1 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CHAIRPERSONS: Senator Julie Kushner Representative Robyn Porter

SENATORS: Cabrera, Kushner, Lesser, Sampson

REPRESENTATIVES: Anderson, Arora, Hall, Hughes, Porter, Rutigliano, Vargas, Winkler

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Good morning, I am Senator Julie Kushner, as you can see now on the screen, and I am Co-Chair of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. I want to start off this morning by thanking the Committee Members who got here on time and were waiting for the Co-Chairs. We did have a press conference this morning, and we are now-- it ran a little over. I must remind you that if we were in the building, the same thing happened all the time, sometimes in the hearing room, and we had to clear everybody out so that we can begin the hearing. But having said that, we have a lot of people signed up to testify on the Bills that are before us this morning, we're looking forward to hearing from all of them.

I would just like to do a little housekeeping and remind Committee Members that because we have such a long list of 100 plus people, I would ask that Committee Members remember that we're gonna continue the rule of three minutes for Committee Members to ask their questions, and we want to remind people to make sure the questions are germane to the issues that were addressed by the speaker. We have seen in some other Committees that have long lists that they actually don't allow any questions and appropriations and that's really to underscore how important it is to hear from the public and, to be able to get through all the testimony. So, with that, I will just entertain brief remarks from my Co-Chairs and Ranking Members. Representative Porter, do you have any remarks you'd like to make?

2 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. PORTER (94TH): Just, good morning, which I've already said, but I'll say again, good morning. I'm looking forward to a long day it seems, but I'm looking forward to hearing from the public and what their concerns and issues, and thoughts are regarding the Bills that we have before us. And I'm not sure, I'm gonna remind you, I don't know if we convened, yeah. So, I don't remember hearing you say that, I just wanted to remind you of that. And I'm done, I'm ready.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I'm not sure I said that we're convened, if not I'll repeat it. I didn't mention this is the Labor and Public Employees Committee, but I will say I'm convening that meeting, the public hearing of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. Thank you for that reminder. And I will go now to Representative (SIC) Sampson.

SENATOR SAMPSON (16TH): Thank you, Madam Chairman. It's, Senator Sampson these days, but I appreciate--

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): What did I say? Did I say Representative?

SENATOR SAMPSON (16TH): It's fine. I'm not sensitive to it, I just thought the viewers might need to be informed. I just wanted to start by welcoming everyone to the public hearing today, our fellow Members, the members of the public that are going to participate, and those watching us today, thank you, I think you are participating in this process is extremely important to helping us do our jobs and make the best public policy that we can. I wanna just repeat the same comments I've made at each public hearing and it is just a polite objection, not to the Chairs themselves, but to this process of the online zoom meeting. It has some benefits, for sure, I think we are allowing some people who might not otherwise have the chance to participate, actually, come forward to testify and speak with us.

3 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

But I do have some concerns that there's a portion of our population in the state that does not have the technology or access to the internet, or whatever the case may be, to participate in the online hearing process. And I just wanted that on the record. I also will politely just say to the Madam Chairman, that I disagree with the limiting of the Members asking questions, I understand the time concerns. I think that the Members recognize that fully, no one wants to drag the hearing out into a multi-day affair, but it is important because this is the only chance, we really get sometimes to flesh out what the intricate details and concerns of the public is.

And we will do our best, for certain, to follow your guidelines, but I do wanna repeat that I hope you reconsider that going forward. 'Cause while we might wanna ask some person 10 minutes' worth of something, the next person might not get any questions, just based on the relevance of what we need to know. And I appreciate you, at least, giving me the opportunity to voice my concerns, and I wish everyone a great day today. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Senator Sampson. And we have tried to be, somewhat, flexible in our approach, although I will say that early on in this process, we did see the hearing get away from us, where every speaker was being asked the same questions and multiple times, and it did make it difficult to see how we were possibly gonna get through the whole speaker list. So, I know there have been a few times when we've been at these three minutes and we've allowed it a little bit of extra time to get the final question out, but our goal is to make sure that everyone that signed up has an opportunity to speak. Thank you for your comments today, it's always good to see you, and I will now call on Representative Aurora.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to everyone joining us today, members of 4 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the public, my colleagues, and other experts here today. I really look forward to hearing on these Bills from the public. As Senator Sampson mentioned, we do wanna have a good discussion, because some of the very important points do come out when, really, in a dialogue and many participants from the public also do appreciate that, when beyond the three minutes, they are allowed to kind of specifically go into certain details, which may not be possible in their testimony as it is. But nevertheless, we will, as Senator Sampson pointed out, that we will, certainly-- we all have the same interest of keeping this in a timely-- doing this in a timely manner and having everyone participate in it. And I look forward to today, there is some very-- things which we'd really need to discuss, so I look forward to this hearing. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And you remind me there's another rule of the public hearings and Committee meetings, for that matter, that I do wanna remind folks of as well. Sometimes when you get started asking questions, you get on a roll and you forget some of the rules that we have long established in the legislature, which is questions need to be asked through the Chair. So just for members of the public, what that means is, before a Committee Member ask a question they say, "Through you, Madam Chair," and they get permission to continue. And that really does help keep an orderly process. So, we're gonna try and do these things right today. I don't see our Co-Chairs today, and that reminds me, our Vice Chairs of the Committee, Representative Emmanuel Sanchez, and State Senator, Jorge Cabrera, it does remind me to let the public know that there are multiple hearings and Committee meetings going on at all times, which would happen if we were in session in the LLB as well, people run from room to room. Here they're running from zoom meeting to zoom meeting and hearing, but I'm sure they will be joining us throughout the day, so I just wanted-- And that's true for all Committee 5 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Members who you might see pop in and then have to leave for another meeting.

But I think we're fortunate all the testimony is provided to us, and we're able to read or watch the recording of the hearing if there's something we missed. So, I wanna start off today by calling our first speaker. Our first speaker is Representative Michael Quinn, is State Representative Quinn. Yes, I him see right in front of me here, good morning.

REP. MICHAEL QUINN (82ND): Good morning. And good morning to the Co-Chairs, Representative Porter, and Senator Kushner and the Ranking Members, Representative Arora and Senator Sampson. I'm Representative Michael Quinn from the 82nd District, which is Meriden, Middlefield and Rockfall, and I'm here this morning to testify in favor of House Bill 6478, an act concerning workers' compensation. In particular, I'm here to testify on Section 1, which was a Bill that I proposed under Bill number 6277.

I've been a practicing attorney in workers' compensation, representing injured workers for over 22 years. What I am trying to do with these proposed changes to Section 31-308A of the Workers’ Compensation Code is to provide additional benefits to workers who have already received their permanent partial disability award. Prior to 1995, once someone had been assigned a disability rating and been paid their award, if their restrictions were such that they were having difficulty finding a job period, or finding employment that paid comparable to what they were making pre-injury, they were allowed to receive these 308A benefits for the rest of their life, provided they did job searches each week to show that they were working.

The wholesale changes to the Workers’ Compensation Act in 1995 put a strong limit on their ability to collect these benefits, and currently, as the law reads, they are limited to the number of weeks that their rating worked out to be. So, let's say, 6 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE hypothetically, someone received a 20% disability rating to their back, they would receive their weeks of compensation, and then if they weren't able to continue to work, they would then receive up to that same number of weeks of compensation. In terms of that body part, and of course, I gotta do the quick math in my head, that body part would equate out to about 75 weeks of compensation, so roughly a little over a year.

Under the current law, once they finish collecting that second set of benefits, they're done, unless something in their condition worsens such that they are totally disabled again, or their permanency rating increases. And during the years that I've been practicing, I've had a number of clients who have found themselves in that situation where they collect the money for their permanency rating, they then collect the second period of time for the 308A benefits, but they had a higher paying manufacturing job and due to the extent of their injury, they can't collect anymore, and sometimes they fall into a trap where they've finished collecting this second set of benefits, they're not finding a job because of their injuries, and their injuries are severe enough to prevent them from doing what they were doing before, but the injuries aren't severe enough to allow them to receive Social Security disability benefits. So, they find themselves in an income gap, because anything that they are able to get is probably more of a sedentary job, that doesn't pay as much as they were making during the manufacturing job.

So, what I'm proposing to do is to, not go back to the way things were prior to 1995 with an unlimited opportunity to receive these 308A benefits, but rather expand it to, up to five times the period of time for their disability, with a cap of a maximum of 720 weeks, which would be a maximum of 15 years of benefits that they could collect. Again, I think it's important that this change be made so that workers who find themselves in that gap of being too 7 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE injured to return to what they were doing before and making equivalent wages but not injured enough to qualify for Social Security disability benefits, have something that they can continue to collect for a longer period of time. And in terms of the other Sections of 6478, I'm also in agreement with those. But again, my primary concern was Section 1, which was the Bill that I had proposed. And I'm happy to take any questions.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Representative Quinn, that was very helpful explanation. Are there any questions from the Committee? I just have one question, I don't see any questions but I do have one, and you may have addressed this. As so often happens, I was distracted for a moment. And I just wanna make sure that, if someone were to get another job, but it was a much lower-paying job as you talked about, would they continue to receive a benefit or would there be an offset for the difference in income?

REP. QUINN (82ND): There would still be the offset. So, let's say hypothetically, their compensation rate was $750 and they found a job that paid them $500, it would only pay the difference between the compensation rate and what they're actually receiving it, they wouldn't get a windfall out of this.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. That that's helpful, obviously, an important aspect of this. I don't see any other hands, so appreciate you being with us here today and starting us off on the right track. Thank you.

REP. MICHAEL QUINN (82ND): Thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up, we have Representative David Michelle. David, are you with us?

8 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. MICHEL (146TH): Yes, I am. Can you hear me, Madam Chair?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, I can.

REP. MICHEL (146TH): Good morning Chairs, and Vice Chairs, and Ranking Members and Members of the Committee. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak on those Bills today. My name is David Michel, I'm a state Rep from Stamford, and for the sake of time, I'm just gonna say that I'm here in support of Bill 1000, and I'm interested also in hearing more conversation about some of the other good-looking Bills. And I will concede my time to Susshila, who should be here. Susshila. K, who is from the Independent Drivers Guild.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. I do see her here, so you can begin. You have to unmute your-- I think you are set up there with some of your colleagues and your co-workers there, and so-- You are unmuted now, go ahead and proceed.

SUSSHILA. K: Good morning, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Senator Sampson, and Representative Arora, and Member of the Labor Committee. My name is Susshila Karga, I live in Branford City. I have been Uber driver for two years, and I'm member of the Independent Driver Guild. So, I'm here, I'm presenting some issue from the-- when I was driving. So, Uber, in the beginning, paid well and as the time went by, they made changes, took more commission and paid us a smaller percentage, which is, for example, like they charge customer like $19.07, and then the Uber took the $12.86, and then the driver get just a $5.91, which is not fair for the driver, and who is depend on the driving totally as a full-time job, and getting that much money, and it is hard to provide for the families. So, it is really tough for the driver. So, at this time, I would like to ask your support to pass the Bill number 1000, so drivers can support their families with dignity. Thank you. 9 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much for being here with us, and you are bringing forward a very important issue, we have seen a change in the nature of work in our country, with the gig economy, and with all these apps. And it's good to see change, and there are some advantages to that, but I think that you're highlighting a problem where you begin working at one level of compensation, and then it is changed and you have no mechanism to address that change, that reduction in your working-- the terms and conditions in your work. So, appreciate you being here today.

I do wanna see if there are any Members of the Committee that have questions. Okay, I don't see any hands at this time, but we thank you so much for-- Oh, I have one hand, Representative Rutigliano. I think I saw your hand go up, Representative Rutigliano, but we don't see you on the screen. You're unmuted, but we can't hear you either. Let's see. Let's give him a minute, he may be having some technical issues. His hand went down, so I'm guessing there are some technical difficulties. So, we thank you for your time today and appreciate all of your-- the other drivers back there in the background. Were we to be in the Legislative Office Building, we would get to say hello to you. And you've been working on these issues for a number of years, so we are happy to see your faces, even if we can't be there together in person. And I see Representative Rutigliano, you're back with us. Did you have a question?

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Can you hear me, Madam Chair?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I can hear you now.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I'm so sorry, I must be having some technical difficulties over here in Trumbull, so I apologize. I wanted to ask the young lady, just for clarification, ’cause my own 10 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE information, how exactly does it work when you get paid? So, the algorithm of the app determines how much the drive costs? Is that true? Or the trip, I should say trip, right?

SUSSHILA. K: Is for the trip, yes. So, they charging the client for the different rate, and then we getting minimum, very minimum amount of the trip.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): So, do they have a set rate for every trip you take or does your portion of that rate fluctuate every time you pick up a client?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I'm gonna ask, if you speak up a little bit louder it's kind of hard to hear. And under the circumstances, I will allow others that are there present with you to answer.

INDEPENDENT DRIVERS GUILD MEMBER: Can I interject.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Sure.

INDEPENDENT DRIVERS GUILD MEMBER: So, for example, a client, you give a ride to a client, he pays $19. Uber will keep $13 out of the $19, which comes up to about 68.47%, then the driver gets $6, which comes up to about 31.57%. So, the client leaves the car thinking that, "Oh, I really paid a good amount to the driver for the ride." And, basically, Uber kept 68.47%. Which, out of that 31%, that's supposed to be your insurance, your wear and tear, your amount to take home for basic head of family pay. I think that is really unfair, for them to-- It should be vice versa, we should get the 68.47%, and they could keep that 31.57%, which is a fair--

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Excuse me, sir, I certainly get your point. Through you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes.

11 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I just wanna know, is that a set percentage for every ride or does that fluctuate every time you pick somebody up? Are they at 68% to them every time you pick up a driver-- a passenger?

INDEPENDENT DRIVERS GUILD MEMBER: So, what happens with most rides, it's a percentage, it's as per the mileage. But this is a good example I'm giving of where a client may be when-- It all depends on how many miles you go, you could take a ride from here to JFK and pay--the client may pay $150, but the driver, or I driving, may get, out about $150, Uber we'll keep 68% of that amount, and I will go home that 31%.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): So you're at 68% every time, Madam Chair? Am I misunderstanding him? 'Cause it is all that I could hear.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Hold on a second. My understanding from what I'm hearing, and it is difficult to hear, but my understanding is that there is a set percentage that Uber keeps on every fare, and that percentage at this point is 68%, and that the drivers are keeping--

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Is that correct?

INDEPENDENT DRIVERS GUILD MEMBER: Yes.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): And when you receive the tip, sir, through you, Madam Chair, are you able to keep all of that amount?

INDEPENDENT DRIVERS GUILD MEMBER: Yes, the tip, we keep all the amount, but if the passenger paid $19 for a ride and it's their option to say, "Okay, maybe for $19 of this ride, I think I basically paid this guy well." So, you take $6 home, and Uber keeps 12 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

$13. We have evidence, in form of a printout, that if you see the amount, it's ridiculously unfair.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I want you to know that I don't doubt your testimony at all, I'm literally asking questions because I just don't know. So, I appreciate everything you're saying, and I'm trying to-- I don't really know how that gig economy works. I get how Uber works, you use an app, people pick you up, but I'm really just trying to raise my own knowledge. Are you comfortable if-- This is just a general question, through you, Madam Chair, if you become an employee of Uber, per se, I guess that's sort of what this Bill would do, are you comfortable with them being able to set your schedule and hours that you are available? Wouldn't that be one of the trade-offs of becoming an employee? Is sort of, you lose some of that flexibility? Is that true, not true? Are you comfortable with that? Through you, Madam Chair?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): The question is--

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Did I say that properly?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I was just helping address the question.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Thanks, dear.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Folks are having trouble hearing. But the question is, is there a trade-off that by doing this Bill, you might lose some of the flexibility that you have now? Because you would then be determined as an employee.

INDEPENDENT DRIVERS GUILD MEMBER: But at the end of the day, if we have a platform where we sit down and negotiate, because right now if you picked up the phone, like if I picked up the phone to ask, "Why did you guys take 68%?" It's a 1-800 number, an offshore person picks it up in Malaysia, all they do is document your complaint, and there is no in- 13 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE between the drivers and the Uber management, there's no in-between. They pay offshore companies to take and document our complaints. And it's unfair for them to have this platform. And we make all this money for them, and all they do is-- Each and every day, there are hundreds and hundreds new drivers coming in to drive. The bottom line is, how much they're making on commission. At the end of the day, when you sign into this platform, there're terms and conditions that you accept. If you do if you decline to the terms and conditions, then you cannot drive for the day. And if that is your basic job, then you have no other option but to sign in, and you agree to all the terms and conditions that they provide to you.

And at the end of the day, when you go back and look at what the client paid, you discover that you just been ripped off. It really doesn't make sense for-- If they turned it over, where they took that 31% and we kept 68%, well done, we will sit down and say, "Oh yeah, this is now--" And this, when they initially came to Connecticut, we really got that good pay. And we woke up in the morning, at four o'clock in the morning, and were out there picking up clients. But they came in with different platforms, different rides, different options for the clients. And practically speaking, it's easier to take an Uber than take the city bus. Because if three people jumped into your car and took a ride downtown, they pay $5, door-to-door, from the train station to their door, if they took the bus, they had to wait for the bus to get there, and the bus stop at every stop.

But when you take an Uber from the train station and you are three students riding into downtown, the Uber will charge them X amount of money, Uber takes the larger share. And if you calculate, it's more expensive for them to pay 175 on the bus, because it comes up to more money on the bus. But it's less money for them to go on the car. And here you are, you're paying insurance, there's wear and tear on 14 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE your car, there is all these expenses that you have on you. And at the end of the day, at the end of the year, you have all these miles on your car, your car has no value anymore. Because if you wanted to trade it in, the dealership tells you, "Oh your car looks nice, but it has high mileage." What are you supposed to do with that car?

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Madam Chair, I do have a couple of more questions. I do know I'm abiding the time limit, I don't wanna be disrespectful to the Chair, but if I could ask them, please?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Representative Rutigliano, I just wanna also assure you that we have a list here with many drivers that are going to be testifying throughout the day, in addition. I'm gonna give you more time, but just to let you know, there's also gonna be people who formulated this particular legislation who can probably answer some of the technical questions that you might have as well. Just wanted to give you that heads up.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I appreciate that. Like I said, I was being totally honest that I didn't know how their industry works. I'm actually sympathetic. I'm not here to defend some nameless, faceless billion-dollar company. My last question to you, sir, madam, would be, do all these driving services act the same? Does Lyft, and Uber, and if there's a different one, are they all at the same percentage?

INDEPENDENT DRIVERS GUILD MEMBER: They all, basically, do the same thing. They take more of the percentage part, and we get less, and what we take home-- We have no avenue of communication. Well, in other states-- I think Uber is a franchise, in other states, they sit down with-- New York, they sat down with the people in New York and they came to an agreement, in different states have different rules. So that means all states are a franchise to a particular group of management. Even maybe in other 15 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE parts of the world, in England, they shut them down and said, "Hey, if you cannot get good terms and conditions for your drivers, then we don't want you here," so they shut them down. And in the US, if I drive to JFK to drop you at the airport, when I'm in New York, I can't pick up from there, but then when they come from New York with Uber and come here, they can pick up a ride here and go back to New York. But I go to JFK, I pay the toll, when I get to JFK, I have to drive all the way until I cross into Connecticut to pick another ride. The terms are not fair.

REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Madam Chair, for your indulgence. I must say, it did prompt like 10 more questions, but I respect that we have a very long list, so thank, Madam.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And I know you're gonna get a chance to ask more questions. But I do wanna move on to, Representative Arora.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Madam Chair. And my question is somewhat similar but somewhat different from what was asked, which is that, are these 20 and 20, because these percentages which you're providing 68%, are they a contractual? Is there a pre-decided contract that 68% will go to Uber and 32% will go to the driver? Because, generally spoken number, that 20 and 25%, and they say Lyft is more aggressive at 20, they take 20% of the cut of the fare, and Uber takes 25%. And I just wanted to know whether there was a clear contract which you had which showed 68%, or that just-- Are they targeting certain areas or certain specific groups or municipalities, so as to say, because the overall average seems to be 20 and 25. So, would you have details about such a contractual arrangement? Through you, Madam Chair.

SOHAIL: My name is Sohail. It's a little technical question. So, I will answer, there is a contract, it's like 20 pages long. So, what they do is, when 16 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE in the morning you go start working, they will say you cannot start working until you read the 20 pages of contract and sign it or click, "Ok," and then do it. So, what drivers usually do, and especially most of the drivers that are immigrants, they don't have patience to read 20 pages. So, they just click it, and then, yeah. There is no set percentage, they just always fluctuate, like how my colleague said. Sometimes they take 68%, sometimes they take 50%, sometimes he has to take 25%, but there is no set rule. They just charge customer a different price, and show a different screen to a driver, which will show a lower fare and they will give them a cut on a lower fare

REP. ARORA (151ST): Madam Chair, if I might follow up. Is this related to the surge or is it related to--Because the understanding is that surge, there are different percentages, or is it on any given day some fares will be 60%, some fare will be 20%, so there is no clear-cut contractual relationship between the driver and the ride-sharing company, that x percent will go to you and y percent will go to you. There is no such number, every ride is different, every day is different in your opinion?

SOHAIL: Yeah, that is true, there is no such contract they will give. In New York City, we were able to, through Legislation, through New York City Legislators, we were able to set that limit, that Uber or Lyft, the companies cannot take certain percentage. But in Connecticut there is no such thing, it's like same thing, they can take 30%, 40%, 60%. And then just to remind you guys, drivers they observed all the cost, from the gas, maintenance, lease, insurance, and car washes and everything else.

REP. ARORA (151ST): No, that's understandable. I think what's really extremely disturbing is that the percentage contract is not clear, because then you have choices between A, B and a C might come in if they said, "Hey, I'm gonna take 40%." But the 17 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE consumer finds a very important service. Just in the interest of time, one last question is that, is there any other restrictive elements of jumping from one to the other, because one of the most--the higher sensitivity for all of us is that if you are independent contractors, they should not be barriers for you to move from Lyft to Uber to somebody, there is a black box or some third one coming up as well. So, do you see any barriers or them trying to restrict you from shifting over while still trying to say you're an independent contractor?

SOHAIL: Right. No, there are no barriers. So, being independent contractors, and by the way, that's a question for Representative Rutigliano, that drivers love to be independent contractors. So, there is nowhere in this legislation, it is right to bargain and staying independent contractors. And then, in a gig economy drivers can still benefit from benefits and have a seat at the table. It doesn't mean drivers want be employed, they don't like it. We saw in California; it's it doesn't work. So, drivers want to be independent contractors, while still able to be sit on a table with the company, and also have some benefits.

REP. ARORA (151ST): That's really helpful, thank you very much. So just to paraphrase, drivers wanna be independent contractors, but the terms right now should be clear, and the terms should be, obviously, negotiated, but they should also be, I hear that they should be clear. Would you agree with that as well? That they should be set out in a contract which a driver or someone who's busy working for 20 hours, or it's 14 hours, or 12 hours, 20 hours a week, or 12 hours a day, they should be able to understand it clearly, and it should not change minute to minute, that would be a very important aspect, I would think. Would you agree? Through you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for that. Before you answer, thank you, Representative Arora, that is 18 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE your three minutes. Turns out that Representative Rutigliano didn't even use close to three minutes, so we can go back to you if you'd like. But I will allow SOHAIL to answer that question, and then I have a couple of questions of my own. Go ahead SOHAIL.

SOHAIL: Sure, yeah. So, yes that happens, in one week they can send you like agreement before you start working, before you sign on your app. It can be like couple times a week, maybe like three times a month, but it changes. And as I mentioned before, even people who born here and they have like higher education, they don't have time to read 20 pages while they have to go to work, and also, it's a language barrier for lots of drivers out there. We have eight drivers to testify today, they need translation, so yeah, it should not change. And that can be solved by the Bill, SB 1000, having a seat at the table, and give drivers a right to bargain.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, SOHAIL. And just to clarify and-- I do wanna clarify, there's been a lot of discussion in different states, a lot of newspaper articles, and even previous Bills that we have taken up in the Labor Committee in the past and each of those are a little bit different. But my understanding, having spoken with you and others from the Independent Drivers Guild, this Bill does not seek to make you employees, as you said, this would retain your independent contractor status. But the gist of this Bill is to set up a mechanism so that drivers have a role to play in meeting with the companies to create standards that would be considered area standards that would be required for the state of Connecticut when you're operating as independent contractors in the state. Is that accurate?

SOHAIL: Yeah, absolutely right, that's what we want to do, because, as we know, workers, especially in gig economy, workers have no say, no right to bargain or say. So that's what we're trying to 19 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE achieve here through SB 1000, so drivers have seat at the table, and then figure out. Before they change policies, change something, drivers have a say in it.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And so that you would have some consistency, as well, in knowing what the expectation is, and that, therefore, there couldn't be changes made in those standards without coming back and meeting with the drivers to create a different understanding.

SOHAIL: That is true, yep.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, thank you so much. And thank you for all being here today. I do wanna say I appreciate your comments about having to sign off on a contract. And it doesn't matter how much education you have; you could be a PhD and still not wanna read 20 pages. And we all have to do that when we go in and use different apps, we often have to say we agree to the terms and conditions, and I'm guessing every Member of this Committee has done that without reading all of the terms and conditions. So, I can't imagine if my work depended on that. But thank you so much for being here today. I do see another hand now, but I'm not sure if that- - No, that's not one of our Committee Members, so that was by mistake. So, thank you for being with us, and I'm sure we'll be hearing more from drivers and from representatives of your organization.

SOHAIL: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So, I'm gonna move to the next speaker. The next speaker we have with us today is, Chairman Morelli, from the Workers' Compensation Board. And, Chairman, I just wanna thank you for being here today with us, we know your work is all- consuming and that you're always busy, but we also know you're always available. So, we appreciate you being here to testify this morning. Oh, we can't 20 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE hear you, though. We still can't hear you. I see someone coming there to help

STEPHEN MORELLI: How about now?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's good. Thank you.

STEPHEN MORELLI: Good morning, Senator Porter, Members of the Committee, Senator Kushner, thank you for your kind words. You've introduced me, I will say I'm here together with Nancy [Inaudible] legal Director, and Richard Amy who is my [Inaudible] legislative program manager. I'm here today to answer any questions the Committee may have at the request of the Chairs. As I think you all understand, the commission, as a quasi-judicial agency does not take a position on pending legislation. We are happy, though, to be available to answer whatever questions the Committee may have, with respect to the impact the proposed legislation may have on the Commission. I would also point out that I have submitted written testimony, specific to the portions of the Bills, which pertain to reporting requirements on the condition, which testimony seeks some clarifications and I'd be happy to discuss those at any time, perhaps at a later date, if that is more useful to your time. With that, I'm here and pleased to answer any of your questions. Thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Chief Morelli. And I will call on my Co-Chair, Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Senator Kushner. And thank you, Chairman Morelli, for being with us today. And these are just basically a couple of questions for the record. Can you tell me how long has the current burial benefit of $4,000 been in place? Can't hear you. Chairman, we still--Yeah.

21 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): We're not able to hear you. And we couldn't hear you before. And it appears that you're unmuted, but it's not coming through.

