn't hear, Oh, we can buy that on our own, we don't need you to legislate that. What we heard was, It's gonna cost us too much to do that, and we're not gonna do it. And so I feel like if I would have heard some sort of accountability or concern for the employees, I would have a different feeling about that. And so for me, the messaging was, Oh, I can't afford to do this. I can't afford to do this. As opposed to, That's an easy fix. We don't need legislation for that. Very different messaging. And similarly, in the messaging of, well, they know the job before they take the job, and that is what they signed up for. And no, because our Vermont labor laws say people get breaks. And we're hearing from employees that they're not getting breaks. So there's a little bit of a disconnect for me to say that it's not necessary to legislate, when in fact, in my opinion, the testimony that I've heard is very contradictory to what should be happening in the workforce. And so I feel like that was the only reason why I feel that. For me, it would've been a no brainer. I'm like, Yeah, I don't think we need to legislate this. I But didn't really hear an accountability on a part of employers that, Yeah, we don't have a problem with our employees taking a fifteen minute break. But I heard the opposite, actually. And that was what was the barrier for me in saying that maybe this needs to be legislated. And so that's just my point, that was what I heard, and that's how I interpreted that information, which is a

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: very different experience from other people in the room.

[Speaker 0]: Sorry, I'm puzzling my way through this here for a minute.

[Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Member)]: You're gonna be Switzerland still?

[Speaker 0]: No. As everyone on this committee knows, I care about this issue. I'm the one who consistently brought it here and took it off the wall and then proposed that we have hearings on it and all of this, because it strikes me that preventing exposure to prolonged exposure to extreme temperatures is a valuable thing for us to pursue. I have to admit to being quite puzzled as to how to move forward, and the reason is, first of all, it's clear that some of the reports and the plans that would make sense for big employers don't make sense for small employers, and in Vermont, most of our employers are small. Many of the activities, as some of you have said, are pretty amazingly difficult to regulate, it would seem to me, forestry, farming, construction, a lot of people, we heard testimony that a lot of people work alone, you know, they're just out there installing this or that, doing it, just getting it done. They may be independent contractors, they may work for contractors, but they work by themselves. I think I came away feeling like it's pretty off. It would be really difficult to legislate the temperatures. I felt that my problem with thermometers was not so much the cost as to how many, impracticality of locating them all over the place, and I know from my own experiences is that what you're trying to do is set up a situation where if there's a complaint, there's a record. How do you record what the Supposing somebody gets in trouble, an employee is in real trouble, and they want to file a complaint and yeah, there was a thermometer, but it was their wording, you know, oh, it was, you know, 25 degrees then, so I don't even know what's involved in recording these temperatures. I think a time limit makes sense, but in theory, fifteen minutes, but it makes no sense in practice. I don't think we can in Vermont count on people to air condition their tractors and air condition their equipment, and so admit I to being a bit discouraged, because I know myself, you can't just pass a law that says, Nobody should be exposed to extreme temperatures without brakes, period. You can't do that. You need standards, you need sufficient stuff. It strikes me that this is something which if it's tackled at all, should be done through rulemaking by an administrative body, not by a bunch of people sitting around like us with the limited time we have trying to parse our way through all of this and say, Oh, Sophie, make it more than 50 people. Sophie, make it thirty minutes. Sophie, make it 80 degrees and, you know, 20 degrees. Sophie, do this. I can't, you know, I wouldn't know what to tell her. Yeah. And so here's an idea. Okay, but this is What if So I've asked myself, well gee, what would you do next?' Obviously, one answer is nothing, right? Okay, sometimes we do nothing. I mean, it's hard to admit. It's hard for me to admit because I'm the one who pulled this off the wall and care about it. But I made myself the promise that we wouldn't do anything, to use a technical word, stupid. So, one possibility is if you would allow me to just spend some time talking to Sophie and talking to Bhosha about whether or not they could undertake an investigation or rulemaking that would make sense and when they would do it, what it would look like, and do they need anything from us to do it and report back to you all. Does that make sense? I mean, I don't know. That's my my opinion. I'm I'm puzzled I'm somewhat discouraged and a little puzzled, I don't wanna completely let go of it. I would like and I don't want us I don't feel like I know enough to even tell Moshe now, you shall do this, or you have to meet over the summer and do this. I'm not quite there yet.

[Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Member)]: Mary Hudson.

[Mary E. Howard (Clerk)]: So, Mary. I just I just wanna make a comment. Yes, Mary. We have correctional facilities and other state owned operated buildings that have no air conditioning, where people have become ill and have to go to the hospital and all of that. And what is VOCA doing?

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: So I feel

[Mary E. Howard (Clerk)]: it should be placed with them. They should be aware of the situations, and they should be responding to these situations before it becomes really, really serious and people start dying. I've had experience with OSHA where they've come in and inspected buildings, and they'll come in and say, oh, you need a new outlet there. And then there are buildings that have boxes of files piled up in the hallway where somebody could trip and fall and get hurt, and it's a state building. So, you know, I feel, you know, employers, when someone applies for a job, they have an idea what the job entails, but they should also be aware of the cautions that need to be taken. So if you wanna have

[Speaker 0]: a conversation with Moshe, I think probably one needs to done whether anything will be done as a result. Well, Mary, what I think you're nosing about is actually much more serious than that. I think what you're nosing about is whether this committee should hold hearings on OSHA and its performance, which is a big job, which can be that is one of the functions of legislative committees. I am not proposing that right now, but I am proposing that I be allowed to talk to them and talk to counsel and come back to you. Is that how do I mean, I'm just wondering how you feel about that. The one thing that I I think I need to go back over the record and address, because I don't wanna sweep it under the rug, is Elizabeth's concern. I think it was your concern that we should take more testimony from individual people who have been experiencing this problem. My view is I heard. I heard, it's clear to me that there are some bad circumstances and bad actors out there. My problem is not that I don't know that. I know it's how to get at them through legislation, which is eluding me. But Elizabeth did say that.

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: Yes. Well, I just want to remind the committee that we started testimony on this last year, where we did hear a lot of individuals.

[Speaker 0]: We did.

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: So I just, it's not that we didn't hear them, I think it's just been a long process.

[Speaker 0]: But at any rate, how do people feel about making a specific proposal that I talk to counsel, talk to OSHA, and get back to you? If people don't want to hear more testimony or whatever, I'm not concluding that.

[Emilie Krasnow (Ranking Member)]: Yes? Take into account from OSHA what they're expecting OSHA to do at the federal level. Is that what powers that?

[Speaker 0]: It's hard for me to believe that OSHA's gonna do anything. Yeah. Yes?

[Ashley Bartley (Vice Chair)]: Can we make a decision on what we're going to do with this specific language today

[Speaker 0]: hear because this is I do not hear a consensus to move forward with this language. I I hear varying opinions. Some people feel that we must do something. Some people feel we haven't heard quite enough. A lot of people feel like, I just don't feel comfortable wading into this. It's too complicated and too risky that we're gonna mess up. And some people feel like this is vocious job. Maybe we should make them do it. I'm just trying to summarize. I'm hearing all of that from the committee, and I'm just saying, I think we are not going to move forward if it's okay. Sophie, you do not need at this point to make another draft of this. Okay? But I will meet with you to discuss this, and I will meet with OSHA, and I will report back to the committee, and then you can have at me again. Okay? And we can hear more testimony or not. Right? I guess that's my call in a way, but I want to do it with it. Are you comfortable with this, everybody, with the idea that it is not a perfect solution? Okay, we're not going to move ahead with this draft at this point. We may do something, but I want to talk to you and I want to talk to OSHA about options, if any. It may be that I'll come back to you and recommend that we do absolutely nothing at this point. It may be that I'll come back to you with some But I

[Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Member)]: think it's important to be clear that we're not moving forward with it in this bill.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah, at this time. I just don't see that. I'd be surprised if I come back with something that will be at 02:30. Right. Yeah, but possible. I yeah. What?

[Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Member)]: No. That's your decision.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah. But I I can't see given the timing of things, I don't think we're gonna be moving forward at two that's 02:30 with this, but I'm not willing to quite let it die. So, I mean, that's where I'm leading it. After hearing from all of you, I hear different strands, that and I'll take that into account, but I think no next draft.

[Emilie Krasnow (Ranking Member)]: Thank

[Speaker 0]: you. Now we do not have anything else for today. I hate to let you roll out a little early, but it is Passover, which some of you celebrate and others don't. And so I will and do I have any anybody have anything else tomorrow? We start