REP. PORTER (94TH): No, we still can't hear you.

STEPHEN MORELLI: You hear me now?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yeah.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I think you might have to move closer, because you're going in and out. We can't hear you. I will say that I had this problem yesterday myself on a hearing where I couldn't be heard and then I couldn't hear them, so we know there are some challenges. Do you wanna try again? You know what I'm gonna suggest, because I did have this problem myself yesterday, Chairman Morelli, I hate to do this to you but if you could, maybe, consult your IT folks and see what's going on there with the computer. We'll take the next speaker and then come back to you.

STEPHEN MORELLI: All right.

REP. PORTER (94TH): And the only thing I'm gonna do since I'm gonna have to step away for a minute, Senator Kushner, is go ahead and put the questions [audio glitch] for when he comes back in and I'm not back in the meeting he can answer. So, the first question was, how long has the current burial benefit then at 4000? And then the other question I have is, what is the most common reason employers are given for denying the COVID-19 related claims?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Can you try unmuting again?

STEPHEN MORELLI: Can you hear me now?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes.

22 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

STEPHEN MORELLI: Okay. So, what I've done is I've opened up my laptop as opposed to using the webcam that's on my monitor. So, I can hear you, you can hear me.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes.

STEPHEN MORELLI: Okay, good. I hope it doesn't great feedback.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): We're okay.

STEPHEN MORELLI: It's beyond my technical skills. I'm sorry.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): It's okay.

STEPHEN MORELLI: Representative Porter, I unfortunately only heard the beginning of what you had begun to state.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay, I'll go back. My first question, we know that the burial benefit is $4,000. My question is, how long has it been 4000? When was the last time it was raised?

STEPHEN MORELLI: I can't tell you off the top of my head when the last time it was raised. It's certainly been 4000 since I've been on the commission, which goes back to 2012. Let me see. Attorney Binomo, is indicating it's been 4000 since the 90s, would be her opinion, perhaps 1993 when they did the sweeping changes to the act?

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay.

STEPHEN MORELLI: I assume the answer will catch up.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay. And I didn't mean to cut you off, I'm sorry. So, I just need to confirm that, 'cause it's my understanding that it was 1987, so if it's 1993, we just wanna confirm that.

23 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

STEPHEN MORELLI: 1988.

REP. PORTER (94TH): And then the second question I have-- 88, thank you.

STEPHEN MORELLI: You're welcome.

REP. PORTER (94TH): And then, what's the most common reason employers are given for denying the COVID-19 related claim?

STEPHEN MORELLI: The most common reason is the generic denial that many form 43s have, which is it has the standard language that did not arise out of and in the course of employment. That language is pretty much common to almost all 43s that are filed, regardless of whether it's COVID or a specific injury.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay. And can you tell me, what's the usual turn around for workers' comp claims?

STEPHEN MORELLI: Turn around in terms of the time to a first hearing, is that what you're asking?

REP. PORTER (94TH): Well, you can tell me time to the first hearing but I'm really interested in knowing the time to the first pay, when people receive the benefit.

STEPHEN MORELLI: That varies from case to case, some people-- I go back to the beginning, I guess, and say that everybody has to bear in mind that almost-- the vast majority of Workers’ Comp claims never get to Workers' Comp Commission. Of the cases that hit the Workers’ Compensation Commission, it'd be impossible to give you a static number as to this is the amount of time it takes for someone to begin receiving benefits. Lots of times they request a hearing, they're already receiving benefits. Sometimes they request a hearing because it's entirely contested, and they're not receiving 24 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE benefits. Right now, the average time to first hearing, meaning you brought a claim, you've asked for a hearing, is 23 days, roughly. And we've strived to be under 28 days, and we've been under 28 days for many years, and even this year, in 2020, where thanks to the executive order 7K, which we worked together with the Governor's general counsel and staff allowed us to stay open, other than two days in March, we've remained open throughout 2020. So, given the nature of the pandemic, it wouldn't have been a good time for the Workers' Compensation Commission to be unavailable to the citizens of Connecticut, similar to Unemployment Benefits.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yeah, I agree with that. How many COVID-19 Workers’ Comp claims have been filed to date?

STEPHEN MORELLI: To date, there are 3123.

REP. PORTER (94TH): 3123. And how many have been denied?

STEPHEN MORELLI: I don't have a specific number, I would tell you that I'd be surprised if almost all, if not very nearly all, have been denied. And that's because in the Workers' Compensation system for the statutes if an employer fails to issue a denial within 28 days of receiving the claim, the notice of the claim, they can then be precluded under the statute from being able to contest it in the future, the extent of the injury in the future. So, it's kind of a, really, a knee-jerk situation where claim is filed, form 43 denial is filed. So, I will tell you that I can extrapolate out that of the 3123 claims that have been made, only 295 are being litigated in our system, meaning only that number of claims have actually asked for a hearing, which tends to make me think that the vast majority of the balance of the claims were one of two things, it was either exposure where they filed a claim to stake-- to put their stake in the ground in the event it developed into something or they were paid. And 25 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE there weren't any issues that they had to bring to the Commission to seek help with.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay. It probably would have been maybe easier for me to ask how many claims have been approved. And I'll just leave that, you can get back to us on that. I really wanna know, is there anything specific that the Commission is done to try to expedite the adjudication of these claims. Like has the commission established the COVID-19 docket?

STEPHEN MORELLI: We haven't established a specific docket like we have with the asbestos docket, but certainly something we've considered and will continue to consider. Frankly, the volume wasn't as great as we were concerned, we may be facing a year ago, roughly today. So, I will say that we have told all the districts and they are prioritizing COVID claims.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay. Well, I think that that's something that we should really seriously be considering, especially with the impact that COVID is having with, specifically, essential workers who haven't had the luxury of staying at home, and who are still, to this day, right here in New Haven, Connecticut transit is still-- they're still contracting COVID. Family members are dying, so we really do need to address the issue. And the only thing I'll say and I'm done with my question for now is that, you stated that out of the 3123 you have 295 cases that have been litigated. I'm thinking, maybe, those are the people that knew that they could ask for a hearing, what's your feedback on that? Do you feel that most people who go through this worker's comp process understand that they have a right to a hearing?

STEPHEN MORELLI: I generally think that the people who have the basis to be able to commence a claim, generally are familiar enough with the system to understand that they can ask for a hearing. When they file a claim, they get a packet, an information 26 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE packet, which goes out to them, and that explains the process. So, there shouldn't be situations out there where people don't know that they can avail themselves of a hearing request. And that's all spelled out in the information packet that gets sent when we receive the notice of a claim.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you for that response, and I'm gonna say what the Uber drivers said, they're probably not reading it, so we're gonna have to work on education as well, so that people understand what their rights are, and how to make this process more smooth for them and for you and your staff. So, thank you, again, for being here today, and thank you for answering those questions.

STEPHEN MORELLI: My pleasure.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Representative Porter. I will next call on, Representative Winkler.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Yes. Through the Chair, what would the Workers' Compensation Commission accept as proof that a worker contracted COVID-19 as a result of their employment?

STEPHEN MORELLI: If I understand your question correctly, are you saying what would we accept as proof if they contracted it as a result of their employment?

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Yeah.

STEPHEN MORELLI: Again, I don't think I can give you a sweeping answer that would be applicable to each and every case, every case would have different circumstances. In the process of adjudicating a claim, it would vary. For instance, if it fell within the presumption period, it would be different than if it didn't. But essentially, if it's not within the presumption period, a worker would have 27 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE to establish that more likely than not, it was contracted in the course of their employment. I will say, one of the unique things about this disease, as opposed to other types of communicable diseases that we've experienced in the past like flu, etc., that's probably somewhat easier, given the fact that people aren't necessarily out and about as much, because of the lockdowns that were instituted, associated with the pandemic. So, I would think the nexus between getting the disease in your working environment, if you have facts to support that it was prevalent in your work, or you were dealing with COVID patients, etc., would be easier than it would be, say, with the common flu or something of that nature.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Through you chair, do you have any guidelines for the people who decide these cases to help them be consistent in their application of your regulations?

STEPHEN MORELLI: Well, as you know, there are 16 Commissioners, including me. All of the 15 Commissioners who are sitting in the districts conducting hearings, are lawyers. They're now functioning, essentially, as judges, and they've all been through judiciary, they all have backgrounds appropriate to the position that they've been appointed to, and in any adjudicatory process, I can't dictate to them that this is how you should decide these cases. The guidelines that they use are the existing laws as they've evolved in case law and the statute. So, the laws you write are the laws we adjudicate.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Describe for me a case that you think was a, "Slam dunk, yes, they got the COVID-19 on the job."

STEPHEN MORELLI: I don't have any familiarity with specific cases, because I'm not out in the districts doing hearings.

28 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. WINKLER (56TH): I don't want a specific case, I want you to create a case that would be, obviously, a COVID-19 job-related illness.

STEPHEN MORELLI: Okay. So, my hesitancy in doing that would be if I give you an example of a case that I think meets the threshold, and that case, or something very similar to that actually gets presented and a Commissioner writes a decision and that eventually, that decision will be appealed to me, as Chief of the Compensation Review Board, and I will have, essentially, prejudged it if I do that, if I go through this exercise that you're asking me to go through. So, I apologize, but it wouldn't be right for me to put myself in that position.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Representative Winkler, I do wanna let you know, I did assure the Commissioner that we would not put him in a position that compromised his ability to adjudicate claims. And so, I do wanna respect that, his response on that issue.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Certainly. So, for us and for the public, there is no way for us to know if we have a good case for having contracted COVID-19 on the job?

STEPHEN MORELLI: There is a way to know, and that is, if it's one of the-- And as I said, a small percentage of the COVID cases we've been presented with are actively being litigated, but the way to know is to go through the adjudicatory process, and if it's deemed to be compensable, then you had a good case, and if it's not deemed to be compensable, then perhaps your facts weren't strong enough. As I said, each and every instance will present a different threshold of facts that the commissioner would have to consider.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you, Madam Chair.

29 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Representative Winkler. I have a few questions. I don't see any other hands. So, I just wondered if you could identify for us how many of the claims that you received today were covered by the time period covered by Executive Order 7JJ? And how many fall outside of that time period?

STEPHEN MORELLI: So, you're asking how many cases fall from March 10 through May 20, the presumption period?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes.

STEPHEN MORELLI: I'm gonna ask Richard Amy if he has that, I don't have it.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And If you don't have it, if you wanted to get it to us, to the Committee, we can make sure everyone gets it.

STEPHEN MORELLI: If you could move on to the next question, I'm sure he'll be able to come up with that information, partly.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Another question is, do you know how many claims for the Burial benefits have been made. So, this would, obviously, be persons who are making a claim on behalf of a deceased family member.

STEPHEN MORELLI: I can tell you that there have been a team. So, let me put it in context for you, in 2019, there were 145, 30 days. A 30 day is a claim for benefits associated with death. In 2020, there were 143. To date, there have been 18, 30 days filed associated with COVID deaths.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): It's interesting, because it does seem like you're making--

STEPHEN MORELLI: A small number.

30 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah, it seems small, it seems relative to the number of people that we know died in Connecticut. And I do think this goes back to an earlier concern that Representative Porter shared about education and that, unfortunately, I think there are people out there that just don't know about their rights to make claims under Workers' Comp. And I've seen that from my own constituents who call and they really have no idea how to pursue a claim. And this isn't any reflection on the agency, on your work, because when we advise them to go to you, they get into the system and they get handled. It's more a reflection on people not realizing what's available. And have there been any cases that have been litigated where the employer was able to establish a defense that it was a review of-- I'm not sure how to say this accurately, but you know what I mean, the rebuttal-- the presumptions that may prevail.

STEPHEN MORELLI: I think I understand your question. I can tell you that there are certainly cases where there are alleged defenses, meaning there's questions as to whether COVID was contracted at work or at home, perhaps they're alleging as a defense that other members of your immediate family had COVID prior to your claim date of exposure at work, there are certainly cases being defended. I can't tell you whether those defenses will hold up or not, because none of them been litigated fully.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And I know that we probably have more questions for you, we're fortunate because we know where you are, we can come back to you if we don't get a chance to ask them now. We did hear from an attorney, who I believe signed up to speak later today, a Workers' Comp attorney who talked about this Bill creating, or designating COVID-19 as an occupational disease. I believe that was the phrase that was used, and that in doing so that would extend the period of time that a person has to make a claim for Workers’ Compensation. Is that accurate?

31 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

STEPHEN MORELLI: Yes, that is.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So that would extend it up to three years, I understand?

STEPHEN MORELLI: Correct.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I hate to make a comment here, but it does strike me as one of the concerns we might have right now, is that there are people who have contracted COVID who recover fully, relatively quickly. And then we heard from a gentleman today at an earlier press conference, who contracted COVID many, many months ago, and is probably never gonna fully recover, a long-hauler, is what they're saying. So, it would seem to me that that designation would be important, because there are those who may not have filed a claim because they felt like I was out for two weeks, but there are those that might have long term illnesses as a result of COVID. That's more of a comment, but if you wanna comment on it, feel free

STEPHEN MORELLI: The comment I would make would be that, somewhat piggybacks on Representative Porter's concerns, in terms of-- and the educational concerns in terms of whether we've considered doing a specific COVID docket, etc. There's a lot still unknown about this. So, to date, I think the numbers indicate that we didn't have a massive influx of COVID claims hit the Workers' Compensation system. Now, that doesn't mean lot more claims weren't made to employers, and perhaps they were paid, they were paid the medical benefits they sought, like most workers' comp claims that exist out there in the rest of the world that I can't get a handle on, there are claims where people get injured at work, they miss some time, they get paid for the lost time, they get paid for the medical treatment, they go back to work, end of story. We never know anything about it.

32 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

That could be a similar issue with COVID claims, there could be a lot more claims. I think the reports that the Commission has been submitting monthly from the information we've been gathering from the insurers might shed a better picture of the larger numbers of claims, but generally, they focus on now the ones that are that are being brought before the Commission. I think we'll have to adjust as we go forward, should the situation change, meaning should there be influx of people who are having long-hauler or symptoms, if the legislature sees fit to designate this is an occupational disease, they'd have three years to perfect their claim. None of us have any way of knowing if problems down the road will materialize within three years or 10 years or 20 years, there's just an awful lot of unknown right now. And I assure you that we will adjust ourselves to whatever situation we have to face so that we can best meet our mission of serving the people of Connecticut. I can also tell you that there were 1726 with date of exposure between March 10 and May 20, in response to your earlier question.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And you know how many-- I guess, I could extrapolate from that, if I do the subtraction, I will get the figure post May 20th, correct?

STEPHEN MORELLI: Yeah, it looks to be about 1400.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. All right. I think that is all the questions that I have today. One last question, in terms of the-- we've heard a lot about the length of time it takes for someone to work their way through a claim that's being litigated. I've heard from several folks in Connecticut who contracted the illness, even during that first period where there was a presumption afforded them, they still haven't had their case resolved, it's still being litigated. There's a woman who's been very outspoken who-- And I'm not asking you to comment on her case, but she was one 33 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE of those people where both she and her husband worked for the same employer, they both got sick. Now the question is, who got-- Did they both get it at work? Or did one of them get it from the other one, I don't know that you could ever figure that out. Nonetheless, they both worked during this period where the rest of us were safe at home, and it was early in March. So, I guess, the question is, in terms of the delay that we hear so much about, are there any things that we as a legislature could focus on that would help to move the process more quickly for the claimant so that they don't have to wait this long period of time to have cases resolved?

STEPHEN MORELLI: I think that the statute as written has provisions for undue delay that any claimant or any claimants counsel can pursue. In my opinion, generally, they don't avail themselves of those very often, because they tend to-- tends to become a threat, and then it kinda gets worked out. The specific case you're talking about, I can tell you without compromising my position on pending litigation, that that's a case where there was a date of exposure in March, but a claim was not made until September, and it's currently a case that is being litigated. And the nature of our workers' comp environment creates a lot of different hurdles that have nothing to do with the availability of the Commission to be able to take you through the adjudication period seamlessly, particularly when we're in circumstances such as this, where you're trying to gather medical records and there's medical offices where people are working remotely. It certainly, I imagine, and I'm not out there handling workers' comp claims, but I imagine it's more difficult to get depositions done. And they're all different, in different cases, some cases move through very quickly, some don't. And sometimes it's because of one party or the other dragging their feet, not getting documents done, not gathering medical information.

34 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Having sat in a district and done hearings for years before becoming Chairman, sometimes you have three, four hearings where you're saying the same thing, "You have to get your causation," meaning you have to get a medical opinion which supports your case. COVID poses some interesting questions regarding that, and I think that is part of the genesis of people considering presumptions for this disease. And that is, just a communicable disease, it's very difficult for a doctor to give a report that says, "Yes, you got it at this moment, at this time." Similar to, you're talking about husband and wife, chicken in the egg situation. So, I guess my point is, if there are delays, and I, by the way, I have to say I'm not hearing from members of the Bar, and I'm pretty accessible to them, I'm not hearing any complaints about their cases being delayed or things aren't moving along quickly enough. We've been operating throughout the pandemic and our volume of cases really hasn't dipped very much. So, I can only say I think the commission is doing its part, and if there are delays, I can't think of any magic bullets I can suggest to you that, where you can wave your wand and it will speed things up. Certainly, for instance, if it's pointed out to me that a number of attorneys are having trouble getting records from x doctor, x doctor gets a letter from me saying, "Better get these reports out. Your reports, in accordance with the guidelines, have to come out in a timely basis." And if they continue to be dilatory in that nature, I remove them from the workers' comp system. So, I do have tools, and the parties have tools.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, I certainly think were remain open to hearing any suggestions on that. And it's interesting 'cause we have a number of Members of the General Assembly who are Workers' comp attorneys, and one of the things they say to us is that, yeah, I think they're used to the lengthy process of litigators of lawyers, they're kinda used to the process. What we hear mostly is from claimants that are not used to the process and are 35 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE desperately trying to pay bills. I'm sure that's why you may not have heard from folks, but we're hearing from them as legislators when they have a problem, and they can't get through the system.

So, I appreciate your taking the time today to answer these questions, and I know you're always available if we have questions after the hearing process. But our goal is, this is really the only mechanism for workers who get ill at work, Workers' Comp is the only system available to them to pursue a claim, and so we wanna make sure that, particularly, because of the pandemic, that we're absolutely addressing this desperate need for people to be compensated and taken care of, because they did go to work when the rest of us stayed safe. And so, I appreciate you being here today and answering these questions, and I'm sure we'll call on you again.

STEPHEN MORELLI: My pleasure, I'm always available. I would like to say, I like the rest of you who have benefited from the workers who continued to be at the grocery store, etc., so I'm certainly sympathetic to that. And you did raise something that I wanted to comment on, that is, I can tell you that the majority of the issues that are presented to me by legislators on behalf of constituents, it's amazing to me that how many of them, it's a function of-- It brought to our attention that so and so thinks their case is being delayed, and then we look up the case, and there hasn't been a hearing request. So, I think, probably, the thing that we should talk about some more at some point would be the ability to disseminate educational resources, either via, I don't know, media, or-- I don't think that's something the Commission has ever looked at, other than what we do do, which is send an information packet out when a case is initiated. I don't know that that's necessarily the Commission's role, but it's certainly in that area of educating people that those problems can be addressed if you're looking to do something. 36 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I appreciate that. I think that we in government need to figure out, pretty quickly, how do we address the pandemic and the illnesses that-- the COVID that people got, who are essential workers, who were working throughout this period of time. And this is, it's a difficult problem to solve, we don't wanna put it on employers who also did their very best in most instances, I would say, to protect the people that were working for them. Not always, but in many, many cases, they were endeavoring to make it as safe as they could. But, let's face it, it wasn't possible to truly make it safe for everyone. And so, it's not really the employer's fault yet we're asking them to pay for it. I get the conflict there. I do you think this may be a situation where we have to look at extraordinary measures, for instance, like was done in the 911 situation where funds were created to help people who were exposed to asbestos and other debris. We are in an exceptional period, and unfortunately, the only mechanism for workers is the Workers' Comp system. And so that's why I think there's so much attention being paid here, appropriately. So, I appreciate your comments again.

STEPHEN MORELLI: And again, I'm pleased to do so. I would like to say, though, that I think it's not just the Workers' Compensation Commission that is their recourse, in all candor, from the information I've gathered, it appears that many, many employers pay benefits, what we call, "Without prejudice," to employees, and that's one of the reasons why we didn't have such a dramatic influx of cases. So, I think there are employers out there that should be commended, because they stepped up and did the right thing, and paid benefits rather than hung their pad on the hook of, "Well, you can't prove where you got this."

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And I appreciate your comment, it's a good thing. IIs sort of what I was getting to, this wasn't all on the employers, and 37 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE that was an intention to make it like they're the bad guys here. And I think your point is, it's good that there were employers that paid. But I will say that, this educational piece is really important, as well, because I know I have a constituent who used all of her sick and medical time, because her employer had a generous policy, but in fact, she was then left without any time going forward. And because she contracted, or believes she contracted COVID at work, she would have been able to be compensated. So, even where employers did actually allow workers to use their sick time and have generous policies, there is-- I think the point that you're making about, sort of, how do we address the employer side, we also need to address the employee side, who didn't apply to Workers' Comp but also lost all their paid time, which is-- It's complicated, and I think that's what we're trying to sort out as a legislature,

STEPHEN MORELLI: It is very complicated, and I don't envy your job in having to do that. I can tell you that, if someone had to use their sick time or vacation time, for instance, and then is left without any vacation time, despite-- At no fault of their own, that's one of the remedies they can seek through the Commission, is reimbursement of their sick time and vacation time. I should say sick time, I really mean vacation time or personal time, personal leave.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, that's important to know. Well, thank you again for being here today, and I'm sure we'll be in touch with you about any questions we might have.

STEPHEN MORELLI: Okay, I look forward to it.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Take care.

STEPHEN MORELLI: Thank you. Have a good day.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So next up we have First 38 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Selectmen, Matthew Knickerbocker. I have full disclosure, Matt as a friend, his a First Selectman in my district, and it's always pleasant to-- Wonderful to see you, Matt.

MATTHEW KNICKERBOCKER: Good to see you, Senator, thank you very much. And Good to see you, Representative Porter and Members of the Commission, and I really appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today. I'm testifying on behalf of CCM, I should also let you know that I am currently the Vice Chair of CALRMA, the Connecticut Air Local Risk Management Authority, and testifying on behalf of that organization too, which is part of CCM. I'm testifying on HB 6478, an act concerning workers' compensation.

And let me start off by saying that I appreciate the need for helping workers, and that I find myself testifying in opposition to this Bill, in his present form today. I have submitted, on behalf of CCM some detailed testimony, but in the interest of time, I just wanna touch on a couple of key points. The main issue here is that, in trying to help workers who legitimately need help through this pandemic, this Bill has some open-ended issues that could possibly, and quite probably, really put some burden on local taxpayers, on local property owners. It goes too far, in some instances, and puts pressure on taxpayers that are already tremendously burdened, not only in general by rising property taxes, but by this pandemic as well. Specifically, the fivefold increase in benefits, duration of benefits. And you have to keep in mind that under CGS 31-284B, there are already provisions that apply only to municipalities that don't provide-- don't apply to the private sector, so this adds some additional burden.

But the biggest of the elephants in the room, of course, and Senator, you touched on it just a few seconds ago, is the definition that COVID-19 is an occupational disease. Certainly, that might be 39 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE appropriate in some narrow circumstances, but to use this as a blanket definition, really opens up a Pandora’s Box of costs. Workers have all different kinds of exposures in different places to automatically presume that anybody who contracted the disease contracted it at work. It just, it opens up the door, not only to workers' costs insurance coverage increases that could be very significant, but also opens the door to litigation, especially because it would be a retroactive presumption.

Just to use this as a simple example, I had a conversation with our HR folks today, of course, the town of Bethel, virtually all of my colleagues in the municipal management business since this pandemic started, have bent over backwards to keep our employees safe. We've rotated shifts, we've put up plastic barriers, we've done this at Town Hall and all of our town buildings, including the schools, and yet we have had it-- Here at Town Hall, I can't speak for the school district, but here at Town Hall, we've had two confirmed cases of COVID- 19, and about a dozen exposures in which employees were then asked to quarantine.

I could tell you; we've been extremely liberal in use of time, we have not penalized our employees for use of personal time when they've had to be quarantined at home, we've equipped them where appropriate and where possible to work from home. But the reason I bring this up is that, out of those exposures and cases, none of them occurred as a result of their employment. Now, how do we know that? Obviously, that begs the question, well, if you-- Because this is a rebuttable assumption, then wouldn't it be possible for any employer to find out if that's possible?

Well, not really, because in our environment, our employees voluntarily disclose that information. Their exposures occurred at family gatherings, during travel, a variety of other things, but none of those exposures occurred at work. Now, if you 40 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE have an adversarial position where an employee is claiming that they have been exposed at work, and their union is backing them up, this Bill would put the employer in a position of having to prove the negative, that that didn't happen. And there's no requirement that employees disclose personal information, there's no legal penalty if they refuse to submit to contact tracing questions. So, this opens up the door to a tremendous number of problems for employers.

And I really would encourage this Committee to look at other solutions on how to reach those, say those first line responders, or essential workers who really do have a legitimate problem in the work that they do. Because this is just too open ended and could result in tremendous costs being passed down to property tax payers that are already really having a hard time with the increases that they've seen in recent years. So, in the interest of time, I'll stop there and ask if the Committee Members have any questions. And thank you so much for the opportunity to speak.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Matt. I don't see any hands at this time, so thank you for being here. Always good to see you.

MATTHEW KNICKERBOCKER: Great to see you. Thanks a lot. Thanks for your hard work, I appreciate it.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Take care. Next up we have, Brian O'Connor.

BRIAN O'CONNOR: Good morning Co-Chairs, Kushner, Porter, Ranking Members, Sampson and Arora and Members of the Labor and Public Employee Committee. My name is Brian O'Connor, I'm the Director of Public Policy for the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities. I'll be testifying today in opposition to Senate Bill 1002, and House Bill 6595. You have CCM's written comments before you, so I'll just summarize. 41 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Frankly, from a municipal employer and from a general business perspective, these two Bills as drafted are some of the most disruptive and harmful proposals concerning workers' comp to come out in long time. Our concern is, if these two proposals become law, Connecticut is likely heading back to a worker's comp market, where the number of claims and costs associated with mental, mental will skyrocket. And the workers' comp system will again become unsustainable, which occurred prior to the reforms of 1993. People in businesses are moving back to Connecticut and I think we need to capitalize on that. And I think, looking at our restaurants and our empty storefronts, I think these kinds of proposals will negatively impact that trend that's occurring today. Just two weeks ago, this legislature made a commitment to cities and towns by passing a tiered pilot program, recognizing that municipalities are at a breaking point need the extra revenue because of the erosion of their tax bases, and corresponding reduction in state and municipal state aid.

These Bills if enacted, will totally undo this effort. What we find it especially troubling, are making COVID-19 a rebuttable presumption, with an expansive death benefit and that it be put in place retroactively. It would have dire financial consequences for municipalities, since it would have significantly increased our exposure to workers' compensation claims, with very little or no recourse as to how the individual contracted the disease. It was just mentioned that social gatherings are one of the main causes of the contraction of COVID-19, and we would have no way of doing that.

Also, making the presumption automatic for COVID-19 is most likely be deemed unconstitutional, since it would eliminate our due process rights, which is what occurred with heart and hypertension, reinsurance will be difficult to obtain. And I think what ultimately happened with heart and 42 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE hypertension, is they moved it out of workers' compensation and made it a benefit. And then, especially for some of our self-insured communities, this became problematic, and also a financial burden that they could not get out from under. Just based on what Chairman Morelli commented earlier, the Workers' Compensation System is working, and fully operational. There's a remedy for compensating employees who may have contracted COVID-19 while performing their duties in the course of work, which is in Connecticut general statute 31-275 Sub 15. Use this statute, it's working. And it will not open the workers' compensation market. As far as some of the other parts of the Bill that-- As far as this goes, we're also concerned with the amendments to the PTSI sections, these are very concerning.

CLERK: Thank you, Mr. O'Connor, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

BRIAN O'CONNOR: Sure. We oppose having the telecommunicators added, we think COVID-19 should not be a qualifying event. And as far as some of the other provisions, I think, burial benefits, we can work with you on that, but we do think $20,000 may be excessive. And then, as a final point, I think, Chairman Kushner, some of the things that you've stated, and Representative Porter, as far as education, I think are very timely. And I think, actually, probably the direction and takeaway we should get from this public hearing. I'll be happy to answer any questions.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. I don't see any hands at this time.

BRIAN O'CONNOR: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So, we will move to the next speaker and I believe that is, Paula Thomas Levy. Oh, wait a second, I'm sorry. Brian, there is a hand, it went up late. But I will allow, Representative Arora to ask the question. 43 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

BRIAN O'CONNOR: Certainly. Thank you.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Mr. O'Connor, for your time and your testimony. Can you tell us a little more, in terms of priority, what are the elements which you really prioritize? The elements of this Bill which would create most harm as you defined?

BRIAN O'CONNOR: I think the retroactive nature of it, and the rebuttable presumption are the two worst elements of this Bill.

REP. ARORA (151ST): And then, does it, in terms of the other elements which you may find somewhere in the middle, could you talk to those or mention those as well?

BRIAN O'CONNOR: Sure. Just one second, please. I think, looking at some of the-- what are deemed to be discriminatory practices, again, we think there's mechanisms in the current Workers' Compensation System that are already effective. Again, Chairman Morelli said they're not getting a lot of complaints, people have access to him they haven't been making those kinds of comments to him, as far as delays in payment. So, I think that that's one area.

The other thing I do wanna point out, we've talked about in the past, maybe something positive, right now you have that 28-day period, as far as whether you can deny a claim and reserve your right to contest in the future. We've advocated for extending that, I think we've put out there in the past, 45 days, 'cause I think it's kind of a defense mechanism, from the insurers’ point of view, is to deny that claim. Because they're still looking for more information. And again, because they wanna reserve their right to contest in the future. So, I think that's something that we could work together on. 44 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Mr. O'Connor. My final question, through you, Mr. Chair-- through you, Madam Chair, is what do you think is the driving need? I do think there is some need which the proponents of this Bill, obviously, feel about, where do you think, from your employees as well as your members perspective, what is the need, if any, for a Bill which addresses this issue? Thank you,

BRIAN O'CONNOR: Yeah, I respectfully disagree that there's a need, I think the current construct of the Worker's Comp system is working. Just based on the number of claims, where out of 3123, only 295 have been litigated, shows that less than 10% are actually being contested, so I think-- Or going trial. So, I think that's an area that it's working.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you for your insights on this issue, appreciate that. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And I see no other hands, so we will move now to the next speaker, and that is, Paula Thomas Levy. Is she with us?

PAULA THOMAS LEVY: Yes.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead.

PAULA THOMAS LEVY: Hello. How are you?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Doing well. Good morning.

PAULA THOMAS LEVY: Good morning, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, and the Members of the Committee. My name is Paula Levy Thomas, and I am an assistant coordinator at a group home operated by attorney firm. I'm here today to testify in support of Senate Bill 1002, and the House Bill 6595. I enjoy my job, because it gives me the opportunity to improve the lives of the people we support. I provide direct care, I pass meds, I'm in charge of 45 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE recreation activities, I set up vacations, set up work schedules, handle documentation for not only the people that we support, but also the house.

In the beginning of the pandemic, we were forced to work with many hardships, but we continue to work and deliver care in the group homes, in mass setting, in close quarters, with co- workers and our clients. Because of this, one of our clients got sick, and unfortunately, we lost him to COVID-19. We were devastated. It is very hard to lose someone that is like family to you. His death hit us all really hard, and it still takes a toll on us today. Passing Senate Bill 1002 and the House Bill 6595, will changed my life, because it would lower my anxiety and allow me to have more comfort knowing that we have adequate protective equipment for the rest of the pandemic and in the future. Please help me protect the frontline essential workers like me. Thank you for your time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much. And thank you for being there for all of us as an essential worker. We really what you went through. And it's not enough to say thank you, hopefully we can do more.

PAULA THOMAS LEVY: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I don't see any questions at this time. No hands, so thank you for being with us. Have a good rest of your day.

PAULA THOMAS LEVY: We are proud of you as well.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I'm gonna go back. I skipped over, James Evans, and I apologize, James, I got carried away here. Are you with us now? James, can you unmute yourself and I don't see you now. You're unmuted, I don't know if you wanna turn on your camera. I don't know if you're speaking but we can't hear you. 46 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

JAMES EVANS: Can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Now we can you hear you but there is an echo, so if you're gonna-- There you go. Go ahead.

JAMES EVANS: Sorry about that. Good morning, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and distinguished Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is James Evans, I'm a resident of Bethlehem and a member of the CEUI, Local 511, and I work the Southbury Training School. I'm a material storage supervisor 1 for our warehouse. I'm submitting testimony in support of the SB 1002, an act concerning labor issues related to the COVID-19 personal protective equipment and other staffing matters, and the HB 6595, an act concerning labor matters related to the COVID-19 personal protective equipment and other staffing matters. I'd specifically like to focus on Section was 12 and 14 of both Bills.

On March 13th, 2020, our physical plant employees with Southbury Training School were deemed as essential employees to prepare and take on additional roles that the COVID-19 pandemic would bring upon the Southbury Training School. Most of our employees that make up physical plant are in the high-risk age group. Myself, I have a compromised daughter that I was very worried about, that I would bring it home to her and the rest of my family. In physical plant, electrical, plumbing, HVAC carpentry, paint, machine shop, adaptive equipment, our warehouse, our powerhouse and our grounds department, we still came to work every day, and still had to maintain all the buildings and grounds, with or without COVID-19 positive individuals, all while 45% of our population tested positive for the virus, and we lost four staff. This made our jobs very uneasy and stressful.

The reason for asking for the specialized hazard pay 47 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE of $10 an hour and updating the hazard pay definitions, is the fact that we never dealt with anything like this highly infectious virus, or given the choice to become non-essential. I urge the Committee to support both SB 1002 and HB 6595. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And I really appreciate you being here, it's important that we hear folks who are out there caring on when we were home safe. And I, particularly, wanna say how sorry I am for the loss of your co-workers and for having been in that environment, must have been very difficult. So, we appreciate your service, and hopefully, this Committee will be in a position to take matters that will really, not just speak words of appreciation, but actually provide relief to essential work. So, thank you for being here today.

JAMES EVANS: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I don't see any hands, so have a great day. And we will move to our next speaker. Next up we have a number 14, Dave Roche.

DAVE ROCHE: How's that?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's good. We can see you.

DAVE ROCHE: You caught me off-guard, I wasn't ready.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah. People sign up and then they can't always get here, or they have difficulty with their technology, but you're up next.

DAVE ROCHE: All right, great. Well, Chairwoman Porter, Chairwoman Kushner, Ranking Member, Sampson, and Arora, and Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. I'm here today, actually, I was here to testify strictly on the energy Bill, but I 48 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE didn't realize that the Workers' Comp was also up on here today, and I did submit testimony on both. So, I'll just, quickly I'll just comment on the Workers' Comp. I just think it's, actually, the right thing to do. We were essential workforces building trades, and doing-- not doing something like this, to me, makes me look back at how we treat our military when they come back from overseas after defending us. We don't take care of them, and this is the same thing we put people on the front liners, and now we're turning our back on them. So, I hope you pass that Bill.

As far as the energy Bill, there's a lot to that, but I just wanna go back. Some of the important parts of that is, involves what we like to be, as part of the building trades, is we realize that there needs to be a change in climate, energy, resources. Things are changing, and we gotta think about, honestly, this world that we're in, and making sure it's here. So, the building trades we've always adapted to that, right? If you look back in history, our first PLA was in, I believe was 1931, was the Hoover Dam, right? Which was an energy phenomenon.

Up to today when we're looking at solar panels at the gravel pit in Windsor. So, we've always adapted to these changing needs. Sometimes we get beat up because we built a lot of nuclear plants, but that was the energy at the time, that was what the needs were for this country. And now we're moving into another part of that, and we wanna be part of that 'cause we feel that our training is second to none. We're already ahead of it, training for the wing that's coming to Connecticut, again, the solar panels, we have that ability to adapt that quickly. And we have the ability to go into communities and offer opportunities to people who may not have had it.

Equality in the building trades has never been an 49 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE issue. Everybody comes in, everybody gets paid the same, whether you're an apprentice in the first year, doesn't matter where you come from, what your background is, you get the right pay, same as everybody else up to journeyman status. So, we just think that this is a great opportunity, not just to create an energy-- a future energy that's gonna help the climate of this country or this world, but also to keep it in line with creating great jobs that'll give good benefits and good pay. So, thanks for hearing me out today. Hope I was good, you caught me off guard, again.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): You did fine. It's always good to see you.

DAVE ROCHE: Good to see you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I don't see any hands. I will just say that, I appreciate your advocacy. One of the things, it gives us an opportunity to recognize the folks in our community, the building trades in this instance, who do such great work. We wanna be in a position where we're making sure that these massive projects that we will be engaged in as we move to a safer, cleaner energy system, that those jobs are done by people who are, as you mentioned, well trained, but also that we are taking care of the people who live here so that people have good jobs, with good benefits that helps strengthen our state. And there are so many folks from the trades in my district and in, I think, all the districts in Connecticut, everywhere you go, you meet men and women who are skilled trades people. And I just have such great respect for everything you do. And we wanna keep you here, we want to keep you as strong members of our middle class here in Connecticut. So, thank you for being here and testifying.

DAVE ROCHE: Thank you. Have a great day, 50 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): You too. Next up, I think we have, Nathan Simpson, is that correct?

NATHAN SIPMSON: So, can everyone hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can.

NATHAN SIPMSON: Okay. Well, thank you very much, Chair Kushner, Chair Porter, and the Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Nathan Simpson, I'm a member of Unite Here, Local 217, and I live here in New Britain, Connecticut. I'm here to testify in strong support of House Bill 6478 to create a Workers' Compensation presumption for COVID-19. I work at UConn Health Centre in the kitchen. I have a sister who is a nurse, and an uncle who works with the homeless, so our lines of work puts us in direct contact with the personal spaces of caseworkers, nurses, doctors, and most often, our patients.

These are individuals placed directly in the line of fire for this pandemic. In my family's experience, the exposure, contraction or even the hospitalization related to COVID-19 isn't really a question of if, but when. We are frontline workers, and we make sure that people who are sick get the care they need. They call us heroes, they call us essential, and we don't have the luxury to work from home. And just to exemplify this, in late March of 2020, Infectious Disease Control experts at UConn health confirmed I was exposed to patients who were COVID-19 positive without any PPE. And by this time, a public health crisis was well underway. I was then placed on a stay-at-home quarantine, unable to work for two weeks, and upon my leaving, there was no test administered, there were no unemployment benefits, no additional sick days. I was given two masks and a paper bag for their disposal. And the company then used my only five sick days for the entire year to cover the days I missed because of 51 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the quarantine. And I will reiterate, we are so called heroes.

As a frontline worker, I put my life on the line to help protect the sick and vulnerable in my community. I'm proud to do that, but in the middle of this pandemic, I don't feel that our institutions really stepped up when we needed them most. Shifting the burden of proof from workers to employers would go a long way towards giving a fair shake to frontline workers throughout Connecticut. Not all of them has been as lucky as I was, and it is imperative to ensure that luck is not the main or sole avenue to safety, both for our health and economy. It just simply won't do. And so, my fellow essential workers in Unite Here Local 217 and I, urge you to support House Bill 6478. And thank you very much for your time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Nathan. a\And thank you for the work that you did, and we are here trying to address some of the issues that you've raised here today. So, thank you for being with us. I don't see any hands at this time, so have a great day.

NATHAN SIPMSON: Thank you. You too.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up we have, Sohail Rana, from the Independent Drivers Guild. Sohail, I saw you here a few minutes ago. Sohail, can you unmute? I don't know if you can hear me, but Sohail, if you're having difficulty, we can come back to you. So stay with us and see if you can get unmuted and get on camera. In the meantime, I'll go to, Rick Melita, who's up next. Go ahead, Rick, you are muted, though.

RICK MELITA: Hi, I just like to start by noting that today is the one-year anniversary of the declaration of the pandemic, and just to take a moment to think of the 500,000 plus people we've lost in this past year. Hello, my name is Rick 52 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Melita, I'm with the Service Employees International Union here in Connecticut. We represent over 60,000 Members, active and retired, in the public and private sector in Connecticut. We at SEIU have lost dozens of workers in high-risk job titles to COVID. You'll hear from others today of stories of how they were expected to show up to their newly dangerous work, not given appropriate protection, were denied sick time when they got sick, and were slow worked refused compensation for their occupational illnesses. The system we have not only didn't protect him, it wouldn't even cover the cost to bury them. They're lauded as heroes, but it's treated as disposable.

When you have to wear a hefty bag to protect yourself, it's clear you’re thought of as trash. Specific portions of this Bill address, among other things, the need to stockpile PPE, provide paid sick leave, provide a rebuttable presumption for COVID, ensure recall rights for those laid off, and increased benefits when a job kills, all of which we support. One of the lies that the COVID plague exposed is that, the one about the benefits of limited government. We've been hollowing out and contracting out government for decades. And when does that disaster struck, we were totally unprepared, whether it was enough masks or gowns, or CNAs, or clerks to process unemployment claims. In my written testimony, I said mean things about the former president, I'll skip over that for now, but I will say that the current Congress and administration have met the moment and realize this country needs them to go big with a COVID relief package, which hopefully will be signed tomorrow. And it's wildly popular, proving the old adage good policy is good politics.

I urge the General Assembly to go big as well. This doesn't reverse all the mistakes, these two Bills don't reverse all the mistakes of the last year, the last 40 or the last 400, but it offers a measured approach of taking care of those that misguided 53 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE policy harmed and take steps to protect workers in the future. I urge support of these two Bills, and thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you.

RICK MELITA: And I think I might have missed which Bills I was intending to support, I'm sorry, It's Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595, apologize for that.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Rick. I do see a hand. So I'll recognize Representative Winkler.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Yes. We've heard a couple of times today that there are only between 200 and 300 adjudicated claims that means the system is working. Do you agree with that statement?

RICK MELITA: I think that the system is cumbersome and not worker-friendly. I was listening to a press conference earlier, and I believe that there'll be an attorney that speaking later on in the program today. But I don't think that the system is geared for occupational illness. The system is geared for manufacturing, if you lose a hand or a foot or a leg, or are killed on the job in an industrial accident, it's pretty cut and dry most of the time. Determining occupational exposures and occupational illnesses that result from those exposures can be complicated.

It's been especially complicated because we find that many employers say, "Well, I don't think that they got it at the job, they might have gone to a barbecue with some of their friends, or what about a family member that gave them?" And there can be a lot of misdirection in terms of that. The bottom line is that, if you look at jobs where there was a high degree of contact with the public, or with individuals that might be susceptible to COVID, there were a number of deaths there. I think in the nursing homes we've had nearly two dozen deaths 54 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE there. A lot of other job titles where there was direct contact and direct care, also proved to be very deadly and caused a lot of illnesses. So I think it's very cumbersome, the current system is very cumbersome in terms of determining compensation levels.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): And through the speaker, we've heard today that if we create a rebuttable presumption that it will open up some sort of litigation. It was my understanding that Workers’ Comp was set up so workers couldn't sue for on-the- job injuries. Do you see how litigation would arise out of a rebuttable presumption?

RICK MELITA: Well, the first word is the key one there, it's rebuttable, right? That it's not automatic. And it's also important to know-- to take out your labor history books, that the Workers’ Comp system was not a progressive demand from working men and women in the teens it was a result of a number of court cases that were starting to go against employers, and they realized that there was tremendous liability against them for the unsafe conditions that existed in the turn of the last century.

So, this was a compromise in order to get them off the hook. If it was a compromise, it was a compromise that was extremely beneficial. When you look at the history of occupational health and safety, we're littered with disasters that were entirely preventable. And we've done a fairly good job on the injury side, it's the issue of illnesses that still remains sticky.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

RICK MELITA: Thank you, Mr. Winkler.

55 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And I don't see any other hands at this time, so thank you, Rick. Have a great day.

RICK MELITA: Thank you, Senator. You too.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And I see that Sohail is with us now. Go ahead, Sohail. You're muted, and if you could position yourself, we can't quite see you, you're off to the one side. I'm not sure if you can hear us, Sohail? Still having trouble, okay. And I will go next then to, Kristina Baldwin.

SOHAIL RANA: Guys quite quiet now, I'm on the call.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Oh, okay, Sohail, go ahead. We can hear you now.

SOHAIL RANA: Pleasure. Hi, how are you?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Good. Go ahead and proceed.

SOHAIL RANA: All right. I think it's still good morning. Good morning, Chair Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Senator Sampson, Representative Arora and Members of the Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to speak here in front of the Labor Committee this morning. My name is Sohail Rana, I am a senior organizer with the Independent Drivers Guild. I have been an organizer for the last five years, and a driver myself for 29 years. I have been a organizing driver in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. All my time organizing, I learned one thing for sure that TNC companies exploit drivers to the last pieces-- to the pieces. And we all know this very well, how these companies exploit drivers.

Drivers do not get paid what they deserve to be paid for their work. After all your expenses drivers take home for less than the minimum wage in the state of Connecticut. Drivers do not have a due process, companies can fire them any time without any good 56 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE reason, and worst, drivers do not have the chance to answer the acquisition the company fires a driver for. Most of the time to get a refund, riders make a made-up complaint and the driver gets fired without any due process, without any investigation of the rider's complaint by the companies. Drivers have been complaining, hurting, suffering, rallying, protesting to nor rescue so far.

History tells us that mega-billions-dollar companies are not going to stop exploiting workers drivers by themselves. They never did, they never will. This only can be corrected by giving drivers right to bargain, giving drivers a seat at the table, and giving drivers a voice. No human should lose their dignity to put food at the table for their families. 90% of the drivers are immigrants and people of color. I seek your support for drivers and their families and ask the passage of the SB 1000. Now it is your choice to save thousands of families or not. Have a great day. Questions.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Sohail. And let me see if there any questions for you. I don't see any hands at this time, but I do appreciate you being here. I know you're someone who has--

SOHAIL RANA: I'm here.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): There you are. I know you're very familiar with the issues. Maybe you could just help clarify a couple of things, what is different about this Bill and what you're seeking compared to previous years?

SOHAIL RANA: Previous years, I think a lot have changed, as we know, like we have learned a lot through going through pandemic, and unemployment insurance, and also Workers’ Compensation, and also health insurance. So, from previous years, I think it was always our thing, drivers are independent contractors and they always should have a seat at the table. And there were like some, like technical 57 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE things, which later my executive director and our legislative person, they will be explaining the bits of it. Like if you wanna know the nuts and bolts of the Bill, but that's what exactly we are asking, the right to bargain, that's a big thing. And, yeah, I mean, we just don't want companies to give us something, and kind of as an employee, we want a seat at the table. So I think in previous Bills, it was a company should do this company should do that, I think we want that seat at the table so we can negotiate for them.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, that's very helpful, to summarize it in that way. I don't see any other hands at this time, so I will [Inaudible] and have a great rest of your day.

SOHAIL RANA: Thank you so much. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up, we have, Kristina Baldwin. There you go. Go ahead.

KRISTINA BALDWIN: Good afternoon. Can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can.

KRISTINA BALDWIN: Okay, great. Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Members of the Committee, my name is Kristina Baldwin and I'm with the American Property Casualty Insurance Association. APCIA is a nationwide trade association representing nearly 60% of the property casualty insurance market across the United States. I'm here to express APCIA's strong concerns with three Bills on the agenda, HB 6478, and the provisions of HB 6595 and SB 1002 that relate to Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Our concern with these provisions are that they would all add major costs to the Workers’ Compensation System, and potentially add millions of dollars in costs for Connecticut businesses at a time when many businesses are struggling to recover from the pandemic.

58 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

First off, I would just like to say that APCIA, like most of us, we recognize the contributions that employees working during the pandemic have made, and we understand and appreciate that these Bills are certainly well-intentioned efforts to provide assistance to these employees and others. But as I said, we are concerned that these provisions will come with a major cost and a clause that will have to be borne by Connecticut's businesses. And to the extent that these very generous provisions add costs, that businesses in other states do not need to bear, Connecticut's businesses maybe at a competitive disadvantage, vis-a-vis businesses in other states, and that may make the struggle to come back from COVID-19 even more difficult for Connecticut's businesses.

Among the provisions about which we have concerned, each of these Bills includes provisions to put in place the broadest Workers' Comp presumption for COVID-19 of any state in the nation. As you know, Workers’ Compensation is premised on the fact that only injuries or diseases which arise in the course of employment are covered. The broad presumption in this Bill would presume that COVID was contracted in the workplace and unfairly make Connecticut employers liable for COVID-19 cases, which may not in any way be related to work.

Narrowly tailored Workers’ Comp COVID presumption, such as the one included in Governor Lamont's executive order, the summer are more defensible since generally, they applied in the early stages of the pandemic when citizens were pretty much staying at home and locked down, except when essential workers left their homes to go to work. Now, on the other hand, as Connecticut and the rest of the country return to more normal social operations, presumptions that the disease was contracted in the workplace is simply-- they don't really make sense when people are going to restaurants, bars, malls and other social and public cultural activities.

59 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

As you all know, and Governor Lamont recently announced that in the coming weeks he's gonna be eliminating--

CLERK: Thank you, Ms. Baldwin, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

KRISTINA BALDWIN: Okay. As we resume normal life, the restrictions are gonna be less and you really can't say that anyone contracting this got this at COVID. And in addition, we believe this would cover all employees, because even employees working from home with any materials from their employer, like a laptop, for example, would be covered by the presumption. So, that's very problematic, 'cause those folks never even left their house. So yeah, we just have great concerns that this is gonna add millions of dollars in costs to be borne by Connecticut businesses. Thank you for the opportunity to express my views, and I'm happy to take any questions.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. I do see a hand, Representative Winkler.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Yes. If we-- and I'm not saying this is possible or advisable, but I'm asking if we took some federal dollars that we are getting, and we put them into the Workers' Comp fund, so that we, in essence, bore the whole burden of COVID-19 claims ourselves, the state, would that eliminate your objections to the rebuttable presumption?

KRISTINA BALDWIN: Obviously, it would be helpful if the entire financial burden were borne from other funds. I think we would still have concerns, though, if insurers and self-insured employers were required to administer all of these claims, because the system would be overburdened. Again, the Workers’ Comp system is set up to handle claims related to injuries and diseases in the workplace. And this Bill, with respect to COVID, would say anytime 60 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE anyone gets COVID, and they worked, they're entitled to this presumption.

So, just I think, if these claims we're gonna be administered to the Workers’ Comp system, that could be a problem, but again, we're certainly willing to look at any proposal and work with folks to try to make something work.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Through the Chair, did you hear the testimony of the Workers’ Comp Commissioner?

KRISTINA BALDWIN: Yes.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Okay. And he indicated that the system was not being overwhelmed by claims, that there were fewer claims than they expected.

KRISTINA BALDWIN: Yes, not currently being overwhelmed by claims. And potentially part of that is due to the fact that the current presumption was appropriately narrowly tailored. The concern is that, this presumption really has no limitations on it so all employees who have contracted COVID, at any time during the crisis, would get this presumption and be able to recover under the system. So the concern is, if that happens, it could overburden the system.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So that does raise a question for me, Kristina. Essentially, I think what your argument is then is that, if there wasn't a rebuttable assumption that because there was a rebuttable presumption-- Or let me just, it's hard for me to get this right, without rebuttable presumption, if it was just the regular needs of filing a worker's comp claims, that workers who contracted COVID-19 are not filing claims, it wouldn't-- So essentially, you said that the 61 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Chairman Morelli's testimony, you think that the number of claims was low because there wasn't a rebuttable presumption that surpassed May 20th. So you think people aren't filing claims because they don't have that assumption or that presumption?

KRISTINA BALDWIN: No, I'm not necessarily saying that, although it may have played a role to some degree, but I'm saying if a Bill of this nature, which passed with absolutely no restrictions on when the presumption would be applicable, and that that really all employees would be able to file a claim if they got COVID, regardless of whether it had anything to do with work. Again, even the employees who never left their house, but were using a laptop or a stapler from their employer. So, I just would have concerns that if something that expansive passed, it could result in additional claims.

There are claims being filed outside of the compensation period, and they're definitely being paid, the system is working, but again, I think it's just the breadth of this proposal that would, potentially, lead to concerns that there could be an influx of claims that may in no way be related to the workplace.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And so, for my last question. So, Representative Winkler laid out an interesting scenario, where there would be funds from the federal government or from state government, for that matter, to pay for claims for workers who got COVID, essential workers, people who were continuing to work. And you were concerned that the system couldn't manage that. So does that mean that you would-- Is it fair for us to sort of extrapolate from that and say that, you think that the workers themselves should bear that full responsibility and cost of having contracted COVID, because there's no system that can support them?

KRISTINA BALDWIN: I'm not necessarily saying that. If under Representative Winkler's scenario, and the 62 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE funds were coming from somewhere else, that we couldn't handle it, but I'd like to see what the provisions would be in it. I would be concerned about the potential burdens, but we'd need to, obviously, take a look at it. No, I don't think that the worker should bear the entire burden, but if they contracted COVID outside of the workplace, then the Workers’ Comp System is not the appropriate place for them to be compensated.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And is there another place where they could go to be compensated?

KRISTINA BALDWIN: There's health insurance for there, obviously, health-related expenses. I believe there were-- There is sick leave provisions, I believe, both at the federal level, and I think in Connecticut as well. And obviously, there have been various relief packages for citizens. So, there are other places, but again, not to repeat myself, but if the disease is not contracted in the workplace, it's not-- it shouldn't be part of Workers’ Compensation.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And the last thing, just in response to your concerns about the Bill being inclusive. Excuse me. Being inclusive is the people that did not work outside of the home. I know when we drafted this Bill, we had informational hearings, and we had a lot of discussion in the drafting. It was not our intention to include people who work exclusively from home and didn't interact with the public or with coworkers. So if there was an error in the drafting, we will thank you for bringing that to our attention, we will go back and take a look at that.

KRISTINA BALDWIN: Okay. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. I see no other hands, so I'll move on to-- Actually, we're gonna move back, I understand that-- Give me one second. I believe there was someone I missed that is here. 63 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Would that be number-- Hold on, I may need your help, Devin. I don't see an older number here, so maybe that person has dropped off again. So, let me go to our next person on the list, I believe that's, Christina Briggs. And Devin, will you take a look at the list while we hear from Christina Briggs, if there's someone that we missed, please text me so I can catch up. Go ahead and Ms. Briggs. Are you with us? Christina Briggs. I see you on the screen here, but we can't hear you and we don't see you. Now, I can-- Oops, you unmuted then you muted again. Christina. Okay, Devin, maybe you can help Ms. Briggs. Let's see. Actually, I see now I'm going back to Mary Tracy, number 18. Are you here Mary?

MARY TRACEY: Good afternoon, Senator, can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can. Go ahead.

MARY TRACEY: Hi, good afternoon, Senator, Members of the Labor Committee. My name is Mary Tracey and I was a security officer at the Gold Building in Hartford, Connecticut until two weeks ago when I was laid off. I'm here with other members from my union, 32 BJSEIU, to ask that you pass the COVID labor Bill. All the members of 32BJ have been on the frontlines of this pandemic, performing essential jobs as cleaners, teachers, and security officers, like myself.

The work that we security officers do always carries risks, because you never know who is going to be walking through the door. Now everyone who walks through the door is a risk, and entirely in a new way. We can't fully protect ourselves either. We might have masks, but we still have to interact with visitors to the building in the same way, making the risk even greater. To address that risk, we support several items of this Bill. First, that essential workers have hazard pay, the essential workers’ pay, retroactive to the beginning of the pandemic. If you recall, that was the essential part of the Heroes 64 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Act. But as that pandemic has gone on and on, people have returned to their old ways of thinking. When it started, everyone suddenly realized that security officers, grocery store clerks, janitors, and so many other working people could not work from home.

Suddenly, people appreciated us. That has faded a little bit, I think, yet we still risk everything, and we still aren't paid much. It's not right. Second, if we need to quarantine or become infected with COVID-19 on the job, we should be entitled to receive payment from the job, and not have it taken from our paid time off or sick time. For anyone that is considered a long hauler, that is anyone who the effects or symptoms of COVID can return, our time for that should not be compensated and-- should be compensated and not deducted from our time off. I hope you agree with these reasons and thank you for hearing my testimony.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Mary, and we certainly do appreciate all that you've done and your co-workers in going to work every day, and continuing to keep us all safe. So we appreciate that. And for the reasons you mentioned, we are attempting to do more than just say thank you. I don't see any hands at this time, I hope you have a good day.

MARY TRACEY: Thank you. You too, Senator.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up, I'm gonna go back and see if Christina Briggs can unmute now. Christina, we still can't hear.

CHRISTINA BRIGGS: Yeah, I'm fine.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, now I can hear you. Go ahead.

CHRISTINA BRIGGS: In support of SB 1002 an act concerning labor issues relating to COVID-19 personal protective equipment and other staffing 65 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE matters, and in support of HB 6595, the Act concerning labor matters relating to COVID-19 personal quick personal protective equipment and other staffing issues, and in support of HB 6479, an act concerning workers’ compensation. Good morning, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, and Members of this Committee. My name is Christina Briggs, I'm an assistant program coordinator at [Inaudible] I am here to support the Senate Bill 1002, House Bill 6595 and HB 6476. I love my job because I love making a difference in many individual lives on a daily basis. I love that I can help them live as close to normal lives as possible. I provide direct care, which looks like cooking, cleaning, passing meds, control of finances, shopping, and lastly, I'm in charge of their recreational activities, as well as all medical appointments and documentation for that.

Because of COVID, we aren't allowed to go on trips for individuals anymore, so we have to get more creative at home and try our best to find activities for them to do. During COVID, my group home ended up with a positive client, and we had very little PPE. Our staff ended up having to quarantine for Christmas, and in order to make sure our families and individuals were safe, some of us had to move into our facility for five days. Our staff put our lives at risk and would have benefited greatly from hero pay. In addition, my husband lost his job due to COVID, and we are now down to one income.

There are countless families in the state who are frontline essential workers experiencing crises like mine. Hazard pay and access to sick leave that would not take away from our own is needed. During this past year, I've worked an average of 75, 110 hours per week, because of short staffing due to this pandemic. Please pass Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595. Thank you for consideration in this matter.

66 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Christina. And thank you for hanging in there with all the technical difficulties. And we so appreciate the work that you do. I don't see any hand at this time, so we are gonna go to our next speaker. Have a very good day.

CHRISTINA BRIGGS: You as well. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And I did get a message that we can-- And I don't know if he's still available, I had not seen it, but I gather he's working with Devin to get connected. Some technical problems, but do we have, Hediberto Canelas? Devin, do we have Hediberto?

CLERK: No, Madam Chair, we do not have him at the moment.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. Let me know when you're able to connect him. I'll move on to the next speaker, number 22, Benjamin Ludwig. Go ahead.

BENJAMIN LUDWIG: Can you hear me okay?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah.

BENJAMIN LUDWIG: Okay. How you doing? Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, and distinguished Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Ben Ludwig, and I'm a resident of Winstead and a member of CEUI Local 511. I work to Southbury Training School and am a QCWEC and work in the HVAC department. I'm submitting testimony today in support of SB 1002, an act concerning labor issues related to COVID-19 personal protective equipment and other staffing matters, and HB 6595, an act concerning labor matters related to COVID-19 personal protective equipment, and other staffing matters. I would specifically like to focus on Sections 12 and 14 of both Bills. On March 13th--

67 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): We just lost him. Okay, we're having so much technical difficulties. There you are, Benjamin, you're back. We lost you right as you were saying, "On March 13th."

BENJAMIN LUDWIG: Okay, so on March 13th of 2020, the physical plant maintenance employees of Southbury Training School were deemed as essential employees. As we're thankful they have been able to work during this pandemic, it's been very stressful experience. Most of our employees are of the high- risk age group, and myself have elderly parents at home. My wife has asthma, so this whole time I've been worried about getting sick and spreading it to my family. The reason for asking for specialized hazard pay of $10 an hour and updating the hazard pay definitions is the fact that we've never dealt with anything like this highly infectious virus down here.

The Southbury Training School is more like a home to the many people that live here than it is a hospital. And during this pandemic, we've had to go in and out of buildings, with COVID positive patients in them, to continue to work on the heating, air conditioning, plumbing, electrical, and the many other systems that need to keep this place running, comfortable and safe for everybody living and employed here. I urge your Committee to support both SB 1002 and HB 6595. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And we did hear testimony earlier today from one of your co-workers, and we appreciate the work you've been doing. And we recognize that there have been some deaths at the Southbury Training Center from COVID, and we feel so sorry for your loss of your co-workers and residents.

BENJAMIN LUDWIG: Thank you.

68 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. I don't see any hand, so-- Hold on, give me one second. Yeah, I don't see any hand, so we're gonna move to our next speaker.

BENJAMIN LUDWIG: Thank you very much. Have a good day.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): You too, take care. I'm gonna move-- Devin did we get number 11, Hediberto?

CLERK: No, we did not.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. So I'm gonna move on to, Andrew Greenblatt.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: Thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: Good afternoon. Thank you, Chairs Kushner, and Porter, and Senators Sampson and Representative Arora and the Members of the Committee. My name is Andrew Greenblatt, I'm the executive director of IDG Benefits Fund, which is a nonprofit that was created to help labor organizations serve gig economy workers, especially drivers on platforms like Uber and Lyft. Our organization has a organization has a particular focus in helping workers get access to benefits. Today I'm here to testify in support of SB 1000. This is a landmark Bill that would, for the first time, give network drivers in Connecticut the right to organize and have an effective voice in shaping their work life, including their wages, their benefits, and protections against unfair labor practices. The proposed Bill would have the state regulate this industry. This is going to be important in how the whole thing works. So the state would step in to regulate the industry, and we do so by creating an Industry Council made up of the companies and a union representing the workers. And that Industry Council would then propose regulations to the state which the state could then accept or 69 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE reject. Any regulations that the state did impose would be binding on the entire industry.

Drivers would be able to choose which unions represent them. And then the Industry Council made up of the unions and those companies would need to negotiate those proposed regulations. This could lead to things like setting minimum wage, providing a suite of benefits paid for with a surcharge on rides, and even creating grievance procedures for drivers who are unfairly kicked off of these platforms.

Now by structuring the law in this way, the state creating this regulatory process with the advice and counsel of the Industry Council. It would allow the state to do this without running afoul of the Sherman Antitrust Act or the NLRA. We see this all the time, right? States routinely set electric rates, licensing requirements for professions, safety standards for workplaces often getting input from the industry that's being regulated, or associations from that industry, this would be a similar situation.

Furthermore, under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, this is a line of cases, it would allow drivers to come together and speak with one voice. So we see that all the time in states, for example, we see organizations like the Realtors Association of the Plumbers Association, lobbying regulators on matters involving their industry. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have. And I thank you for your time and service that I see going on all day today. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Andrew. Your testimony is incredibly important because, we've heard a lot from drivers and I'm sure we'll hear more from drivers throughout the day. And they have the great opportunity to share with us what brings this legislation about.

70 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Their lived experience that brought us to the point where there needs to be legislation, and that's immensely helpful. But we also need to understand the structure that this Bill creates. Because it is different than anything we've done or seen or attempted to do in the past. And I appreciate you clarifying that. We have gotten some questions offline. I had an opportunity to speak with a representative of the company who was concerned about the Anti-trust aspect of this. And I wonder if you could address that in a little more detail for us, because I think it's important to have it on the record.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: Sure, I'd be happy to. So under the Sherman Antitrust Act, independent contractors like drivers, or plumbers, or doctors or anybody else can come together and negotiate for their fees, how much do they charge and things like that that would be collusion. So the Sherman Antitrust Act does though have something called the state immunity doctrine. And that gives states the power to regulate industries on their own. And we see that all the time, right? I mentioned in my testimony, state set electric rates, cable rates, licensing requirements for all sorts of professions, and on and on and on.

And all of that has been upheld by Sherman. What we're doing here is we're saying Connecticut's now going to regulate this industry, just like it regulates dozens of other industries. And the way the state's going to do this is it's going to ask for advice and counsel from the people most impacted by those regulations, the app companies and the independent contractors who work with them. Nothing crazy here.

When states set electric rates, they ask the companies to tell them what they think the electric rate should be, and to justify that. Nobody thinks that's a violation of Antitrust, because the companies aren't setting their electric rates, the 71 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE state is setting the electric rates. The same thing would happen here. The industry would get together and work out what they see as reasonable regulations, and they would then suggest that to the state, but ultimately, the state wouldn't be imposing any regulations and standards on the industry, not the industry doing it themselves. And that's the difference between Antitrust and regular regulatory action.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So that is really very helpful. Along the same lines, I think I understand that the NLRA issues a little better from my own past history. But we would not be creating employee status here for these independent contractors, thus there would be nothing that you are doing that would require the state to preempt the National Labor Relations Act, is that correct?

ANDREW GREENBLATT: Yes. And to be clear, the state couldn't preempt the National Labor Relations Act. So, we don't require that. You couldn't do it if you wanted to, and there's no reason to in this case. The National Labor Relations Act regulates employees, and their interaction with their employers. That isn't the situation here. It also regulates how employees and employers interact when doing collective bargaining agreements, which again, are outside of state action, which is not happening here. So under NLRA, you're talking about, "Okay, when can you get together? What do you have to negotiate for a contract? What happens if you get to a stalemate in contract?" There is no contract here. And so all of those issues go away. There's also no employees here. There's no employer here. So all those issues go away. That's not an issue here.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So a couple of other questions that have come up, that I would just want to ask. There's been some concern raised that somehow by engaging in this kind of relationship where the drivers are now involved in helping to set standards, that somehow that process in of itself 72 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE would cause the drivers to have to give up the flexibility they're now afforded by being independent contractors. They can work at any time. Is there any reason to think this system would eliminate that option for both the company to have flexibility and for the drivers to also have flexibility?

ANDREW GREENBLATT: No.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's pretty clear.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: There's just nothing in this Bill that would in any way, impact that.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. And that flexibility is on the part of both the employer and the--or the app developer, the app, as well as the people who do the driving, correct?

ANDREW GREENBLATT: That's correct. Yep.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And then my last question relates to the benefit side of this. Because one other concern that has been raised is that now people who work only a few hours a week, the companies might be required to pay them full time health benefits. And I know my own personal experience in collective bargaining for part time employees like adjunct faculty or dealers at the casino who work very intermittently, that I have had the experience of negotiating benefits that depend on the amount of work. How much subsidy you would get for toward benefits. Is it something similar to that that's envisioned or do you have any experience with that. You mentioned you're providing benefits to independent contractors, to drivers in particular?

ANDREW GREENBLATT: Yeah. So this would of course be up to the state, right? There's nothing in the law that directly addresses how benefits would be administered. So the Industry Council would meet and 73 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE come up with a set of recommendations for benefits. They could certainly have tiered benefits in those recommendations. The state would ultimately make the decision as to how that would work out. And we've done this in New York State around benefits already. Not the whole package, but just on the benefits question. The New York state legislature passed a law a couple of years ago setting a half a percent surcharge on every ride.

So if you take an Uber or Lyft anywhere in the state of New York, you will be charged an extra half a percent and that goes into a fund that pays for benefits, which right now include dental, vision and Telemedicine. But there's a tiering of that so everybody gets Telemedicine which is cheap. But only drivers who drive on a more regular basis get access to a dental plan that gives them really good access to that. You mentioned a major medical. I don't anticipate that that would ever be negotiated.

Most drivers qualify for either Obamacare or Medicaid or something like that, given their wages. And it's unlikely that the way that the system works now, it could support a major medical plan for a large number of drivers. So I think this is about filling in gaps that aren't currently caught. And we could talk about that in some detail some other time, if you'd like. But I know you have a lot on your table today.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): But that was very helpful. We had been sort of waiting for one of the folks who had experience drafting this to testify. I do see Representative Arora has his hand up.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Thank you Madam Chair. And thank you Mr. Greenblatt for your testimony. The question--I'm just trying to learn here and clarify. What we are saying here under this Bill is that the state would negotiate--because we did hear from other folks who testified, who actually drive that they wanted a seat at the bargaining table. Right? 74 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

So what we are saying is that the state would basically sit down and negotiate with all of them for these additional things, or as you say, whether their benefits, whether their rates. Are we setting rates here or asking them to set rates? Is the state qualified to negotiate with the industry? It's not a union negotiation here I would be saying. Can you please explain your expertise on this?

ANDREW GREENBLATT: Yeah, sure. So I will do this as quickly as I can. I will walk through that the steps. So the workers would choose to organize and be a part of this. And there's a way to do that where they could show the preference for the union they would want representing them. When they did those workers would join workers from other companies who have done the same thing. And then the companies from those workers would join a large table called the Industry Council. And so the negotiation would happen at that Industry Council between the workers and the app companies.

The state is not involved directly in those negotiations. So we wouldn't expect the state to have the expertise in how the industry works. But rather the workers and the companies who do have that expertise would do the negotiations. At the end of that process, they would come up with a list of recommendations. So for example, New York City has a minimum wage for drivers. We found in New York City drivers, as we found in Connecticut, we're making less than the state minimum wage. And so New York State regulates that.

Well, you could negotiate a similar system in Connecticut to make sure Connecticut workers were all earning the minimum wage again. And so if that was a part of the package, they could also say, "Well, we want some benefits. So we're going to have a small surcharge on every ride. And that'll provide a dental plan," or whatever they can negotiate. That package is then given to the workers to vote on, either up or down. And if they vote to accept that 75 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE as a package, that is then handed as the official recommendation of the Industry Council which is handed to the board at the state level--I'm sorry, Commissioner at the state level. The Commissioner then looks at the recommendations and see if it kind of comports with the desire to make transportation economical, safe and fair for the workers. So there's kind of a standard set there as to how to measure these recommendations. The state then can either thumbs up or thumbs down it. And if it thumbs down--if it gives a thumbs down--I'm creating verbs for this testimony. If it gives it a thumbs down, the state will then give recommendations like, "This is out of bounds. We don't like this part or whatever." And then the Industry Council can try to reform what their recommendations are?

REP. ARORA (151 ST): What you're suggesting when you says state will give a thumbs up or thumbs down, does that really mean the legislator, the executive, the Commissioner? Do we as legislators then get to say, "Well this is the recommendation," because we operate in the study group all the time. So there's a study group which can have various memberships which can have more members from just as you said, it can have--and they come back, tell us, "Listen, this is the set of rules we should have." And then we basically would try to encodify some of that in law.

That's the standard methodology we use often. Why can't we use something like that, provide a study group where the membership seat on the table is for the folks who work, drivers actual as well as the companies who are there or representative of those app makers, as you may say, and other experts on the table, and they come and recommend to us, and that's a straightforward way. And then obviously, we would know. We can even bias the memberships just the way we are, make it fair, would that not be a way to achieve the same but keep it in line with what do we do all the time?

76 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

ANDREW GREENBLATT: I'm sorry, if I could just get some clarification. Are you asking about replacing the Industry Council role or replacing the decision maker role and moving into the legislature or both?

REP. ARORA (151 ST): No, I'm just saying a study is what we use all the time. We do many in every Committee every year. And to use that same format which is very comfortably available, and we all understand and we know how it works. It's just that we put the members of the study as the industry members, as the Industry Council in that proportion. And they come back to us with, "Okay, we need point 0.2% for a dental program." Because as a part of the study that looks like what is the best practice, for example, in other--one of the other things we want to do is this is an emerging field, emerging business we want to get best practices in. And then that study is codified into a law based upon--and then we don't have to up or down it, we just vote on it. And you know, it's a point 0.2% surcharge on the industry. That would be the law of the land then.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: Yeah. So, I think there's two elements to your question. One is, "Could you do this and survive a Sherman challenge? Could you do it the way you laid out?" And it sounds like the answer is yes. I'm not familiar with Connecticut's process. I apologize I'm working in a number of states on this. So I'm not familiar with your study group process, but the way you laid it out, it sounds like that's not a violation of Sherman. And if Connecticut decided to go that way, it would probably survive that challenge.

The second part of your question I think is, "Would that be the best way to do it?" Is there something in this Bill that is somehow preferable? And again, I'm not familiar enough with your study group process to know, but one thing we were very sensitive to in how we were designing this legislation was to make sure that the workers really got a democratic voice in controlling their work. 77 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

And rather than have the state pick a handful of representatives and say, "Okay, we want five of you, we're gonna do--" It's more than a focus group. But it's certainly not giving access to every voice.

We instead wanted to say--we wanted to make sure that the workers really got to choose who spoke for them. And if they wanted to elect from their own, they could elect from their own. And then whatever the Industry Council came up with, the workers would get the final, not the final say, but would get a say along the way where they could stop it. And that part of it is very important I believe. Because these are workers who really have been made powerless by not being made employees on the one hand, but being very low income. They're often immigrants, who this is their first jobs in America, things like that. And so they've really been exploited. And we wanted to make sure that their voices were heard. And that's what--we've created a system that does that.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Madam Chair, could I ask you a follow up question?

SENATOR KUSHNER: You know, if you can keep it short, I will allow that. But you have run out of time. So you have to be very brief.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): I'll definitely try to be brief. Is there enough in the current legal framework especially when it comes to minimum wage and many of the workmen compensation issues which are already there where the executive right now that UL right now could address it given some expertise.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: So some states have pursued making these workers employee. This law is actually silent on that. Connecticut could continue to move forward with trying to make them employees, and there's nothing in the law that would contradict that. We haven't seen that. It hasn't worked anywhere. California pushed that the farthest. And 78 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE it ended up kind of blowing up in their face because the app companies pushed an initiative and referendum, which I believe is not an issue in Connecticut, but got the law overturned. I'm agnostic on the question as to what their classification should be. I am passionate on that workers should have a voice and if Connecticut made them employees, and gave them all the rights of employees that would create new problems.

And I believe the companies would be happy to talk to you about all those problems. I'm agnostic on that. But whatever Connecticut does, I urge you to make sure that it's the workers who end up having a voice so that they can sit at the table and not make all the calls, right? The Industry Council includes the companies. We're trying to get the industry to work well, to be effective in the state of Connecticut for everybody. And right now it’s just effective really for the companies. And that's what we're trying to change

REP. ARORA (151 ST): For the consumer too. Thank you.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: For the consumer as well. Well, it doesn't work for anybody if it doesn't work for the consumer, right? Everyone's out of work if no- one's taking these cars.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Thank you very much for your time and thank you Madam Chair.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: And I'll be available after this in the coming days anytime you want to reach out to me. In my written testimony is my contact information.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Andrew. I do want to say that I think that you have--I want to congratulate you and the organization for putting together an approach that is fresh, new. I think it's helpful that it is also similar to other 79 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE systems that have been established in the past that worked well to regulate new industries, or to regulate industry. And essentially, framing it as a way for the state to regulate a new industry that is a gig, a part of the gig economy that is governed by apps, as opposed to a workplace. It's very creative. And it's very helpful. I think we have a real desire to make sure that in seeing new industry come to Connecticut that we do it in a way that is fair to the people that work there. And that provides good jobs with good benefits for the people who live in our state. So I really appreciate you're providing this perspective and to all the drivers who've been working with you to really try and come up with an approach that recognizes the needs of the industry, the needs of the consumers, but doesn't leave out the needs of the workers. So we really appreciate it.

ANDREW GREENBLATT: Thank you Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): It's really interesting piece of work, and I appreciate you bringing it to us. I am going to--I see no other hand. So thank you for being with us. I'm going to ask my Co-Chair, Representative Porter to take over now. And I think number 11 is up next. Representative Porter are you ready to take over? We're not hearing her so she may not have heard me. So I will call in number 11. And Devin maybe you can reach out to Rep. Porter. So number 11 is and we're going back to him. I know you had trouble getting on. We have Hediberto Canelas. And I believe you have a translator with you, Frank. So Hediberto go ahead.

FRANK SOULTS: [Spanish language]

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Hediberto can you hear us?

FRANK SOULTS: Senator, I'm going to try to get in touch with him on his cell phone.

80 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's okay. We know that these hearings are challenging for some particularly with the technology. That's why we're being very flexible. And we'll come back to Hediberto when you can reach him.

FRANK SOULTS: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next on my list I believe is--Representative Porter, are you with us? There you are. Great. We're at number 25.

REP. PORTER (94TH): That'd be Pamela Puchalski. Connecticut Council Project Coordinator. You have the floor.

PAMELA PUCHALSKI: Yeah. Hi. I'm not able to start the video. Hello.

REP. PORTER (94TH): That's fine. You can go ahead.

PAMELA PUCHALSKI: Okay. All right, here we go. Okay. Hi, I'm actually a little dark because it's tough to find a good spot in my home. Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of House Bill 6478, an act concerning Workers’ Compensation. The language in this Bill addresses numerous issues that affect an injured workers ability to recover from a workplace injury or illness. My name is Pamela Puchalski. I am the project coordinator for the Connecticut Council on Occupational Safety and Health. We're a nonprofit organization that specializes in training, education and advocacy for workers to keep them safe and healthy in the workplace. Sometimes workers get injured or made ill no matter how hard we work unfortunately, and of course they must look to the Workers’ Compensation Act to provide for them. I want to talk about the different changes that 6478 would address.

81 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

The first one, in Section 1 would allow Commissioners an increased ability to support the recovery process for a worker whose workplace injury or illness has left them permanently affected and unable to return to their pre-injury state. Sometimes this recovery takes longer than is allowed. A number of years ago in the 1990s, they had certainly cut back on a lot of those powers for the Commissioner to be able to help keep the financial and medical supports going for certain workers.

Section 2 that speaks about employers would not be allowed to discharge or discipline an employee who has filed a Workers’ Compensation claim. We think that that is important because through the years we have heard stories of workers whose employers have subsequently influenced them not to initiate a Workers’ Compensation claim or misinformed them of their rights to do so. And when they actually should have had their claim in the Workers’ Compensation system. Section 3 increases the communication between an injured worker's medical provider and the employer and insurer. And the hope is that this would improve the injured worker's medical needs being attended to even while an employer was disputing the medical providers’ requests for treatment. The Section 4 deals with COVID-19 specifically. And we do agree that the time frame that the Executive Order--

CLERK: Ms. Puchalski, your three minutes have ended. Please conclude your remarks.

PAMELA PUCHALSKI: Okay, thank you. So we support Section 4 for increasing the time for the rebuttable presumption. And as well as we do support increasing the burial allowance for workers. It has not been changed in a very, very long time. And we believe that a dignified burial for a loved one who has passed because of a workplace injury or illness is his only proper. Thank you.

82 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you for your testimony. And I do agree. It's been since 87 or 88 since we've raised that death benefit that currently sits at 4,000. So that is a critical piece of this legislation. And I'm looking and I don't see any hands of any comments or questions, but I thank you again for being with us today. I thank you for your patience. And I thank you for your [Inaudible].

PAMELA PUCHALSKI: Thank you so much for this good work.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You're welcome. You have a good day.

PAMELA PUCHALSKI: You too. Thank you.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you. Up next we have--I don't see her in the room. Do we have Bertha Ruzeau?

CLERK: Madam Chair, we're still working on some tech issues with Hediberto and we'll let you know as soon as he's available.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay, number 26 Bertha Ruzeau. Okay, moving on to number 27, Adam Abubakar. Okay, moving on to number 28, Joy Avallone, General Counsel for Insurance Association of Connecticut. Good afternoon Joy. How are you?

JOY AVALLONE: I'm well. How are you Representative?

REP. PORTER (94TH): I'm doing well.

JOY AVALLONE: I know that you guys have a long list of people testifying today. So I'll try to go quickly. There are a number of proposals in here. Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Members of the Labor Committee. I'm Joy Avallone, General Counsel for the Insurance Association of Connecticut. I want to thank you for the opportunity to offer comments today, which are going to focus really on House Bill 6478. And one additional 83 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE proposal, provision of House Bill 6595 and Senate Bill 1002. So with regard to Section 1 of House Bill 6478, the 308a benefits. These benefits are currently capped at the lesser number of weeks of permanent partial disability or 520 weeks. Representative Quinn had talked about this earlier.

The proposal is to increase the portion of benefits that relate to the disability rating by 400%. And to expand the maximum number of weeks of discretionary benefits from 520 weeks to 780. Really, this proposal seeks to revert back to benefit levels that were similar to what they were prior to the 1993 reforms, which we believe properly placed limitations on coverage and benefits in response to the cost of coverage really becoming unaffordable. I think just prior to the reform cap--at one point, they were unlimited, and they were reduced to 780 weeks and then further reduced to 520 in 1993. You know, [audio glitch] analysis has examined similar proposals in prior years. One of those proposals simply sought to eliminate the lesser of the two benefit caps to allow Commissioners to use discretion in awarding up to 520 weeks. So that's not as high obviously as the 780 proposed in this Bill. And OFA found that that would result in a significant cost to the state and municipalities.

Similarly obviously would have affected private businesses as well. So because this proposal seeks to increase it even further than that, logic would dictate that it would have a greater impact. And for that reason, we're really concerned with that. Regarding Section 4, the COVID presumption piece, we really strongly oppose a proposed rebuttable presumption because this really would provide sweeping coverage for almost any employee who contracted COVID and missed any time from work during the entire pandemic. This really expands beyond essential employees, and even the list of essential employees is very extensive.

84 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

The impact on the Workers' Comp system cost really would be tremendous. Employees will be presumed to have contracted COVID during the course of their employment regardless of whether they had any exposure at all during work. And regardless of how much exposure they had outside of work. So an employee who frequented social events or violated social distancing guidelines, and was never in contact with anyone who had COVID during the course of their employment would still be presumed to have contracted COVID under this proposal. NCCI recently analyzed Section 4, and they used three different hypothetical scenarios. And they reported increases in Workers' Compensation system would likely range from 54 million to 378 million. That represents a seven--

CLERK: Ms. Avallone your three minutes have ended. Please conclude your remarks.

JOY AVALLONE: Yep. That represents a 7-47% increase in overall system costs. So obviously, that's very concerning to us. I know that there are a number of other proposals in here. I have submitted written testimony. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. But obviously, I don't want to take up more time than I'm able to.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you for your testimony Joy. I do see Representative Winkler has a question for you. So I will recognize him at this time to be followed by Representative Arora.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you through the Chair. The term in your testimony on 6478 the term Permanent Partial Disability, is that a term I can understand intuitively or is there something technical about that term?

JOY AVALLONE: So permanent--in the normal timeline, a typical timeline of Workers' Compensation case, there are I'll say four classification of benefits. If you let's say you injure your back, initially 85 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE maybe you're not you're not able to work in any capacity, you're entitled to one classification of benefits. As you start to recover, you have an increased work capacity. This is again, just a typical case, you would be entitled to another classification of benefits. At some point in time, typically within a year, but obviously depends on the case, you reach a point of maximum medical improvement.

It doesn't mean that you've fully recovered, but it means that for purposes of benefits and under the Act, you know, you're not going to get any better or they don't anticipate you improving much so they rate you. So you get a disability rating for whatever body part you've injured. Under the Act, there's a certain number of weeks that correspond to each body part and benefits. The PPD benefits, Permanent Partial Disability benefits, are based on that designation of weeks and the percentage of disability that you're given by the doctor.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): So does permanent mean permanent, like my hand will always be this way, not 100% functional.

JOY AVALLONE: I think it’s reasonable to assume that in some cases. Some individuals may increase whether its function. There are always obviously new developments, medical developments and treatment. So it's possible that you may improve. Typically, I've never encountered a case where that's happened, but I think that that's reasonable.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Okay, let's say that I have an injury, that higher authority declared was permanent. Something obviously I'm going to be permanently partially disabled for the rest of my life. What's the rationale for limiting the number of weeks reimbursed for the on the job injury that caused a Permanent Partial disability?

86 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

JOY AVALLONE: Sure, so the exact date is the timeline of a typical case. There are exceptional cases where someone may never return to work. There are cases when someone could hypothetically receive temporary total disability benefits for the rest of their life. So you don't necessarily have to reach a point where you're rated. Hypothetically speaking, there could be instances where you could collect that type of benefit forever.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Through the Vice-Chair, you testified that at one time there was no cap on the temporary--I'm sorry, Permanent Partial Disability benefit. I guess it did go for the life of the person. What was--

JOY AVALLONE: So PPD benefits are different than the three the 31-308a benefits that we're discussing right now. So the benefits that I was speaking of are the 308a benefits that follow and correspond with the disability rating that you're assigned for your injured body part.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Okay, so I have a Permanent Partial Disability. Let us say that that is going to be permanent and partial. So, at any point, would I be reimbursed for life for that benefit. For that Permanent Partial Disability?

JOY AVALLONE: No, because permanent partial disability benefits are based on a number of weeks that are associated with your injured body part. Once you are paid all of the benefits that correspond with the disability rating that you receive, then it's under the-- the Commissioner has the discretion to award additional benefits. Those are the 308a benefits. That's really what this proposal aims to address. So currently under the law, those benefits can be awarded. It's the lesser of the amount that you were paid based on the percentage of disability or 520 weeks.

87 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

So at one point in time there wasn't a cap of 520 weeks, and there wasn't a cap of the corresponding 308a benefits. But that was reduced to 780 weeks and then further reduced in 1993 to 520, because of the affordability of coverage concerns.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Okay, that's what I was getting at. So it was reduced from unlimited to 780 to 520 for financial considerations was what you just said, it has not to do with the fact that the person is no longer disabled, they're still partially disabled. But for financial reasons, we reduced the benefits' time line.

JOY AVALLONE: As you know, the Workers’ Compensation, it's part of the grand bargain. So in exchange for claims being found compensable without having to show that it was-- any fault was involved. There has to be a reasonable cap on benefits so that coverage is affordable.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Alright, and from the other perspective, it just seemed crazy to me that somebody got a Permanent Partial Disability, and we arbitrarily decide that's worth a certain number of weeks. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You're welcome, Representative Arora.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Thank you Madam Chair, and thank you Ms. Avallone for your testimony. And just to clarify, you're testifying both for 1002 and 6478.

JOY AVALLONE: Yes. So really, I'm testifying our written testimony addresses all of the provisions in 6478. So I didn't address all of them. I didn't have time, but also the additional expansion of PTSD benefits in 1002 as well.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): So I have a couple of quick questions. On 1002, the major concern you also have 88 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE as we heard from others, is the basis for what you called presumption that COVID was contracted at work, right? That's the big issue there. Is that correct?

JOY AVALLONE: Yeah. That is probably the most damaging or most harmful, potentially harmful proposal. The expansion of PTSD benefits, obviously we are also just concerned with, and we always caution on the expansion of mental claims, because of the subjective nature. But really the presumption is very concerning to us. And again NCCI just issued this report saying that it could increase system costs by almost 50%. So obviously, that would impact businesses tremendously.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Yeah. Beyond these, one thing is cost as Representative Winkler pointed out, but another thing is also that it's not even--the assumption just puts business in the wrong spot, would you say that? That they do not have the ability then to really--the onus is on them and these are small--many of these are very small businesses, and people do spend a lot of their time. So can you talk a little more about this presumption because many of us are not aware of these labor languages or legal languages. What is--explain what presumption means in practical way for a small business, if all I do is basically run a very--two person or 6 person business.

JOY AVALLONE: Sure. So, the rebuttable presumption would basically--so currently under the Workers’ Comp Act, the intent is to obviously, compensate workers for claims that arise out of and in the course of their employment. And in order to prove that you have to really just show that the workplace, that your work was a substantial contributing factor in bringing about the disease or the injury that you're complaining of. The effect of the presumption is it will cause claims that are unrelated to Workers’ Compensation unrelated to the work that they were doing to be found compensable, 89 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE which is obviously contrary to the intent of the law. And because this presumption is so broad, it will have a tremendous cost impact on the system.

So as currently drafted and I understand that representative, Senator Kushner said that maybe it was mis-drafted. But as currently drafted, this would apply to every single employee that was working during this pandemic, and that missed work on account of a COVID diagnosis regardless of whether or not they were working from home. They would qualify as long as they were working with some type of material from their employer. I mean they could have been working from home during the entire pandemic and never had contact with their employer, with co workers, or really the outside public and it would still be found compensable under this draft.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Oh, I see. And then going to 6478. Right? That's obviously not related to the presumption there the issue is--can you can you prioritize the top issue there as well?

JOY AVALLONE: Yeah. So, the language regarding the presumption is actually identical. In this Bill the presumption obviously is it would be very problematic. The other provision that I think would be most problematic would be that extension of the 308 that increase and or extension of the 308a benefits that I was attempting to discuss with Representative Winkler.

A problem with the presumption is also--so obviously the breadth of it, but it's also requiring insurers and employers to provide evidence to rebut the presumption within 10 days of filing a denial of the claim or notice to contest or reservation of rights, which is really a form 43. And as Commissioner Morelli said, insurers and employers have to file this form 43 within 20 days of receiving the claim. So this proposal to further--to now require us to provide whatever evidence we can to defend the claim within an additional 10 days at that point, just 90 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE over a month's time, there often is the case that an employee hasn't even provided us with the medical release in order for us to go and get the relevant medical records, let alone be afforded the time to actually review them. So really, from our point of view we do think that that's a very unreasonable practice. So that's very concerning to us.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Yeah, since you bring a really very well thought out and expert point of view, Madam Chair may I ask a follow up question here. I know, I have asked my three questions. May I ask a follow up question here from our witness?

REP. PORTER (94TH): Before you do that, let me just check with the clerk. Because I know we're doing this by time. Can you tell me where we aren't on time?

CLERK: Yes, Madam Chair. Rep. Arora has 1 minute and 43 seconds remaining.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Madam Chair, should I go ahead? I think there must be technical problems. So in the interest of our of the entire community, I'll just let--

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Representative Arora, I'm here I'm listening in. And so I am sure she did have a technical difficulty but you can go ahead and give him the time left.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Thank you Madam Chair. So the follow up for--and again I'm sorry I'm jumping between the 1002 and 6478. To follow up for 1002. Is there a reason here? Do we have a problem of--a major problem that people are being denied their due compensation that we need to address? Do you hear that or are you aware?

JOY AVALLONE: I'm not aware of that. Obviously, I am less familiar with claims data throughout the entire state than perhaps the Chairman of the 91 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Commission is, but from what I heard from him earlier, it seems based on the low percentage of litigation rates, it seems that people are being compensated and it doesn't seem to me that there is a need for this legislation at this time.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): And then finally, one more question would there be a reason to believe that more people are getting it on the job versus off the job, because on the job there is still availability of PPE and stuff and many of the precautions being taken off the job nobody knows and it's up to each person. So would you say that in the might be--that it's an on the job off the job differentiation?

JOY AVALLONE: Not necessarily. I do think that there are instances when a case could be made that due to--the greater the exposure in the workplace and the less exposure outside of the workplace, the stronger you have for a case to be found compensable under the Workers’ Compensation Act. So obviously you're going to take into consideration the safety protocols of the employer, obviously the schedule, the contact with other people. But you're going to do a reasonable assessment of the exposure that the claimant had to COVID and where the source of that exposure was. So it's not necessarily you know--well it shouldn't be found work related. There are instances where it may be appropriate for that to happen.

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Fair point so your point is really should take into consideration. It shouldn't be a presumptive assumption or whatever the word is but it should take into consideration all the facts of the case.

JOY AVALLONE: Well there's there shouldn't be a presumption because under current law you can show that work was a substantial contributing factor, and in those cases those are the appropriate cases when it should be found to be work related.

92 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. ARORA (151 ST): Sounds reasonable. Thank you Madam Chair. I think I'm done and thank you for giving me the time. Thank you Ms. Avallone for your thoughts and insights.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You're welcome Representative Arora.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): You're back.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yeah, my computer is plugged up but for some reason it decided to power off.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): How bizzare.

REP. PORTER (94TH): I think I have a hand that I will recognize. Representative Rutigliano you have the floor.

REP. RUTIGLIANO: Thank you Madam Chair. Good afternoon Madam. I was under the understanding that the federal executive order covered people for paid sick leave and [Inaudible] of COVID-19. Is that still in effect or did that executive order expire?

JOY AVALLONE: The federal executive order or the Governor's executive order?

REP.RUTIGLIANO: My understanding is that was federal that they covered if somebody had to go out on leave because of COVID that the employer technically got reimbursed for their compensation of the employee.

JOY AVALLONE: Yeah. So I know that there are programs out there, employers engaged in salary continuation. I know that there were repayment-- employers were able to receive federal funds to compensate them or to reimburse them for some of the expenses that they expended and payroll I think was one of those specific designations. I don't know the 93 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE particulars of the expiration of that if I'm being completely honest.

REP. RUTIGLIANO: My understanding was that that they instituted a federal paid sick leave specifically for COVID that if you had an employee that went out during the pandemic, during the declared emergency, that you could apply and get reimbursed for the cost of them being out.

JOY AVALLONE: Yeah, that does sound correct but I don't know the particulars.

REP. RUTIGLIANO: So I just didn't know if you had known the time limit on that. Whether or not it had expired or not or if it was still continuing.

JOY AVALLONE: Unfortunately I don't, but I'm happy to look into it and get that information for you.

REP. RUTIGLIANO: You're in the middle of something on six. I gotta tell you the truth, I read this Bill like three or four times and I read your testimony. I have a hard time--I mean I get the subject matter, but I have a hard time understanding some of the nuances. A lot of technical language in there and you seem very knowledgeable and I was just wondering if there was anything else on 6595 that you wanted to share because there was a couple of provisions in there I could start asking you questions but I would run out of time so in a quick synopsis, was there anything that was left out that might help me understand it a little better?

JOY AVALLONE: So 6595, I mean a lot of that language really mirrors 6478. There was a provision in there regarding wrongful discharge. So there was a proposal aimed at discouraging and prohibiting discriminatory practices of employers. We obviously are supportive of measures like that. We're concerned because we think that this proposal as drafted could have unintended consequences that may be problematic, especially when we're placing such 94 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE an emphasis on the importance of education and getting information out there.

So under the current law, an employee can file a claim in either Superior Court or in a worker's comp, if they allege that they've been discharged or discriminated against, because they filed a Workers’ Compensation claim. This proposal seeks to allow a claimant to bring a claim when they allege to have been deliberately misinformed or dissuaded from filing a claim for Workers’ Comp benefits. We think that again while well intentioned, and we agree with the sentiment of this, that this could discourage employers from discussing the Workers’ Compensation process with their employees for fear of being accused of wrongdoing, which could also result in from frivolous lawsuits. So we're just concerned with this proposal, even though we agree with the sentiment of it. And I think we actually--

REP. RUTIGLIANO: Is there a track record of people?

JOY AVALLONE: What?

REP. RUTIGLIANO: Is there a track record of people suing because they don't have access or that they're discouraged from--or claiming Workers’ Compensation?

JOY AVALLONE: I've seen in my experience--I have seen occasions where this was added as an issue. In those instances it seemed to me, and I'm sure this isn't all cases, but it seemed to me that those were used strategically in cases where we were discussing settlement and so forth. I'm not saying that that occurs in every claim. I'm sure that there are instances where this may occur where someone may have been discriminated against because of their filing of a Workers’ Compensation claim. I don't think it happens that often. And so I'm unsure why we're seeking to change the law right now.

95 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. RUTIGLIANO: I believe that's all I had Madam Chair. I appreciate your time. Thank you very much Ms. Avallone.

JOY AVALLONE: Thank you.

REP. RUTIGLIANO: Thank you Representative. And I do not see any further hands. So I will thank you again for your testimony today, and for taking the time to be with us.

JOY AVALLONE: Thank you so much.

REP. RUTIGLIANO: You're welcome. You have a good day.

JOY AVALLONE: You too.

REP. RUTIGLIANO: Thank you. So I understand that we do have number 11, Hediberto Canelas in the room and he's ready to go. So you have the floor.

FRANK SOULTS: I'm sorry rapporteur, he might be having trouble again. It's pretty new technology for him. If you could go on to the next speaker. I'll let Devin know when everything's ready. Thank you.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you Frank. I appreciate that. So next we have number 29, Debbie Berkowitz, Work Safety and Health Program Director with NELP. Hi Debbie. You have the floor.

DEBBIE BERKOWITZ: Thank you. Thank you, Representative Porter. And thank you Senator Kushner and Members of the Labor and Public Employee Committee. My name is Debbie Berkowitz, and I am the Worker Safety and Health Program Director at the National Employment Law Project, which is a national nonprofit organization. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter. I'm here to join the Connecticut AFL CIO in supporting House Bill 6478 and the similar provisions in House Bill 6595, and Senate Bill 1002. COVID-19 is not only the 96 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE largest public health crisis in over a generation, it is also the largest occupational health crisis in the US.

We have known from the beginning of the pandemic that the workplace exposures to COVID-19 could be and are a significant driver of this pandemic. COVID-19 has been spreading in the workplace among the central workers since the end of February 2020 when the first infection was reported among nursing home workers in Seattle. Now one year later, the CMS reports that there are over 551,000 cases of COVID- 19 infections among just nursing home staff. COVID- 19 did not just sicken workers in the healthcare sector. Studies have confirmed a higher risk among all the central workers. COVID-19 has spread in healthcare, in meat and poultry plants, among bus drivers and transit workers, warehouse workers, supermarket workers and many other essential workplaces sickening and killing so many.

We also know that Black and Latinx workers and other workers of color including immigrants are more likely to be in frontline jobs. And these communities have disproportionately higher rates of serious illness and death related to COVID-19. As you heard from the workers testifying today, the toll of workplace disease on an individual worker and their family is enormous. Medical bills and lost time from work related illnesses can be a crushing burden. Workers’ Compensation provides a crucial source of healthcare coverage and income support for workers suffering from a work related engineer illness, but it's often difficult for workers to obtain Workers’ Compensation for occupational illnesses. Though essential workers face a higher risk of COVID-19, companies and their insurance carriers are fighting their Workers’ Comp claims. In fact carriers are denying a significant percentage of claims related to COVID, that is why you must pass this legislation to ensure that those that have gone to work every day during a pandemic and it does not cover workers by the way that work from home for 97 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the last 14 days, risking their health and safety so the rest of the public could obtain the goods and services they need, have access to Workers’ Comp benefits if they get sick the COVID-19.

To date 19 states have expanded Workers’ Comp coverage for workers with COVID-19 either through executive orders or legislation in 13 more considering similar legislation. Most of the states create a rebuttable presumption. It is also important to understand that many insurance companies and businesses fear that pandemic related Workers’ Comp claims will overwhelm the Workers’ Comp system. Those fears as I testified last summer are unfounded. Connecticut must join all of the states and continue to make sure all essential workers who are sick and or have died from COVID-19 can have access to Workers’ Comp benefits. The Governor's executive order provided the presumption contained in House Bill 6478 but it was time limited and only for workers who contracted COVID-19 between March and May 20, but since last may there was a second surge of COVID-19 and case numbers and deaths spiked to levels higher than have ever been in essential workers who were sick after May 20 deserve the same benefits as those that were sick before May. Thank you for this opportunity to testify.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you for your testimony and because it was one of the questions that popped in my head as I was listening to your testimony, you stated that 19 states have this rebuttable presumption and as you know we've had quite a few people come before us with concerns, the most recent speaker being Ms. Avallone. So with some of the concerns that she raised and with the data and research to choose-- been privy to are you saying that those concerns are unnecessary?

DEBBIE BERKOWITZ: Yes. I mean there's a group called the National Council of Compensation Insurance (NCCI) that sort of--they collect all this data and they came out and said that according to 98 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE this state industry data that they compiled, that the cases of COVID-19 were more than offset by a steep drop in non COVID-19 claims as layoffs, shutdowns and remote work reduce the number of workplace injuries and illnesses. And back in June when I testified in front of this Committee, they had actually--I think they may have been on testifying saying that the Workers’ Comp system is sound and can afford this. Remember that Workers’ Comp--you could get COVID and be home for two weeks to not have any medical bills and so you don't have medical costs and things like that. And that Workers’ Comp doesn't kick in right away and so you know these are for people that are really been sick and have lost significant time.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you for that and thank you for that clarification. And you did mention the Governor's E.O that ran from March 10 to May 20, and I actually have a constituent that fell within that time frame who was hospitalized in March, came home in April on Good Friday. Her husband passed away in May of 2020. Her deposition is actually March 22, a couple weeks from now. But we're talking about a year out and she's still fighting to get her worker's claim, she's still fighting to get the death benefit for her husband, and the only income she has right now is unemployment insurance. So I don't need to tell you the struggles that are instilling in her household. But I don't see any hands up for further questions or comments. I will thank you again Debbie for being with us today and thank you so much for your testimony in support of this legislation.

DEBBIE BERKOWITZ: Thank you. I thank you for all that you're doing, so thank you.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You're welcome. You have a good day.

DEBBIE BERKOWITZ: You too.

99 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you. Up next we have Kim Burns, nurse with District local 1199. Is Kim in the room? Yes she is, I see her. Kim, you just need to unmute. Now, Kim may be having some technical difficulties as well, so we're going to move on. We'll come back and see if we can get her later. Up next we have Dale Cunningham, President L&M Nurses/ AFC Connecticut. You have the floor.

DALE CUNNINGHAM: Can you hear me?

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yes, I can.

DALE CUNNINGHAM: Okay, good afternoon Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and the Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Dale Cunningham. I'm a registered nurse at Lawrence and Memorial Hospital. I'm a neonatal nurse, and I'm president of the nurses' union, representing over 600 members. And we're under AFC Connecticut who represents eight hospitals in Connecticut. I have submitted for the Bills 1002 and 6478 under my name, but I've chosen to read my member's testimony, if you would allow me because she couldn't get a spot to speak today if that's possible.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yes, please proceed.

DALE CUNNINGHAM: Kathy Rinkes has submitted her testimony. She lives in North Stonington, and she works at Lawrence and Memorial Hospital and she's a member of our local 5049. She is here in favor of House Bill 6478, an act concerning Workers’ Comp. When COVID-19 pandemic hit, my job became dangerous. My employer had little or no supply of masks, disinfectants or other personal protective equipment. Despite the fact we didn't know the full extent of the risk we were taking when we showed up to do our jobs. We wore the same N95 mask or respirator for weeks before finding out that our manager had additional supplies located in her locked office, after which we were issued one mask 100 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE for each 12 hour shift for all of the ICU patients we took care of.

When our COVID unit, though PPE was a major concern, and has been throughout the pandemic. I took extra steps to prevent the transmission of COVID to myself and my co workers, our non COVID patients as well as my family and any outsiders with whom I have come in contact with such as the grocery store personnel. I maintain my protection throughout my entry and exit to work, taking a shower and bagging up my uniform and shoes at the end of each shift. On October 4, ICU was exposed to a patient who was reported to be COVID negative. I was informed of the exposure on October 7, by my manager by a phone call. I had worked after the exposure on October 6 without knowledge of the exposure. I began experiencing symptoms on October 8, and was tested on--

CLERK: Ms. Cunningham, your three minutes have ended, please conclude with a remark.

DALE CUNNINGHAM: I had mild symptoms, which she went on to say basically that she has reported for Workers’ Comp, she's been denied. She's had to reach out to our union and our avenues to get assistance. She's now been out since last October. She's lost her position because after 16 weeks, you lose your position and after a year you lose your job. You can read the rest of her testimony. And she would like you to know that there are many like her that suffer in this state. And if you have any questions related to the process of what our employees have going through, are still going through, you are free to ask me. And thank you for your time and thank you for all your hard work. These Bills are very important to the frontline workers in Connecticut.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yes, I agree. And thank you so much for your testimony. And thank you for reading the testimony on behalf of your colleague. We certainly do understand, we hear these stories day in and day out and it's been a year so this is why 101 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE we're here. This is why we have brought forth this legislation and this is why this public hearing is so critical. We need to hear from the people that have been directly impacted because I know that people that have problems are closest to the solution. So it's not fallen on deaf ears. I don't see any hands raised for comments or questions, so I'll thank you again for your time today Dale and thank you for your patience and I hope that you enjoy the rest of your afternoon.

DALE CUNNINGHAM: Thank you all.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You're welcome, bye. I'm going to go back and see if Kim Burns is able to join us. I do see you on the panel, but you would need to unmute you're muted right now. Okay, next we have Cortney Skinner.

KIM BURNS: Hi.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Oh, hey you go.

KIM BURNS: Hi, I'm Kim.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Glad you could join you have three minutes to give us your testimony.

KIM BURNS: Okay, thank you. I stand in support of Senate Bill 1002, an act concerning labor issues related to COVID-19 personal protective equipment and other staffing matters. And in support of House Bill 6595, an act concerning labor matters related to COVID-19 personal protective equipment and other staffing issues. Good afternoon Representative Porter, Senator Kushner and Members of the Committee. My name is Kim Burns. I am one of the state of Connecticut's registered nurses who have been faithfully working throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. I am speaking in support of Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595 because it would allocate hero pay to those of us who have been there for our patients on the frontlines. I am proud of what I do 102 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE and the individuals I care for. I only hope that the state of Connecticut recognizes me and my colleagues' dedication.

We have consistently put forth endless efforts in caring for our patients and we were not afforded any reprieve from the expected or unexpected circumstances each day. We put our health and our family's health at risk throughout this pandemic and yes we signed up for this when we chose the nursing profession, but to recognize the risks that we took and to compensate us for it would speak volumes. It has always been an honor to work for the state of Connecticut and be a member of the SEIU 1199 of New England. Hero pay would show a vast appreciation for the frontline workers. As always we stand united and appreciate the opportunity to testify today. Thank you

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you Kim and I do not see any hands raised. I'll just thank you for your service. You know we appreciate and love you all and that is why we're here today having these discussions. So thank you again for being with us and enjoy the rest of your afternoon

KIM BURNS: Thank you Representative.

REP. PORTER (94TH): All right, you're welcome. Bye, bye. Next up we have Cortney Skinner and I don't see her in the room. So, I'm going to go on to Carrie Redlich. Okay, Jeffrey Branch. Right, well I do see Joe Toner, number 35. Mr. Toner you have the floor.

JOE TONER: Hello.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Hi, how are you?

JOE TONER: I'm sorry I'm trying to--thank you Representative Porter, Chairman Kushner, Ranking Member Sampson, Member Arora, Members of the Labor and Public Committee. My name is Joseph Toner, I'm 103 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the Executive Director of the Connecticut State Building Trades Council. Connecticut State Building Trades Council represents over 30,000 men and women in the construction industry. And I'd like to speak to you today in favor of strong support of Senate Bill 999, an act concerning our transition to climate, protective energy production and community investment.

The Connecticut State Building Trades has long played an integral role in the delivery of vital energy services to our state. Our members built the PSEG harbor power station in Bridgeport to CPV Teutonic Energy Center in Oxford and many other of our members continue to work at Dominion Millstone Power Station in Waterford. We're proud that our members will be constructing the wind turbines in Bridgeport for Vineyard Winds offshore wind project, as well as the state pier and turbines necessary for [Inaudible] project off the coast of Long Island South.

Our members are also working on a gravel pit solo project in East Windsor, and an array of projects all over New England. The owners of these projects have shown commitment to workforce development. All these projects and dozens more have created opportunities for careers in the unionized construction industry. These projects will provide pre- apprenticeship and apprenticeship training opportunities that will provide good wages and benefits and quality, on time, on budget products that consumers can rely on. But this pandemic has also laid bare some of the vulnerabilities of the industry that we're facing. We're struggling with high unemployment and budgetary constraints, have handcuffed our state for making bold investments and for infrastructure and transportation systems. There's no doubt that our climate is changing. We've seen the effects for stronger storm surges and high winds with these changes. However comes an opportunity for our state to make meaningful 104 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE investment in renewable energy and create long lasting careers for our residents.

As the state transitions from fossil fuels to renewable energy, and other emerging technologies, it's imperative that we not leave our workforce behind. Senate Bill 999 sets a new standard on how we produce renewable energy.

If we're really truly committed to tackling climate change and Senate Bill 999 is a common sense proposal. With this Bill, we are fully utilizing other state approved apprenticeship programs, job training, workforce protections and labor peace language, prevailing wages and other use of the project labor agreements which are beneficial to the communities. Senate Bill 999 ensures a return on our investment. It's critical that our workforce is properly trained, and prepared for energy--the new energy for tomorrow. We urge the Committee's full support, and joint favorable passage of Senate Bill 999. Thank you Co-Chairs, Ranking Members and distinguished Members of the Labor Committee.

I'm Joseph toner, Executive Director of the Connecticut State Building Trades. And I just quickly if I could say one more thing, I think it's important once we're switching over to renewables right now, there's no protections for workers in this renewable world. So what's happening, we're having more and more unscrupulous out of state contractors come in. And folks are being exploited on these projects, not being paid a livable wage. So this t ensures that we're going to make sure we train the folks in the communities, the workforce development is part of it, the disadvantaged zip codes are also part of this, we're going to make sure when these projects are going to be developed in any community in the state of Connecticut, the folks from the community are going to be involved in their projects at a livable wage, being trained properly with proper retirement and health benefits. 105 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

So with that, Representative Porter, I thank you for the time, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Well, I thank you for your testimony. And I do see that Senator Kushner has her hand raised, I will recognize her at this time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And thank you Joe, it's great to see you here. You know, when you were testifying--it basically what you realize and think about is that we're looking to continue this tradition of good skilled trades jobs, with good benefits, under safe working conditions and under conditions that can provide security for an entire family basically. And this is something we've had in the past with the old forms of energy.

JOE TONER: Yes.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And what you're trying to do now is say, as we move to these new industries, new forms of energy, we should continue that same treatment of the workforce. Is that essentially what--there's a link here, right?

JOE TURNER: Yes. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Senator Kushner. Yeah. So traditionally, in the past all the fossil fuel projects have been done with project labor agreements, and the inclusivity of our apprentice training programs, community involvement. So once we're transitioning, we're losing valuable partners in the construction industry that have invested not only in the communities that are developing, but in the workforce in general, right? And providing good jobs with good benefits. So that's very important. And in this arena, as we sit today, and the renewable side, there's no worker protections.

There's truly no partnerships with these developers, with the building trades or folks in the community to assure that livable wages are being paid. So that's very correct, that's a correct statement. As 106 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE we transition, hopefully some of our partners in the fossil fuel side will gear up and get into renewable side because we've had 100 year relationships with these folks. And if not, we have to make sure this bill ensures not only a cleaner environment, but workplace protections for the building trades.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, I have to say, Dave Roche testified earlier today, and I didn't think about this. And we hadn't had as much testimony and certainly the rest of the day may prove me wrong, but I can't see why there be any opposition to this. This is like sort of sort of basic, and we haven't heard any opposition yet. But it's very basic that what you're looking for is to continue the buying tradition in Connecticut. Good jobs with good benefits for our trades workers. And project lead through project labor agreements in industry. And I think it's very visionary, it's looking forward, and I appreciate that you're here to testify on that.

JOE TONER: Thank you Senator, just I know earlier, you spoke to Brother Roche and you said that we're the middle class families in the building trades and that's true and we're hanging out to the bottom rung. With the unemployment and the lack of work opportunities, unemployment benefits don't get you to anywhere in the middle there but hopefully Bills like this if they do move forward, it's going to provide opportunities for our members our families and thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Thank you for being here today and thank you Madam Chair except I don't see her now. I know that my Co-Chair has had some technical difficulties with her computer today, but I don't see any other hands Joe, so have a great day.

JOE TONER: Thank you Senator. You also.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So great. Next up we have number 26, Is that Bertha Ruzeau? Is bertha here? 107 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CLERK: Madam Chair this was a phone number calling.

FRANK SOULTS: Senator Kushner we're trying to get a hold of Marlie, Bertha's daughter is going to read her testimony. We're trying to get her on, if you could just go to the next person. I'm sorry for all the trouble

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's okay, we know it's difficult. Next up I have, is it Abubakar Adam? Do I have that right? Is Adam here?

ABUBAKAR ADAM: Yes. Hold on a second, just--

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. We'll give him a minute. Okay. He's here, okay Adam, is that your first name or your last name?

ABUBAKAR ADAM: Last name.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's your last name Mr. Adam?

ABUBAKAR ADAM: Yes.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, we can't hear you real well. If you could speak up a little. We don't see your face. There you go, just speak up a little. Okay go ahead. I want to make sure I have it right. Go ahead.

ABUBAKAR ADAM: [Inaudible]

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I'm sorry but we're having some difficulty with your connection. You're freezing quite a bit so I'm going to ask if you're muted again--hello

Yeah, so this is what he was trying to say. So he was trying to say that what happens is when the driving app-- they have difficulties and when Uber sends out a notification to pick up, they drive 15 108 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE miles away to pick up passengers that's only going to--that they get where you put so many miles to pick up clients and then they just going to blocks three blocks down the road and you find yourself in that scenario where you are spending time to drive x number of miles. Would there be that provision where they adjust their system where the-- when this signals are sent out you don't have to have a driver dry all the way back.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I'm going to have to stop you for a minute because--Hello? Sorry but we're gonna stop you. Devin, I think you're going to mute them and explain to them that we were having too much trouble understanding. It is breaking up too much and they are going to have to get some technical help there to be able to--we can't hear you effectively so we're going to ask that you get some help with your signal or move it to a place in the room where you have a stronger signal. I recognize that a number of people that have signed up to speak are in that location but we need to get the technology working before we can call on you. So I'm going to go right now to the next speaker on the list and I believe next up would be number 32, Cortney Skinner. Is that correct?

CORTNEY SKINNER: Yes. Good morning.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead Cortney.

CORTNEY SKINNER: My name is Cortney skinner. Thank you for hearing my testimony this afternoon.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead we can hear you.

CORTNEY SKINNER: Okay, great. I'm a teacher's aide at Team Inc and early childhood program through prior to that I was an assistant teacher. I have been a part of early childhood for almost six years. In my testimony I'd like to support the reason why early childhood educators including family support staff are more than deserving of hazard pay given 109 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the changes of the classroom environment since COVID-19. The dynamic of the classroom has changed tremendously due to COVID. Teachers are risking their lives daily to care for children within the community while aides like me are doing our best to maintain a safe and clean environment where these children can still thrive and reach their potential. We are tasked with providing a safe environment by downsizing the classroom which includes things like removing toys and other materials to eliminate cross contamination with germs from children while also keeping it comfortable and maintaining developmentally appropriate practices for the children.

As you can imagine it's a difficult balance and it always comes with risk. Children get sick or they come from home where others are sick such as their family members or whoever are living in the household. We sanitize everything but that means we are exposed to everything as well. I believe that hazard pay including in the Bill concerning labor issues related to COVID will make teachers feel recognized but more so appreciated. We come to work every day to provide a difference for these children and they are our future leaders. We are putting our life in jeopardy in doing so and I think we are all worthy of being recognized and included as essential workers. Thank you for your time and your consideration.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Cortney. I do see a hand, Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you Senator Kushner. Courtney I have no questions for you I just want to thank you for the work you do especially with the little ones. They are our future and I really do appreciate the sacrifices that you have made and we understand that the sacrifices that your family is making in the work that you do just critically important and I just wanted to let you know that it matters to us and that you're very much appreciated, 110 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE so thank you and thank you for being here today and sharing your testimony

CORTNEY SKINNER: Thank you and thanks for having me.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You're welcome thank you Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Sure, have a great day Cortney. Next up we have Bertha Ruzeau. Bertha is joining us by phone correct? I know she was here a minute ago I'm told. I can see Bertha's phone there and popped up for a minute and it disappeared .There she is. Bertha can you unmute your phone? I know there is a way to do that with the keypad. Devin do you know what the numbers are?

CLERK: Madam Chair I believe it's star six.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I couldn't hear that. Could you guys repeat that? Robyn.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yes Madam Chair. Bertha if you hit star six that should unmute your phone if you're dialing in. Star six.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. And I know Frank is here as well. Frank I'm not sure if Bertha is Spanish speaking. Perhaps she doesn't understand us. Okay we're going to keep working on getting Bertha back here but in the meantime I'm going to move to the next speaker on our list and that would be number 33, Carrie Redlich

CARRIE REDLICH: Can you hear and see me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes. Is it Dr. Redlich?

CARRIE REDLICH: Yes.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Nice to have you. Go ahead.

111 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CARRIE REDLICH: Good afternoon Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Dr. Carrie Redlich. I'm an occupational medicine and pulmonary physician and Director of the Yale Occupational and Environmental Medicine Program. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to briefly comment on House Bill 6478. I have taken care of numerous patients with COVID over the past year. I thought I would just briefly mention one patient I saw last week for the first time that I think illustrates some of the issues that have been discussed. Briefly she's a woman in her mid 30s who works as a certified nurse assistant at a hospital in Connecticut. In early February she was informed that she had cared for patients with COVID and should get tested. She got tested and was positive and developed COVID symptoms herself. I saw her for the first time last week. She's now been out of work for five weeks. She has persistent shortness of breath, it gets short of breath just doing the grocery shopping and has used up all her sick time and is worried about losing her job. She says that her supervisor told her there was no point in applying for Workers’ Compensation. So she had two problems or several problems but still persistently symptomatic and also you know lacking an income and benefits. So she's currently being evaluated by the post COVID clinic. Fortunately most patients that--the great majority do get better after their acute illness. Unfortunately there are some, who have persistent symptoms and really symptoms that impact their ability to return to work, and so she is being evaluated now to manage and understand and treat her shortness of breath, and the hope is to get her back to work. We explained to her Workers’ Compensation. In this case I know the question was raised, "How would you know if it's work related or not?" I think in the majority of cases we can determine that I'm more probable than not basis. She had contact with a sick COVID patient. She lived with her three children none of whom had COVID 19. So I think she illustrates a number of the problems that we see and 112 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE that will hopefully--this act will help address. So I will stop there. I'm happy to answer any questions.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I just want to say how important it is that you came here to testify today. We have heard from insurance companies, we have heard from workers, we've heard from employers, we've heard from city officials all of whom talked about concern over cost, concern over how you would actually be able to know if someone contracted COVID at work and this example is one example you gave. Coming from a doctor makes a huge impact because it really does tell us that there are ways to determine whether or not someone most likely got this at work and if they most likely got it at work then we should be protecting them and so I can't tell you how it made a huge impact on me and I'm sure other Members of this Committee to hear from you and we somehow I think in all of the discussion today we kinda left out the medical professionals who are there to help establish these backs and that can be very--

CARRIE REDLICH: You know I would just say that unfortunately many physicians despite our trying to educate them don't understand the concept of more probable than not. And they think they need to be 95% or 99% sure, and so that is I think one of the challenges that we've seen where their own treating physician even though I think it's clear where they got COVID from--they sort of well they could have gone to the grocery store you know and come up with so I think that is one of the challenges.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And why do you think people are resistant? Do they feel they have to be 100% accurate or right in order to--

CARRIE REDLICH: Yes and that this is not unique to COVID 19 at all. Physicians when they diagnose a heart attack or cancer I mean they're 99.9% certain 113 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE and they just aren't familiar with the more probable than not concept.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well that was very helpful to me. I really appreciate your testimony here today. I don't see any hand so we'll let you get back to work

CARRIE REDLICH: Okay, thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you very much. Now I'm going to go back. I saw that Bertha is unmuted and so let me--and I know we're going to pick up some of the others that we have skipped over but let's start with Bertha, number 26. Bertha can you hear us?

MARLIE: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead.

MARLIE: I'm coming for Bertha. I'm Marlie, I'm her daughter.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay.

MARLIE: I'm here because I work at Sbarro, and my mom also works there and she also works the bar and I work in a busy schedule and I have many responsibilities on my shift to make sure everyone in the restaurant is doing their job and also doing my job as well. But I make 13 hours or $1 more than minimum wage. I live with my mom and I pay rent. I'm gonna help her out. She has two jobs, she works for Sbarro and Chevrolet. My mom is Bertha Ruzeau she was testifying but she couldn't make it because of work. She works at Sbarro and --

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): You can go ahead and tell us your story but we do need to know your name for the record. Can you spell it for us?

MARLIE: M-A-R-L-I-E 114 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay Marlie, go ahead and tell us her story.

MARLIE: My story is I have been working with customers who don't like to wear masks and I feel like if I'm protected because we have to serve customers either with masks or without masks on and I work and I still feel like I am getting paid for that and I don't have no sick days. My boss she had COVID she was out for like two weeks and she now took the vaccine and stuff so like we're not really doing well at Sbarro so I don't really know what to do.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay so you're concerned about feeling unprotected at work and having to go to work?

MARLIE: Yeah. I don't have no sick days or nothing even if I'm sick I can't call out.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay well there are a number of things that we're hearing testimony on today that would hopefully help secure workers in your situation.

MARLIE: Yeah.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Anything else you want to share with us Marlie?

FRANK SOULTS: Marlie, do you--I'm sorry for interrupting Senator. Marlie, do you have the testimony that we worked on that is on your cell phone? If you'd like to just go through that very quickly.

CLERK: All right I can actually thank you very much Marlie for that your time, your testimony. Your three minutes have ended please conclude your remarks.

115 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

MARLIE: Okay

FRANK SOULTS: All right thank you Devin, thank you Senator.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for that. Next up I'm going to go back to Adam. Is that Adam Abubakar?

ABUBAKAR ADAM: Yes, we are back. Can you hear us now?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes we can.

ABUBAKAR ADAM: Okay, so the issue there was in terms of this is the bill for the drivers.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes.

ABUBAKAR ADAM: So what happens is when a rider requests a ride, the Uber driver would drive 15 minutes or 15 miles away to pick up a client that is going two blocks away after dinner. So the issue there would be, would the app techs put it in a system where they don't have to pinpoint a driver that's 15 miles away to pick up a passenger going two blocks down the road. It's unfair for the Uber driver who has to drive all the way and spend $10 on gas and only make $4, $5 on a ride. So those are some of the difficulties drivers come down to in that--what this platform does is forces you to drive long, there's no compensation on all your miles, on your--I mean that basically is a ride that is a total loss because a good example is if I drove from New Haven to Wallingford 15 exits away just to pick up two, three people from New Haven to Ihop that were going back home, it really did not make sense for that pinpoint to pull you all away, and when you go to Wallingford you thought maybe this is somebody who headed into Hartford or somewhere else only to find out that you only got paid $6, $7 for a ride that you drove 15-20 minutes to get to.

116 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

That's where we all come again and say we need a ride--an avenue to sit down with all these techs and say it makes no sense for you to pull somebody miles away to come and pick up a client that you want to take care of who's just going home after dinner to avoid a DUI and they just want to make them happy but they don't consider how long it took you to get there. And another thing is if you if you refuse to take a certain number of requests, they turn you off. And if that becomes persistent then they shut you down for that reason of you declined on a request. So that's where we all come in and we ask instead of calling the 1-800 number in Asia, we need to sit one on one with this franchise owners as I may call them because different states have different rules. If they come to Connecticut and we serve Connecticut residents the riders need to know that we also--

CLERK: Your three minutes have ended. Please conclude your remarks.

ABUBAKAR ADAM: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Adam. Is it Adam Abubakar?

ABUBAKAR ADAM: Yes.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you and I think we have heard some pretty good testimony today about the mechanism that would then provide an avenue for the drivers to actually sit with the representatives of the companies and come up with agreements on what the standards should be and then provide those to the state to adopt as regulations if the state sees fit. so thank you for your testimony and I don't see any hands so I am going to move to the next speaker and actually we're going to go back and pick up number 20, I Deshawn Burnell is here. Mr. Deshawn can you hear us? Go ahead and unmute yourself.

DESHAWN BURNELL: Hello. Can you hear me? 117 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes we can, go ahead.

DESHAWN BURNELL: Okay. Yes, my name is Deshawn Burnell, I am a security officer at 32BJ, and-- Just give me one second I have some notes I wanna get up here

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Sure. And while you're looking through your notes, if number 36, Sonam, if you could mute.

DESHAWN BURNELL: Well, I'm all set.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, go ahead.

DESHAWN BURNELL: All right. I’ve been working for the state of Connecticut as a security officer for five years, and I’m in contact with a lot of people every day, from the mailman to parolees and everything in between. Even though we have a glass up it doesn't mean that it's the end-all, and I might not be police or nurses but we are just as important, we protect assets at the buildings, the state buildings. I’m not just an essential worker, I’m a mandatory worker. I have to work to make a living and don't have the luxury of staying home. I shouldn't have to use pay time off to quarantine on a chance that I might have to COVID or I was contacted with somebody that might have it.

I bring my work home with me every night, health- related-- I mean, wise, and if I get a sniffle I’m terrified that I might have this virus, so I stay away from family members, plus I have high blood pressure and I’m also epileptic. So I’m at risk. I deserve hazard pay because of these reasons. I have to stand on the front lines. Did you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): We did. And thank you for that testimony in support of pandemic pay. We recognize that there are so many workers who are in your situation that had to go to work, as you 118 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE pointed out, not just the public safe but the assets, and so we appreciate your work. I don't see any hand at this time, so thank you for coming on and testifying today, and have a good afternoon.

DESHAWN BURNELL: All right, thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Next we have number 37, that would be, Eric Chester.

ERIC CHESTER: Good afternoon Chairpersons, Representative Porter, and Senator Kushner. My name is Eric Chester and I come before this Committee to testify in support of House Bill 6478. By way of introduction, I’m an attorney, I represent the American Federation of Teachers, Connecticut, as well as several other unions and their members throughout the state of Connecticut. As counsel to these unions, our firm provides legal representation to union members in contested workers' compensation claims. Over the years I estimate that our firm has represented hundreds if not thousands of workers in contested workers' compensation claims. I’ll say at the outset that, I believe firmly that the Workers' Compensation Commission, its Commissioners and all of its paid staff and employees provide an essential and important function to Connecticut's working class.

It has been my experience that while not perfect, the Workers' Compensation process is one that more often than not works well to preserve and advance the rights of workers who are injured or become ill in the workplace. I wanted to spend a few minutes to talk about a particular piece of this legislation that deals with the presumption and the employers' ability to rebut that presumption. One of the few shortcomings of the existing Workers' Compensation system is that claims can take a long time to be processed. The primary cause, in my experience of 119 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE this delay centers around the request for and the production of medical records.

When a worker files a Workers' Compensation claim, as Chairman testified earlier, and some other previous witnesses also testify to, the employer has 28 days to file a contested claim or the form 43, which you've all heard about. Once that happens that is your denial. The insurance carrier will then ask the injured worker to sign a release so that the insurance carrier can access the worker's medical records. That request is then sent to the worker's, oftentimes their primary care physician, and then the doctor's office begins to try to compile those records in response to that request.

The production of those records can take weeks, they could take months. And again, not casting any fault on anybody, especially in light of the pandemic, when staff are working from home and it may be even more difficult to compile these records. It just takes a really long time to process these claims. While this is happening, the claim is contested, the injured or ill worker is processing their medical treatment through their own insurance if they're fortunate enough to have it. They're incurring out- of-pocket expenses, perhaps they're forgoing medical treatment because it's too expensive. Additionally, they're out of work, they're burning through their accrued sick time, if they're fortunate enough to have it. And often, this can bleed into periods where they're unpaid. Now you have the worker who became sick at work in a very perilous situation, the medical bills continue to come in, the paychecks aren't.

CLERK: Thank you Mr. Chester, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

ERIC CHESTER: That was awfully fast. I would urge the passage of this Bill, I do have a number of remarks I prepared in response to a number of the questions that the Committee Members asked of 120 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE previous witnesses. I will say that we have presently 30 active contested Workers’ Compensation claims, and of those, 34 have been accepted 26 are still being contested. And I would just say also that this Bill does not preclude the employer from contesting a claim, they can still do that, they just have to do it quickly. So that the worker isn't hanging out there in the wind, incurring medical bills, and not receiving these benefits that they're otherwise entitled to.

And then lastly, I would say that in response to some of the earlier comments from representatives from the insurance industry, this Bill is not overly expansive. There is an exclusion in the Bill, as I read it that excludes workers who work from home or have the ability to work from home. So this Bill covers workers who didn't have that opportunity to work from home, and instead had to go into work. These are our essential workers. And if we've learned nothing else from this pandemic, we've learned who's important to keeping our society and our economy running. And these are the people that came to work every day. And as a result, more likely than not contracted COVID. I'm happy to take any questions.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And there is a hand of my esteemed Co-Chair, Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for your testimony, Mr. Chester, and your work. You know, I have been looking at the Bill and I kept forgetting to bring that up. But there is a section for lines 114 to 121 where I think you're referencing, the word, “Piece and solely,” if they were employed in the capacity from home and did not have physical interaction, blah, blah, blah. So thank you for putting that on the record. When you look at that, and the research that you've done, if you did say that there were some questions that you actually have responses to I would be very 121 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE interested to hear what those questions and answers are, who you are. Through you Madam.

ERIC CHESTER: Thank you for that question Representative Porter. One issue I wanted to respond to is in response to the recent testimony from Dr. Redlich, I believe her name was. Where medical professionals are often hesitant to put their name to an opinion that says they're 100% certain that this person got COVID-19 at work. And what the Commissioners look for, the language they look for is that the treaty would say that it's within a reasonable degree of medical probability. That's kind of the magic phrase we look for in the Workers’ Compensation field, that it's within a reasonable degree of medical probability that this worker, contracted COVID-19 at work. Representative Winkler asked a question very early in the day as to what a Slam Dunk case would look like. And I would respond that that's what it would look like. If a worker went to his or her doctor and said, I'm a nurse at NML Hospital, I had a known exposure to a patient who was positive for COVID-19., and three days later, I began experiencing symptoms. And I've now tested positive. That doctor would hopefully say that it's more likely than not, it's within a reasonable degree of medical probability that you contracted COVID-19 as a result of that workplace exposure. And that would more likely than not result in a case that would be accepted. The other thing I would say in response to a number of questions regarding the disability rating, there's a lot of discussion about that. I'll use the lungs, for instance, because COVID-19 more often than not impacts the lungs more than any other body part.

A lung is worth 117 weeks of Workers’ Compensation pay. That's if a one were 100% disabled. So in the case of COVID-19, we're learning that, we have more to learn about COVID-19 than we know already. But there are long term impacts that people suffer as a result of contracting this disease. And more often than not, it's going to be to the lungs. So if a 122 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE nurse, if a healthcare worker contracts COVID-19 at work, she suffers some symptoms, she gets some treatment, she feels better, she's back to work. There may, and there likely will be long term impacts as a result of contracting COVID-19. At some point in time, she'll be examined by a physician and the physician will say your lungs are only 90% of what they were before you contracted COVID-19. Because they're only 90% of what they were. That means there's a 10% permanent partial disability to her lungs, or 11.7 weeks, that's your 10% is.

And then that results in that permanent partial disability payment. So it's important that these claims become accepted. What's been happening, in our experience is that we, as chairman Morelli correctly stated, we do get to a hearing relatively quickly. And what often happens is, not always, but what will often happen is the insurance adjuster will agree to advance some benefits on a non- precedential basis. We will advance you for weeks of pay or will reimburse you for your medical expenses. But we're not going to accept the claim. And that's been happening. And that can work for a period of time. But what we're seeing with COVID, people suffering long term effects, they may have to go back out to work. They may need future medical treatment, the only way to ensure that they get the benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act is if the claim is accepted. Not kind of accepted incrementally, but accepted. That way, we assure that the injured worker who contracted at work is entitled to the benefits that she deserves.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Well, you definitely made some great points there. And I know that I missed some of Chairman Morelli's testimony, but it was stated that we have 3123 file claims.1726 were filed from March the 10th through May 20th.And then 1397 were filed since then.. 18,000 death benefit. So would you happen to know how many claims we've paid out of all those claims? You have -- would you be privy to that information? 123 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

ERIC CHESTER: No, Representative Porter, I would not but I'll say this that I do know this, nobody wants to be on Workers’ Compensation. Nobody wants to contract COVID-19. I know that. So to -- in response to some of the testimony that this is going to open up some kind of floodgates of claims, I would deposit that that is without merit. Nobody wants to file a Workers’ Compensation claim. Nobody wants to get sick at work. All we're looking for us that in the in the unfortunate event, they do contract COVID-19 at work, they get the benefits that the Act entitles them to.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Well, I do agree with you there. So thank you again, for your testimony and taking the time to be with us today. Enjoy the rest of your afternoon. And thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, I do have-- I have one question, because, you know, it's always when we get folks before us that have had a lot of experience with the system. And I think sometimes we get a little caught up, those of us who haven't worked out great deal with Workers’ Compensation, might get hung up on the fact of who's to blame. So, you know, I think there's a lot of concern that somehow we're blaming an employer for someone getting COVID, and are we sure that the employer was to blame? And, you know, one of the things that if you can address, I am certain there are a lot of circumstances where a worker gets injured at work. And it wasn't the fault of the employer in the sense that they didn't -- they weren't intentionally disregarding regulations or intentionally creating an unsafe work condition, but it is the nature of the work itself.

For instance, we know firefighters get hurt at work. We don't blame the fire department for them getting hurt at work. They got hurt at work, because it's a dangerous work situation. So is there a way to look at this, similarly, that employers may have taken 124 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE all the precautions, but there was no choice about it. Work had to go on and the workers were in a dangerous work situation because of the fact that this disease, this virus is so contagious. Can you elaborate on that? Because I don't think we've really heard any testimony about that.

ERIC CHESTER: I'll try Senator Kushner, thank you for the question. I think being that this, you know, we're talking about the Workers’ Compensation Act, which is a no fault system. And the result of creating the Workers’ Compensation Act was to take things -- work related injuries and illnesses out of civil litigation. So you didn't have to prove fault. You didn't have to prove negligence and, you know, to no fault system, you're at work, you get injured, and that injury arises out of the course of the employment, it's covered under the Act, there's no lawsuits, you get the wage replacement benefits, you get medical treatment, and hopefully you heal and come back to work. So I agree, I don't think there's anything in this legislation that's punitive towards employers. Not at all. It's just extending the remedial nature of the Workers’ Compensation Act to cover workers who are more likely than not contracted COVID-19 at work. And again, it still allows the employer to present evidence to rebut the presumption and is a rebuttable presumption that's important to remember. It's just they have to do it quickly. Because not doing it quickly puts the sick worker at a greater disadvantage than she already is, as a result of contracting COVID-19 at work.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That is exactly what I was looking for. And I couldn't say it so well, because I'm not as familiar with it. But I think we have gotten a little hung up in this hearing, and other times on thinking that we're blaming employers. And I think the way you said it just now that it's a no fault system helps us to understand this much more clearly. I do see a handout representative Arora. Representative. Representative Arora.

125 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. ARORA (151ST): Yeah, thank you. Can you -- yeah, you can hear me now. And thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chester, I think you'd really did help us out by, you know, explaining, it's a no fault system. That was that was an insight we needed. My question here is that, what we're saying is that if an employee gets hurt, let's say, you know, while they're playing, you know, let's say basketball. And it's still a back or an injury, it's very clear that they're not going to claim Workers’ Compensation, because it happened outside work, right. And that -- that kind of just because it's a back injury doesn't mean that it's related to work. Now, here, what we're saying is -- and think about also, because it's retrospective. So you know, your other idea that we got to give quick help, especially in COVID, everything has to be quick. So we were saying basically, later compensation issues we're talking about. And here we're talking about things but which might have happened long ago. So the question really -- your opinion, I would like is, understanding that's a no fault system. It doesn't -- shouldn't we follow the same process as others, because just like, the percentage might be the same as another injuries in this injury, that is a reasonable chance it could be have gotten outside and just like we do it on other events or other injuries, shouldn't the same process be followed?

ERIC CHESTER: I thank you for the question, Representative Arora, I would say no. For a number of reasons. One, in a normal Workers’ Compensation process, you have someone who suffers a back injury. That person may still be able to be at work, earning wages, you know, maybe they don't have a restriction, they made a claim they got hurt at work, but they're still working. So they're not suffering a loss in income, they're not suffering the loss and accrued time, or, or maybe not even incurring medical expenses, they're still at work.

You contract COVID-19, you're out of work, you're out of work for who knows how long, and all the 126 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE while you're potentially without pay, potentially incurring expenses associated with medical treatment, and you know, are burning through accrue time, if you're fortunate enough to be earning it. Rents due every 30 days, you file a claim that Form 43 doesn't have to be filed until 28 days. Now, the claim is contested. The landlord's still expecting the rent to be paid. You have in -- you have sick workers who got sick at work, who may not be receiving income as a result of contracting the disease at work, I think that it is imperative that we recognize the uniqueness of this disease, the uniqueness that it puts you out of work, the uniqueness that it could keep you out indefinitely. And the -- not just the probability but the likeliness, that these workers are going to suffer economic harm, in addition to the physical harm from contracting the disease.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Mr. Chair. So that's very helpful. You know, we also have to keep in context, the fact that there is a Cures Act number one, which was before the first Cures Act already provides for -- I think it's two weeks of paid sick leave, which the employer actually can deduct from his social security or his unemployment taxes. And so that 14 days is available. And typically, that's the first form of -- line of defense to get the wages back already. So you know, there seems to be - - that's another point we made but I do appreciate the fact that you're saying that here, it's the urgency, but however, I'm still failing, there are many, many back injury, maybe different, the many other injuries many, many other injuries where you know, where you are out of work, and it's really hard for workers. So I'm still not, you know, -- I'm not still not realizing why it's so different from many other injuries. But perhaps if you had a comment on that, that'd be great. Otherwise, that's it for me.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. I will, just for the record to make a couple of comments here, 127 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Representative Arora I know that you were referring to the 14 -- to the time of that workers received under the Cares Act, it was actually I think the Families First Act that covered time off from work if you contracted COVID, or someone in your family, and you were required to stay home. There were a couple of different ways into families first, you could receive time off with pay. But I do wanna point out that that was restricted to persons who work for employers that have fewer than 500 employees. So only the big change were not impacted by that.

It also had an exemption for home -- for healthcare workers, healthcare facilities could claim an exemption. So, you know, I think the Families First program was a great concept. But I do know, from having researched it a bit that I think the families first program was not used as much as it could have been, or should have been, possibly because employers didn't know what or feared that it wouldn't compensate the way they expect it.

The other problem with families first is that you had to be active on the payroll on April 1st, when it went into, when the Regs were established when it went into -- it didn't go into effect until April 1. And all of the employees that were out of work in March, because of the shutdown, or didn't have a school to send their kids to or didn't have a daycare, send them to if that happened prior to them leaving work on April 1st, they were not eligible for that benefit. So, there were so many holes in the Families First program that, but I understand your point that there may have been some benefits that did come from the federal government. And I think we're all thankful for those that were able to receive them. I assume in that case, and maybe attorney Chester, you can -- you might have the answer to this. In the case where somebody did receive a benefit, like a Families First benefit, paid time off from the federal government, if they then had determination that their COVID was related- 128 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

- was a work injury, and their time expanded beyond that two weeks, would they have still qualified for more time off then under the Workers’ Compensation or payment for more time off?

ERIC CHESTER: They would need to be yes, the Families First coronavirus response act grants you two weeks of pay as a result of having to miss time for contracting the virus. So if this Bill were to pass, or if a worker were to be able to assert that they contracted the virus at work, then Workers’ Compensation would pick up, you know, in addition to those two weeks. And the FFC already has expired. That benefit is over. And again, it's two weeks, it's not enough.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And if somebody claimed that two weeks and received pay for that. Would they be double- dipping? Would they be able to get the -- would they be able to get the--

ERIC CHESTER: No, no, they would not be able to double-dip. That would be an offset against those weeks two weeks paid.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. Thank you for that clarification. I do see Representative Arora, I think you have a little time left. Did you have another question?

REP. ARORA (151ST): No. Madam Chair, I just wanted to continue. That was really great point you made about the Families -- FFCRA, and pardon me, I referred to it as Cares Act. Is that if you were using the PFB, which is called FPUC, which is 600 a week from the federal government as well. And let's assume that was also quite automatic, and I know I've been having worked for several constituents, would that also be an offset in this case? Because that was for 26 weeks? So let--

129 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Exactly, let me just clarify that you're talking now about someone who received unemployment compensation?

REP. ARORA (151ST): That's correct. That's correct. So you were eligible, because in this time period, really, you were eligible -- the unemployment compensation was quite -- it was broadened. So let's say you were not able to work because of COVID reasons. You know, you typically were granted unemployment allowance for not just the regular amount, which would be up to limited to 650, but also another 600. So there'll be 1250 a week, which will typically cover wages plus a little bit perhaps. So would that not be included in something like this?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So the question I believe you're asking Attorney Chester is, would the -- if the person then prevailed in receiving Workers’ Compensation that had also received for a period of time, unemployment compensation, would that be considered for an offset as well?

ERIC CHESTER: I would say I believe it would be and I would just say also that the goal here isn't to push people onto unemployment. The goal is to keep people employed. And they shouldn't -- no one should lose their job as a result of contract and COVID-19.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you very much. That’s really that's really a great objective. Practically what happened was you know most people did end up availing that because it was quite generous in some sense. Once again thank you, thank you Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you and I don’t see any other hands at this time so thank you Attorney Chester for helping out today with your testimony.

ERIC CHESTER: Thank you, it was a pleasure.

130 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay next on our list -- I believe we're going to go back to Frank Soults for you're going to read us the testimony for number 11 we had so much trouble getting that.

FRANK SOULTS: Thank you senator I'm very sorry about that we just couldn't get his equipment to work so the translation of his testimony, although I have before me he says good day to everybody--

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Let me clarify for a minute just so everyone listening knows that we are now hearing testimony for Hediberto Canelas and he was unable to be able to make the technology connection that we needed so Frank Soults is going to read that testimony. Go ahead Frank.

FRANK SOULTS: Thank you Senator. So Hediberto Canelas said, or would have said, Good day to everybody and thank you for hearing my testimony. My name is Hediberto Canelas I'm a member of 32BJ-SEIU and for the last five years I've been a cleaner at the Stamford train station. I'm here today because I believe many parts of the COVID Labor Bill that's House Bill 6595 and Senate Bill 1002 would help my coworkers my union brothers and sisters in all essential workers across Connecticut. I'm part of a team of a dozen cleaners at the station many of us are older like me, Hediberto, are close to 60. I'm grateful that I'll be getting the vaccine on Sunday but it has been a difficult year. I'm lucky that I've not gotten the Coronavirus but at least two of the 12 cleaners at the station have had COVID and another had to go into quarantine because he was exposed.

I know that some have used their own vacation time saying they would not lose their paychecks. I am proud of what we've achieved with our unions but we still can't afford to lose a week's pay and everybody needs to have time off during the year to be with their families and not have to use their vacation time. Every day we work cleaning and 131 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE sanitizing a large lobby, public bathrooms and other spaces. Not all the customers at the train station wear masks. Homeless people often use the station and sometimes they're not well they leave messes or they cough near us without any face mask on.

We have to deal with all the customers of the station as part of our job, I understand that, but we have a new layer of risk with a pandemic I’m proud to keep the station clean and disinfected but I think that the people of Connecticut can appreciate our hard work too, and they will support recognizing our sacrifice with hazard pay. I'm sure you can understand that the extra pay would be a very big help for us in these difficult times. Finally I'd like to see the government help us with Personal Protective Equipment. Our jobs provide us with gloves and face masks but we could use more support oftentimes a face shield is as important for us as it is for a hospital worker. Thank you for listening to my story and I hope you'll support the COVID Labor Bill. Have a good afternoon. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you frank. Thanks for reading that for us. There won't be any questions and we'll move to the next person on the list and that is number 42. Mike Trahan. Trahan? Did I say that correctly? Mike. We're not hearing you Mike. You appear to be unmuted but we still can't hear you. You might wanna unplug your headset and see if that -- there you go.

MIKE TRAHAN: I'm sorry. Senator, my name is Mike Trahan, with Solar Connecticut, the state's solar energy business group, and I'm here to testify in opposition to Senate Bill 999 as it's currently drafted. Our members, for your Members' benefit, are residential solar installers, responsible for most of the solar systems installed. And so, residential rooftops. Our members are also for the purposes of this Bill, small businesses who develop small commercial solar systems. We have a couple of reasons in opposition for this Bill. 132 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

The main reason is that the average home solar commercial -- the average commercial systems installed today, 99% of them are small systems installed by small businesses. They are not the 125 megawatt size solar project that was recently approved in East Windsor. They're not the 500 megawatt sized gas plant that's been proposed. And they're not the 2000 megawatt offshore wind project that's been proposed. The largest commercial solar system installed in Connecticut today, where they average on the high end is 1/100th the size of the offshore wind project that's been proposed.

So what this Bill is asking those Connecticut small businesses to do is to comply with the same requirements that large national international companies are being asked to -- those additional requirements that the build suggests. Our members here, I've been installing commercial solar since 2011, for a decade. The industry has worked well. The vast majority is probably 99% of the systems installed in Connecticut, are small systems installed by small businesses, who've recruited 2000 workers to the state of Connecticut. They've hired those workers, they've trained those workers, and they employ them at a very good wage.

And they're very happy to be working in the solar industry today. We've made a number of suggestions, Senator, on how to improve the Bill. The suggestions are listed at the bottom of our testimony. You don't have it yet, but I'll submit it in just a little bit. But we'd like to work with the Committee on that. And I would also say that if the Committee -- it sounds -- and I'm glad to hear that the Committee is like to match clean energy growth within state jobs. The solar industry in the state of Connecticut on the commercial side is stymied by caps and limits on solar programs here. We could add hundreds and hundreds, maybe as many as 1000 jobs today, if the handcuffs were taken off the solar industry here in the state. And I think it would be more than a good 133 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE idea if the Labor Committee, the Commerce Committee, and the Energy Committee, meet together to try to work together to meet the challenges of matching clean energy and job growth here. That's my testimony. Senator, thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. I know I spoke too soon, when I said we hadn't heard any opposition to that Bill. But I do wanna -- I have a couple of questions for you. You mentioned that the workers in the industry that there are 2000 workers who are recruited to work in the solar industry in Connecticut, is that correct?

MIKE TRAHAN: I think it's 23 -- a little better than 2300. That's a number that is generated by the National Solar Census. Yes, that's from 2019.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. And you said that they are paid very good wages. Can you tell me the average wage?

MIKE TRAHAN: I don't know the specific wages of electrical or a construction worker or carpentry work, but I can get those to you, Senator.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): within the solar industry.

MIKE TRAHAN: Sure. Yeah. I would tell you that that the subcontractors that work for our members, and the direct employees have been with their employers for many, many years, and are quite satisfied. We are -- we're working in an industry, like I say that is a little bit of a wobbly standing now, because of the Caps and limits on programs here. We're trying to work our way through that with the Energy Committee this year. But I think to the general point is to put small businesses -- the compliance to this Bill, to have small businesses who have been working here since 2011. They built this industry, these small businesses did. To make them -- and they're invested here. They have kids in public schools here. They pay lots of taxes. They aren't 134 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE parachuting into Connecticut, like some other national companies to do one job and leave these companies are Connecticut-grown businesses. They're based here, the taxpaying companies.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So I'm, I'm glad to hear that, you know, we are looking for good jobs for people here in Connecticut. I guess.-- I do believe that there are always solutions to problems or to situations that might fall outside of the norm that you described outside of the big project to the small employers. You know, we certainly wanna see our small businesses survive in Connecticut, and -- but I do think there's a way that workers needs can be resolved through collective bargaining and through working with the unions to find the right -- the right formula for success there. But I do have a question for you. Are you -- are your employers or the businesses that you represent? Are they working on residential workers that commercial work also?

MIKE TRAHAN: Most of the companies that do residential work to residential only. There are some residential installers that do small commercial work. Most of the companies that do commercial work do commercial exclusively.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): The members of your association are they doing strictly the residential, then for the most part?

MIKE TRAHAN: what we have, we have some members who are just strictly residential home solar installers. We have some members that do some residential and some commercial. And then we have some members that do just strictly commercial work. And like I said, while, you know, the project that you read about it was mentioned earlier today is I think, 125 megawatt solar project. Again, on the high side, the project stick in state commercial developers are doing is well inside a 20 megawatts. And that's -- and to achieve, you know, to achieve -- so that -- so the leap harmless to small businesses, we've suggested 135 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE several line stages that would -- that would allow this Bill to move forward, but would not have a negative impact on small businesses.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And hose that have worked on commercial projects, have they ever participated in the project labor agreement?

MIKE TRAHAN: I suspect that they have those that may have been hired by municipalities. You know, our workers installed solar in school rooftops and fire stations and other public buildings. I don't know that they've done much work for the state, as far as I know.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, thank you, I do hope that there will be an opportunity to sit down with some of the unions in this industry, and talk about small businesses and how it could work together with union labor that would ensure that people have good wages with good benefits. And I would be interested in knowing the average rates for the trades in your in association. That'd be helpful. If you could get that. If you get it to our clerk down and he'll make sure to get it to all the members.

MIKE TRAHAN: I'll do that.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, I don't see any other hands. Thank you for your testimony today.

MIKE TRAHAN: Very good. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So, next up, is -- I believe we're up to No. 43. Now, Candice Carlson?

CANDICE CARLSON: Yes. Can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes. And I think you've been sitting there for a while because I've seen you up there for a while.

136 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CANDICE CARLSON: I have. Good afternoon, Senator Kushner and Representative Porter, and members of the Committee. My name is Candice Carlson and I have been employed by DDS as a caseworker in the individual home sports program for over 27 years. I am testifying and advocating today, on behalf of thousands of heroes like me, statewide, who have selflessly and extraordinarily risen to the needs of our most vulnerable citizens statewide during the COVID pandemic. Our heroes have sacrificed their safety, their families, and their futures. And I am here today to ask that you recognize our sacrifices and our extraordinary work by compensating us with the hero pay that we are so deserving of. I ask you to please pass Senate Bill 1002. And House Bill 6595.

I speak today on behalf of the employees who have continuously showed up to work in some of the most unsafe, absolutely unimaginable environments, and circumstances that the average person never has to see because we are the heroes that do the work. I speak on behalf of the employees who have been forced to work in COVID crisis environments consistently without proper PPE, employees that have been forced to work in environments that are severely understaffed, mandated every single day, and some up to 24 hours straight. For those who cannot even go home because of the severity of the environment that they are working in, would put their families in a high risk category. I speak on behalf of our heroes who have gotten sick because of the lack of the lack of PPE, the lack of PPE protocol and the gross mismanagement statewide.

I speak for those who have unknowingly transmitted this virus to their families. And I speak for those employees who have made the ultimate sacrifice with their lives. I speak on behalf of employees that have been consistently treated as though they are expendable. And instead of being valued, respected and treated like the heroes they are, they have consistently been treated like zeros throughout this 137 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE entire pandemic. The magnitude of COVID is absolutely measurable, yet essential, and frontline employees show up every single day. With that said, again, I please ask you to pass Senate Bill 1002, and House Bill 6595. And I thank you for all that you do. And I thank you for your consideration.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, we've heard a lot of testimony today from a lot of workers. But what I wanna thank you for is putting it in so -- you know, really poetic terms. It was really well-written and well-thought out, to give us the perspective of what's happening to our state and to the people who work in our state in such exceptional circumstances. So thank you for that testimony and being here today, and for all you do. Thank you. Oh, I do see a hand now. Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): I just wanted to piggyback off what you said. We've been going at this 14 hours now. You've been very patient and I just wanna echo what the good senator said, we both have been out here on this road, up and down, south to north of Connecticut, since this pandemic started over a year ago, and you just kind of conjured up all the stories that we heard while we were out there, and you guys do matter. And I want you to know that, and I want you to take that back to your colleagues, and co-workers, and let them know that they are not forgotten, and that they are very much appreciated. And instead of just calling you heroes, we wanna treat you like heroes, right? Just not saying you're essential is enough.

If you're an essential worker, you should have essential pay, you should have essential healthcare, whatever it is that you need in order to provide us with the essential work and how you show up every day. And when you say 24 hours, the first thing I said is, "That's illegal," but there's a lot of illegal stuff going on out there, so thank you for having the courage and intestinal fortitude to come 138 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE and speak truth to power today, Candice, your appreciated. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, have a good day, Candice.

CANDICE CARLSON: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next step, I’m gonna go back to number 36, to Sonam. I know we were having trouble with your technology and I understand you're on the phone now. Sonam Sherpa. So, Sonam, you can unmute yourself, I’ve been taught now that this is *6.

SONAM SHERPA: Hi. Good afternoon, Senator and Representative and Member of the Labor Committee. My name is Sonam Sherpa, I live in Enfield Connecticut. I’ve been Uber driver for five years, and member of the IDG. I have a issue with about my rating, rating through the Uber. When I drive, so like they're gonna give us Uber ride is far away and if we did like cancel our trip, then they're gonna decrease our rating. And also I have a issue with like a ride to the Boston and New York. When we go to the airport to the Boston and we can't get that back to- - Back from the Boston to the Connecticut so we need to come back all the way back to the quality get to get a ride. It's almost like half and half, and yeah and like same New York. IN New York if we drop our customer to the JFK and somewhere else like around New York, we can get ride back from there. Is like New York driver they came here to drop off their customer, they're gonna get ride back from here and like say Massachusetts they're gonna get back from her or Rhode Island, but Connecticut driver they can't get back from like whatever, like we can't go to the Rhode Island, like New York, Boston, we can get ride back that, so that's the thing.

And I have a issue with the mileage, so the mileage is very low. If we drive like 55 mile they're gonna 139 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE pay us like-- Uber will pay us like around 45 and it doesn't make sense so we need to cover that, like for our like mileage, and like gas, everything. It doesn't cover our income expenses. And then also like the nighttime, driver drive in the city, and some drive from other states, and will like if other state drivers tend to drive in city, then the Connecticut driver couldn't get enough job to do, we're like a full-time employee for the Uber and we can't get like enough jobs and we don't have like that kind of good benefits, like insurance for our like, health insurance.

Like if we did like the night driver, they need to pay like little extra for the night driver and the day driver they have a-- they need to put something like would like a-- incentive thing. And last, thank you very much and at this time, I would like to ask your support to pass the Bill Number 1000, so driver can support their family with this little. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Sonam, and thank you, I’m glad we're able to get you on through your phone. So thanks for being with us today. I don't see any hands, but I hope you have a good rest of your day.

SONAM SHERPA: Thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up, we have--Hold on a sec. I believe we're up to, Diane Rittuci from Workers' Compensation.

DIANE RITTUCI: Hi, good afternoon, everybody. I am providing some testimony in opposition to many of the Workers' Comp issues, Senate Bill 1002, HB 6595, HB 6478. I appreciate the opportunity to talk to the Members of the abor and Public Employees Committee today. My name is Diane Rittuci, and I’m President and CEO of the Workers' Compensation Trust. The trust is an employer mutual association that's for 40 years has been providing Workers' Compensation 140 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE insurance to over 400 healthcare and human service organizations throughout the state. We represent about 80,000 workers. I applaud healthcare workers, we applaud healthcare workers, this is what we do. We support them every single day. And we are proud to serve them every single day, and work with them on their health issues, whether it be a COVID incident or not.

I am testifying today however in opposition to many of the Workers' Comp issues that are contained in these Bills. And while I certainly understand the sensitivity and the tremendous impact COVID-19 has had on the workforce the past 12 months, I know all too well how private employers and insurers have responded to the needs of the employees affected by COVID-19. In the vast majority of situations, private employers sought help to ensure that their workforce was protected, educated, and cared for when sick, all while dealing with the needs of their own patients, their clients, their consumers, as well as their own families. Were the answers they got always right? No, probably not. So much was happening so fast, early on in this pandemic that it certainly was difficult to give right information and have right equipment. But certainly, as more time passed, and more solid information became available, we all fell into the very unfortunate rhythm of managing employees with COVID-19.

The Bills that we're discussing today seem to have been written without any regard to how far we actually have come. There are far more employees than not, who believe the system worked exceedingly well for them and their claims were managed with timeliness, professionalism, care, and concern. It's now been almost a year since our first COVID-19 claim in the state, and insurers have proven that we have evaluated these claims and come up with the right answers. Based on what we heard this morning from Chairman Morelli, 3100 claims have already come through the system, only 9% of those are being litigated, far less than the 24% of non-COVID-19 141 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE claims that are being litigated. When we talk about litigation in the Workers' Comp world, it's not as scary as it sounds, litigation purely means is I requested a hearing. And it doesn't necessarily mean my claim has been entirely disputed, it just means that I might have a comp right issue, or I might wanna change my medical doctor to someone else, or it could be a very minor issue. But the term is used litigation.

Certainly, those stats point to a system that is working, even for those with COVID-19 claims. The employees who most likely than not got COVID from the workplace are getting paid. That's evidenced by, not only what's going on with the Workers' Comp Commission, but certainly, the reporting that's going to the commission about claims that have been accepted by insures. I’ve been on the call all day and I listened to all the employees, the healthcare workers who I’m so happy for them that they got a chance to voice their concerns today, what we heard from a lot of those was that they were not paid during quarantine periods. And quarantine period isn't typically something that would be covered under a Workers' Compensation situation. They're not not injured, they're not ill, right?

CLERK: Thank you, Ms. Ruttuci, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

DIANE RITTUCI: Already? Okay. So I think you need to kinda separate that out, what's a quarantine period versus what's someone who actually contracted COVID with. The whole concern about presumption in our position is that you don't need a presumption, you already have the insurance industry doing what they're supposed to do. The other point I'd like to make is a lot of what you heard today, was from state workers, state of Connecticut workers. So I think you do have an issue that you need to kinda look at, about how they're handling the quarantine periods and choosing people sick time, etc, etc. But 142 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE private employers seem to be doing a good job of it.

Basically, I urge not to disrupt the Workers' Compensation system because of this horrific pandemic that, hopefully, won't happen to us again in another 100 years. I think you've got an occupational disease language that's very strong already in our books, you've got a method in our state to handle these claims appropriately. And I think you need to find another solution for handling some of the people who have fallen out of the system, weren't eligible for the FFCRA benefits because their employers were too large, or the benefits weren't available to them. But the cost impact of changing the Workers' Comp system to accommodate this, is humongous and it will hurt employers in our state for years to come, this would not be a one-shot deal. The NCCI numbers are horrific to look at, you can't even think of wrapping your head around them in this economy the way we are. So I just urge you to find another solution to deal with some of the outliers that did not come through, that would not come through the Workers' Comp system, and leave the Workers' Compensation system operating as it is.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. I do see Representative Winkler has his hand up.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Yes. Through the Chair, we hear-- I forgot the exact number, 247 adjudicated claims. And the inference in two previous speakers was that they are the only legitimate claims that weren't paid by employers uncontested, isn't it likely that most of the other claims people just give up when they get the first mail?

DIANE RITTUCI: I personally don't think so. I think people are very much aware of how to file Workers' Compensation claims in our state. I think it's on every bus, every--attorneys advertise in every bus about Workers' Comp, there's commercials, there's 143 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE public fliers out there, there's information that's promulgated by the Workers' Compensation Commission, and the union. So, employees know how to process Workers' Compensation claims. I think the ones that are in dispute are truly in dispute for whatever reason, because there likely was not as much evidence going on in the workplace to show that COVID came from the workplace. And I think those cases will fall out. Now, whether they're not moving as quickly as we'd like to see them may be another question, and maybe that's another area to focus on, is to try and streamline that process or fast-track that process so people can get their answers quickly or quicker. But to actually think that there's a host of claims out there that are not being recognized, I sincerely doubt it, I think there's more than enough avenues for people to get their claims processed in the right way through the Workers' Comp system if they've legitimately felt that it was a work-related injury.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): A comment through the Chair. From my perspective, I used to represent 3000 workers, and they would get their initial denial, medical denial, and they would give up, and I would say, "Don't give up, they haven't even looked at your medical record yet." And they ask me, "What do you mean?" And I said, "They have to give you an answer in 30 days." And they don't have enough doctors to actually look at all the medical records within 30 days so they just deny them all, 'cause it have to respond. And if you appeal, then they go back and look at your medical records. So, a lot of people just gave up. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Rep. Winkler. I see Rep. Porter has her hand up.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Ms. Rittuci, for your testimony today. And in listening to it, you're saying that you don't think so, and I know that we personally, I’ve talked to hundreds of workers in this last year, admitted 144 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE this is why this piece of legislation is before us. And it's exactly what Representative Winkler just stated, people shouldn't make the assumption that because something may be on a bus, or advertised, or attorneys-- and we have non-union, a lot of non- union workers that are included in the crafting of this legislation, and they have told us, straight from their mouth to our ears, that they didn't know and they didn't realize that they could actually do what you're making the assumption that you can do.

So, there is some education gaps that need to be filled, but there's also the case of the Workers' Comp, not working. And I mean, you're saying you represent about 80,000 workers, so can you tell me out of the 80,000 workers, during this COVID pandemic, how many of them have filed for a COVID- related Workers' Comp claim?

DIANE RITTUCI: The numbers that we had gotten in was about-- were over 400 exposure claims, over 110 actual COVID positive claims, and 110 COVID positive, I believe we've denied 12. 12 or 14, it might be 14. And that's all in the past year.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay, so you had a total of 110 COVID positive claims, and out of 110, you've only denied about 12-14, 15 of them. Can you tell me why they were denied?

DIANE RITTUCI: Yes. Because, in fact, when we went to ponder the information that was presented to us-- and the thing about COVID is you do have a very specific timeline, right? You have 14 day, quarantine period but you also have a period of time that you know that people are likely to have been exposed before they actually get symptoms, the 5-7 day window. So it's pretty easy to go back to a timeline and say, "Okay, where were you 5-7 days before? What was going on? Anything else going on in your household? Any travel experiences? If you've been-- yeah, whatever, and figure out whether or not 145 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the work environment contributed, more likely than not, to you getting COVID.

Were there patients, in fact, or clients, in fact, in your Group Home or your Nursing Home that had COVID you were exposed to? So, it isn't all that difficult to delineate if you have clear facts from the employer, and clear facts from the employee, and you have testing results, and you have when symptoms began, things along that line. It doesn't often require a medical provider, I'll be very honest with you, it requires, really, a very concise timeline and from there you can glean more likely than not and obviously, we're ensuring healthcare workers, so we expect that in most cases, more likely than not, might be the workplace, right? We believe we understand what's going on in the workplaces that we're ensuring. So it hasn't been all that difficult to delineate it out. Now, when you have someone who says that they had COVID but meanwhile you find out in the background that their whole family had COVID prior to them getting symptoms, etc, etc, well, then we kinda know there was no work exposure. So it's a matter of doing some investigation, talking to all the parties, and looking at the timeline and figuring out what works, what makes sense and what doesn't.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay, thank you for that. And then my next question is, what would you estimate to be the turnaround time with your claim from start to finish?

DIANE RITTUCI: We are very expeditious in our claim processing, and I obviously can't speak for the whole industry on this one, but we, basically, round-tabled all of our COVID exposure claims every Thursday morning to whatever came through the door, made sure that we had our investigations already done, our timelines already done, 24-hour contact with the employee and the employer to figure out what that timeline looked like, and we were very quick to make decisions, even if it was a, "Not 146 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE quite sure, here's where we're going, here's what I still need." Employees knew every step of the way where we were in this process. We did not wanna let people linger and wonder, as sick as they were, how they were gonna be taken care of

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay. And you say, "Expeditious," can you just give me a estimation and day, what that looks like? Weeks?

DIANE RITTUCI: I would say it was less than a week of us-- From the time we got the claim through the door, if we were able to make contact and, of course, realize in this world it's hard to make contact with people, they don't answer their phones. But if we were able to make contact with that injured worker, and with the employer which we usually can get ahold of, and able to piece together a timeline, we were able to respond back to that employee within seven or eight days, in order for them to know whether we were having problem with the claim, or whether we were all set.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay.

DIANE RITTUCI: But particularly with the COVID, we were extremely sensitive, and I think most insurers were extremely sensitive to COVID-19 and what was going on with these employees, and wanting to make sure that they were taken care of.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you.

DIANE RITTUCI: And in most cases, these were serious illnesses, people were hospitalized, there was stuff going on.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, I appreciate that. And my last question, through you, Madam Chair, out of the 80,000 workers that you represent, can you tell us where some of these health care workers are in the state, who they're working for?

147 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DIANE RITTUCI: Oh yes. They're all over the state.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Just a few.

DIANE RITTUCI: Names of companies, you mean?

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yes.

DIANE RITTUCI: For example the To Journey Found employees, Journey Found is one of places that we insure, we insure Marrakech, we insure Stanford hospital, which was one of the first-- highest incidence of COVID in our state came through Stanford Hospital and that area. Amazing how blank your mind can go. We insure a number of Nursing homes.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Oh, I get it. It really happens. So, what I’ll ask you to do, if you don't mind, is if you could just get me a list of the folks that you guys represent and send it to our clerk, and he'll get it out to the Members and then that way I can let Representative Arora get in here 'cause I see he has this hand up. Is that okay? Ms. Rittuci?

DIANE RITTUCI: Yeah, okay.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And before I call in Representative Arora, I do have a question for you, and it goes along-- It, sort of, follows up on what Representative Porter was just asking you about. In your testimony you said that far more employees feel like we've done it right, and I wondered how you made that assessment, whether there was a survey that you conducted amongst the 80,000 workers, or some other mechanism that you used?

DIANE RITTUCI: No, we have not conducted a survey, and obviously, 80,000 workers were not affected by 148 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

COVID-19, right? So, that's just who we represent, in terms of the people that we insure, so potentially injured, and that includes our self- insured business as well, which is the number of municipalities. So, no, we have not surveyed, but we also have not gotten feedback that we haven't handled this well and, typically, we would. People are pretty vocal about when things aren't going well with claims handling and claims processing, and we do have a number of ways for people to reach out to us in that regard.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, so that was just a judgment you made?

DIANE RITTUCI: Well, it's a judgment. Yeah, but it's judgment based on experience, and I see how the claims coming through the door, how they're handled, and how they're-- and what attention they were getting beyond. If we're denying the claim and they're satisfied with-- they understand the denial and they've moved on, I don't consider that a negative thing, I consider them being communicated with well, understanding the process and knowing where to go next.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I had some experience representing workers who filed for unemployment-- for Workers' Compensation from injuries so it has been-- I’ve never heard of an insurance company that would say, "People think we're doing a bad job," so I take it with a grain of salt. I don't have any question that you are attempting to do the right thing by these workers, but we have heard from so many workers as to the failures of the system, that it's just hard to imagine that-- if you're the one company that's doing it right, we need to learn from you, but I do, I have a couple of other questions. Earlier today, Representative Winkler posed what I thought was a really important hypothetical that I think should be posed to you as well. If, in fact, there were funds provided from, say, the federal government, or the state to compensate workers who 149 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE got COVID, essential workers, the workers described in our Bill, would you have a problem with this, with a presumption, a rebuttable presumption, and the Bill, the way it's crafted, if there wasn't going be a cost that returned to the employers?

DIANE RITTUCI: Yeah, I don't see the value in adding money to the Workers' Comp system, I don't even know how you would add money to the Workers' Comp system to pay out claims for a special presumption Bill or however you would orchestrate it. The Workers' Comp premium is paid by employers to insurance companies, and then insurance companies are at risk of collecting enough premium to pay out claims. So there is no big cadre of money that we're all pulling from, it's just whatever we've been able to collect for premium. So, I don't think that technically that would work, but the concept, I think, is a-- off the top of my head, I'd say it's a pretty strong concept, that yes, you have people out there right now who are unfunded, if you will, for a period of time because of COVID-19, because they were essential workers in our state, and they have suffered a loss and you're trying to fill that gap with some money, so I think keeping a separate fund of some sort, that would allow them to apply for funds, and have funds be available to them to make them whole, I think-- It's a pandemic, it certainly would be a unique concept to kinda fill those gaps, similar to what the federal government has tried to do, and similar to what employment is trying to-- It's another method.

I would just strongly urge you to keep it out of the Workers' Compensation System, because I think you want the Workers' Compensation system to maintain its integrity of what it's designed to do. It's designed to help those who were injured in the course of their employment, and not all of the situations that we even heard from today are people who were affected in the course of their employment, from a physical standpoint, they did not necessarily 150 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE get COVID, they did get exposure to COVID, and exposure to COVID kept them out of work because they had to quarantine for a period of time so they wouldn't affect others, etc, and themselves. So, that's a whole separate bucket that I think you can move those employees off to and compensate them in another way, to make them whole for that, without affecting the entire Workers' Compensation System from here on forward.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, I think you're making an important distinction between those that were quarantined and did not contract COVID-19, and I could see that as a separate bucket, not that those persons aren't deserving and there should be compensation, I think it would vary, I know of individuals that it was very-- It has serious impact on their family life, to lose all of their sick time because they were required to quarantine by their employer. And the quarantine was the right thing to do, but the employee paid for that, through losing their accrued time. Time that they perhaps had saved up, either because-- I know in one case a woman who was pregnant and had to-- lost all of her accrued time that she had intended to use after the baby was born.

And so, there's serious problems with the quarantining group. I do see how that is separate and could be handled in a different way than those who actually contracted COVID and in the group-- I guess, I am inclined to think that we need to look at Workers' Compensation as the appropriate system to address that, because with a rebuttable presumption, there has to be-- there is the opportunity for the employer to prove that they did not get it at work, or we're very unlikely to have gotten it at work, in the kinda case that you presented, where everybody in the family was sick before that worker got sick. That would obviously be evidence that would come up in a hearing. But at the same time, I do feel like we're dealing with a pandemic, we still don't know the long term impacts 151 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE on people's lives, and on their health, and their ability to work. And so, I think in that regard, Workers' Compensation is set up to address those kinds of long-term issues.

DIANE RITTUCI: Absolutely, those claims have been filed through the Workers' Comp, should be, if they haven't already been filed to the Workers' Comp System, and they should be adjudicated appropriately by the carrier. And if the carrier is unable to support that employee, they should be moving off to the Workers' Comp Commissioned to get some additional assistance and support there. And then, yes, whatever happens long-term, as a result of that claim, is part of the Workers' Compensation liability, that is what the system is set up to do. I don't think anybody is saying that Workers' Compensation System isn't meant to handle COVID-19 claims, absolutely incorrect, it is meant to handle workers' COVID-19 claims, where, in fact, that employee acquired COVID through the workplace.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I think you did hear the testimony earlier today by doctor. Did you hear the doctor's testimony?

DIANE RITTUCI: I did.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): About the likelihood and there's a-- And, Attorney Chester, also pointed this out, there is that phrase that, "There was a probable likelihood that they got it at work."

DIANE RITTUCI: More likely than not, exactly. And that's just standard phrasiology in the Workers' Compensation world for all of us, the medical community, the insurers. That's what we look for, that's the language we look for.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And I do wanna call on Representative Arora who has his hand up.

152 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Rittuci, for your testimony, we really appreciate that. I have a couple of questions. First one, I wanna clarify that what you were suggesting is that COVID cases in the Worker Compensation are working their way through, there should not be a special process, that's what your contention is, as espoused by this law, under the normal process, everything should be as is.

DIANE RITTUCI: We do cover occupational disease and we do cover situations where, more likely than not, you acquired something at work. So, yes, that's already built into the system.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Great. The other thing I want you to apply on these numbers, I’m looking at some of these approximate numbers that the total number of people who were working and contracted COVID, and this is by age, under 60, is of the order of 5:10,000 in Connecticut, 10,000, and of which 500 were hospitalized. And you already told me that there were a few hundred claims anyways, so are we talking about a 500-- And most of the other 10,000, supposedly, they had a two-week interruption and were back in reasonable order, some may have taken four weeks. So, what we're talking about is 500 people who were hospitalized. Really, that's the extent of the problem for which we need a special case, because while there were 300,000 people who had contracted COVID in our state, 90ish percent, or 85-90% were those who are older than 60, so we're most likely not working.

So what we're saying is that, the reason there are a very small number of claims is because the actual number of people who contracted COVID and were hospitalized in the state of Connecticut were actually small, and that reflects a small number of claims, right? It's not that they were claims because people didn't come up. Would that be your experience with those numbers play out in your thought process as well? 153 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DIANE RITTUCI: I can't validate those numbers, all I do know is that, our expectation, that we did get a fewer COVID claims than we anticipate. We didn't know what to anticipate, right? How could we even prejudge this, right? So it was happening so fast and so furiously we had no clue what to expect, but we certainly, were prepared to have accepted and look at more COVID claims than we actually got, and it could be to your point, that those that suffered greatly from this virus were not in the workforce, that could very well be part of why we didn't quite get what we expected to get. But claims are still coming through the door, we had a very high spike in November, had a high spike in December. And the fall out of those are kinda just coming to us now, so we're not done with this yet.

REP. ARORA (151ST): No, absolutely no, this is a pandemic. The other thing which has been suggested by some others is that, the reason this legislation seems a little bit off is because most of the workers would do better from the other programs, because we do have a $5 trillion overall being spent by the federal government, and I know that different governments, we're spending four and a half to $5 trillion, and Workers' Compensation fund is less than a few Billion dollars, I’m assuming. And most workers would not be in good stead if they had to offset the money they would have received from the other programs. Have you heard about that that kind of assessment? One of the reasons people do not wanna take a Workers' Compensation for COVID is because for COVID we have some excellent federal programs, well done early on. In March we put together a 1.9 trillion program at the federal level, that'll be. Have you heard that that's one of the reasons that we do not wanna double up, we wanna attend problems where the holes are, not, basically, going where there is already a flood of programs there?

154 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DIANE RITTUCI: Yeah, I do think the FFCRA funding did allow for a number of employees who had quarantine periods or needed to be home for family members etc, etc to take advantage of that 14 days. And I do think that solved a lot of what maybe, potentially, could have been a comp claim or another-- a sick claim of some other sort. But I do think that came in very handy and it helped people figure out quickly how to get paid for the time that they needed to be off from work. But I think where there was legitimate illness that became a Workers'- - A real Workers' Comp exposure, I think those claims came to us. I think most of the FFCRA was used for family members or quarantine periods. That's been our experience. But it's a very valuable--

REP. ARORA (151ST): My final question is--

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I'm sorry, Representative Arora, you are out of time. And I’ve been giving you a lot of leeway, so I am going to ask that we move on and see if there is--

REP. ARORA (151ST): Madam Chair, one small question in the same stream, I'm sorry.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Can you make that a real question without a lot of comments, that you'll do it 30 seconds. If you could do that, I’ll let you ask it.

REP. ARORA (151ST): I always try to do that. Maybe it's just my nature of my formation.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I know how hard it is for you to do that, but let's see if you can do a 30 second question. Go ahead

REP. ARORA (151ST): Does Worker Compensation ever pay above the wage which you make? Because FPUC does. 155 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DIANE RITTUCI: No, it doesn't. Workers' Compensation is based on the 52 week average prior to your injury, it's about 75% of your wages, it is not taxable so it comes out to about what your wages are, but it does not exceed.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Madam Chair, I rest my case, that FPUC and the other programs pay you more than that.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Excuse me, Representative Arora, I will say you have brought up in many of your questions the other federal programs for unemployment, and I do wanna point out to you, we are not discussing people who got unemployment, we are talking about people who could not work because they contracted COVID, many of those people ended up seriously ill, we've heard from people who are still suffering, either heart disease or respiratory problems who cannot work, this is not a question about whether or not the federal programs for unemployment should have supplanted the Workers' Compensation System. So, I do feel like it is a pretty serious digression, and is not germane to the subject. So I would like to move on to the next. We're not--

REP. ARORA (151ST): Madam Chair, let me respond--

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): No, I'm not gonna let you respond, you have used your time. I was very generous in giving you more time, but I do wanna move on to the next witness, we have a lot of people waiting, and I don't think this-- is I don't believe Ms. Rittuci's expertise is in unemployment, it is in Workers' Compensation, so we will move on to the next person.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Madam Chair, I wanted to respond to your question not to hers.

156 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): --as I got your mic and I will ask that you refrain from going further at this point, Representative Arora.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Madam Chair, you're very harsh on me. You're very harsh on me, seriously.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): We can move on to the next witness. You have pushed me beyond, and I tried so much

REP. ARORA (151ST): I know.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): All right, thank you. Thank you Ms. Rittuci.

DIANE RITTUCI: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): This was not on you.

DIANE RITTUCI: Appreciate your time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): No problem. All right, next up we have Sarah Ganong. You are next, please proceed.

SARAH GANONG: Great, thanks. Good afternoon everybody and good to see you all. My name is Sarah Ganong, and I'm a Hartford resident, and also the Campaigns Director of Connecticut Working Families. We're a grassroots organization fighting for an economy that works for everybody and to democracy where every voice gets the chance to matter. Thanks for having this hearing and for the chance to testify before you today. I'm here on behalf of Working Families in favor of two Bills. The first is House Bill 6478 an Act concerning Workers’ Compensation and also Senate Bill 999, an Act concerning unjust transition to climate protected energy and community investments. First, on Workers’ Compensation. Working families support House Bill 6478 and the similar provisions that are also found in House Bill 6595 and Senate Bill 1002. We know 157 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE when the COVID-19 pandemic hit, the jobs of 1000s of Connecticut residents from grocery store workers to the bus drivers and postal carriers and more became both essential and very dangerous at the same time.

Many didn't have access to disinfectants or Personal Protective Equipment. I know we all saw the news coverage of nursing home workers for example who were forced to wear hefty trash bags rather than the sterile gowns that they deserved. Despite these dangers, workers across Connecticut kept showing up at their jobs and since then we've been calling them essential, as Representative Porter said, we've been calling them heroes and we at Working Families believe that they deserve to be treated like they're essential, especially if they've contracted COVID- 19. This bill would move the burden of proof from employees to employers by requiring that the employers prove that employees didn't get the virus at work. They can obviously still challenge claims but the law would assume that the workers got the virus on the job unless the employer can demonstrate otherwise. The governor's Executive Order 7JJJ provides this presumption but unfortunately only for workers who contracted the virus between March 10th and May 20 of last year, and since the pandemic has just reached a year old in Connecticut this week that's a very narrow time window. And additionally with the dual recent announcements from the Governor's Office of a drastic reopening plan starting on March 19th and the denial of many essential workers from actually getting vaccinated until their age bracket is reached, the extension of this Workers’ Comp presumption is even more important.

Now, moving on to the other Bill we're supporting we also strongly support Senate Bill 999. We at Working Families know that a just transition to a low carbon economy must both reduce economic inequality, address poverty, reduce health disparities, and ensure that our communities are safe. This Bill will create good paying careers, not just jobs for 158 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Connecticut residents that need the most including by targeting historically disadvantaged communities for job training and apprenticeship programs. Ensuring that unionized Connecticut workers are hired into projects is essential to the sustained growth of the renewable energy sector in our state, and workforce development prevailing wage requirements and project labor agreements will all ensure equity in this growing exciting clean technology sector. Ensuring that proposed projects are evaluated for the ratepayer impacts environmental impacts and labor practice impacts is essential for adjust transition. Again thank you so much for your time and for your consideration of these Bills and for holding this virtual hearing today and happy to take any questions or comments.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Sarah, it's good to see you.

SARAH GANONG: Likewise.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I don't see any hands at this time, so thank you for your testimony and have a great day.

SARAH GANONG: Great thanks.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay next up we're going to go back, I understand that No. 7, Manuel Estrada is here with us. Go ahead Manuel. Manuel, can you hear us? If so can you unmute your device?

MANUEL ESTRADA: Okay, now?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, now we hear you.

MANUEL ESTRADA: Okay, how are you?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): We’re doing well, thank you for joining.

159 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

MANUEL ESTRADA: Well, good. Yes, hello my name is Manuel Estrada and I thank you to the Members of the Labor Committee for hearing my testimony. I'm a member of a 32BJ, and I also the maintenance worker. I am a maintenance worker at the state capitol. As you know the building is almost empty there are no legislator or staff but there are about 40 workers at the state capital, between mechanics minus workers and janitors, who are still coming every day to work. So, we do the cleaning, we do the maintenance, we do the improving all day, every day, days, nights, so we keep the building safe and secure and functioning. Before the Corona pandemic [Inaudible] at this time, every day. We also are from different countries, different nationalities, and different races. But we are essential workers, because we have a lot of cases or different cases within the capital, because I remember like, around four coworkers, they get the virus, so they were out of work. But fortunately, we at the capital, we are lucky because our current employer, they pay us the two weeks for the quarantine. But imagine in other places in other buildings, there are not really fortunate, because they have to use their personal time their vacation.

So after that, some of them probably they stay longer than two weeks. Like, there is a case for a coworker who wife is in coma because the virus. She's being in the hospital for around three months, waiting to be -- she's gonna be disconnected from the ventilator and properly she's gonna, or they're gonna take her to Philadelphia to get a new lungs, because she's very, very ill. Also, the disease -- that's why I would like to ask the Committee to consider the harm that we face as essential workers being on the front line all the time. We are in danger all the time, not just the capital, it's another buildings. So that's why we asked you for your support to the Labor COVID. Bill, House Bill 6595, and also the Senate Bill 1002. They would allow us to get support. If we--

160 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CLERK: Thank you. Mr. Estrada, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

MANUEL ESTRADA: Okay, well, again, I would like to the Committee support our -- the Bill for the Labor -- the House Bill 6595 and the Senate Bill 1002. Because we need support for those workers that are in the frontline.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Manuel, and I want to say, on behalf of all the legislators that are on this Committee and that are on this zoom call. We are the beneficiaries of your work. We are there, whether it's -- whether we're in session, or whether we're just in the office, we see how hard you work. And I have to say I've never worked in a place that is so spotless, so carefully cleaned. And I just know from my own experience, you and your coworkers take very good care of the people that work there in our beautiful building. And so we really appreciate your work during regular times. And you know, I always try and say hello and say, thank you and I see you in the capitol but even more now that we're in this COVID time, so thank you so much for your work. I don't see any hands at the time. But I hope that next time I see you will be able to say hello in person. And you take care.

MANUIEL ESTRADA: All right, you too. Thank you for listening to us.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up we have, let's see, I'm going to go back in order here. And I believe Next up is number 47. Is that right, Melanie? Melanie Kolek.

MELANIE KOLEK: Thank you Senator Kushner and Representative Porter and Members of this Committee. My name is Melanie Kolek, and I am legal counsel for the Connecticut Education Association and I proudly represent school teachers across our state and their Workers’ Compensation matters. And no question that I am testifying today on important aspects of bills 161 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

6478, 6595 and 1002. Regarding 6478, while I agree with all parts of this proposed Bill, I am specifically referring my testimony to the rebuttable presumption. It is no surprise to me that links teachers have taken to ensure they are and remain healthy for their students during this pandemic. In the past year, I've spoken with hundreds of members of our organization who have and continue to suffer from the personal effects of COVID and the resulting illness.

Nearly every one of them got sick from a known positive contact at their school with no known exposure at home or in the community. And almost every case involved the teacher spreading the virus to their family members. Only a handful of those claims were accepted by the insurer and deemed compensable. Given the long lasting effects of the illness caused by the virus educators are enduring the need for long term care, costly payments for items not covered under health insurance and loss of considerable time from work. It is -- it is very scary for these employees that are experiencing these losses. Processing claims and paying for them are two very different things. As discussed earlier, I support the illness being designated as an occupational disease. We are seeing more and more people recover but not fully and with some possible delayed symptoms requiring long term medical treatment. I find Dr. Redlich's testimony was crucial for understanding the dynamics involved. From a doctor perspective and the need for greater understanding regarding the term medical probability. IN comport with the studies referenced by Debbie Berkowitz earlier, I do not see that our state will have a large influx if we enact this presumption. But for those who do contracted at work, this legislation will make a huge difference in terms of care and wages while the insurer investigates.

It has been insinuated earlier that if someone is able to make a claim, it's automatically accepted. 162 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

This is not the proposed legislation. As Attorney Chester told you. The presumption shifts the burden to the insurer to pay the claim and further allows you to investigate while the wages and medical treatment are paid in the interim. The entirety of the Workers’ Compensation commission, in my opinion, is doing its part in moving these cases forward, and frankly, did an exceptional job keeping the process going despite the shutdown, but that said, is at least two to three weeks to get a hearing, and during that time, the claimant can be without medical treatment or wages, while the insurer is investigating the claim. Regarding other important aspects of 6595 and 1002. I've already testified earlier about the need for expansion for mental claims. I've provided this Committee with some studies after my testimony. And I urge you that our workers deserve our support now more than ever, and please consider implementing these critical provisions into the act. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much, Attorney Kolek that was very helpful. I don't see any hands. I guess I just -- the only question I have is, do you have a number for us of the number of teachers that you represent that have filed claims?

MELANIE KOLEK: So I have spoken with over 150 school teachers, public school teachers from across the state. Two claims were filed, and they were both denied. And the reason that the other claims were not filed was primarily because they filed the claim, they received the 43. And the insurer wasn't paying they got better. But most importantly, as Dr. Redlich like talked about earlier, these folks weren't able to get that medical causation report because I think, and I'm you know, sort of referring to what Dr. Redlich said, that there's some inconsistency about what that report actually needs to state, and it's all about educating, you know, not only doctors but claimants about what -- what their burden of proof is. So I think that's why. But 163 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE only two were able to get that report and they were both denied. Both denied by insurers for representatives that have spoken to this committee today.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So, you spoke in your testimony about supportive declaring this an occupational disease, and we had the opportunity to speak with Commissioner Morelli earlier today who established on the record that that would give people -- workers an additional -- would give them up to three years to make a claim. So some of the teachers who contracted COVID, the people that you represent, did that file a claim, is it -- should be our understanding that should they have conditions that occur, even though they may feel better now and have gone back to work, but let's say a year from now they have something hit them that they didn't anticipate that is you know determined to be related to COVID. That would put them as I understand in a position to file a claim is that -- is that correct?

MELANIE KOLEK: Yeah., that's -- yes senator that's exactly correct and it would expand the statute of limitations if it's an occupational disease to three years as you were talking about earlier with Attorney Chester but I think that we all just don't know enough about this disease. We don't know how this is going to play out and the long term effects certainly we all know that there are these long haulers that are -- that were very ill and continue to be ill but for those who -- you know bounced back so to speak after two to three weeks and were back in their employment we don't know what kind of pulmonary issues they could be dealing with. I don't think our medical -- our medical community knows that either until we have more studies done. So I think that that is a very real probability and one of the main reasons why it should be deemed an occupational disease. There are many states across our nation that have done so. We wouldn't be the only one this is not a novel thing for Connecticut.

164 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you that's important to know as well and it would -- I think it's important that we get the other states that have done this that will be helpful if you have that information.

MELANIE KOLEK: I do.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you if you would share that with our Clerk, we'll make sure that Committee Members get it.

MELANIE KOLEK: Sure.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): All right, thank you so much. I don't see any other hands so have a great day and thank you for testifying today.

MELANIE KOLEK: Thank you so much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up we have John Harrity. John are you with us? I see you're here.

JOHN HARRITY: Here I am.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Please proceed.

JOHN HARRITY: Well, thank you all for your endurance. Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, other Members of the Labor Committee. You have hung in there quite some time and I'm glad to get a little moment to speak with you in support of Senate Bill 999. Just transition to climate protective energy production and community. So, the Bill has the bill has several components, some of which were testified to before about -- if an assisted energy project -- if a project is big enough to need state assistance it should include a community benefits agreement to make sure that people in the community get work. There needs to be -- if a project is big enough there should be a project labor agreement.

165 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

There should be workforce development components, and of course the same community benefits agreement and that unions participating in those projects should work with the developers or construction companies on apprenticeship, pre apprenticeship programs and other ways to bring people from the community into those projects, especially people who have been historically and systematically excluded from energy projects and often placed in places where energy created its dirtiest messes. But I think that the most important thing about this, is that we're at a point where climate change is going to be a critical issue. I think for the rest of our lives, it will be the most important issue. We need to make sure that people get on board addressing climate change. We make energy jobs low paying and people are sliding out of fossil fuel down into energy jobs where it becomes like the Walmart of new jobs. Then there will be very little enthusiasm for green economy. In the 1930s manufacturing became big, those are not great jobs when they unionized they became great jobs and they became a path to the middle class. We need to make sure that workers see the new green economy as a similar mechanism. Because otherwise frankly, I don't think we get the political will that is needed to address climate change fully until it's too late, and I can't stress enough the critical nature of climate change. We have been reeling from COVID, this will be like a very weak, you know, beginning to what we're going to be seeing in terms of disruption to our lives. So I would urge the committee to look at this as a historical Bill that gets us to the point where we need to be in enthusiastically addressing climate change--

CLERK: Mr. Harrity, your three minutes have ended. Please conclude your remarks.

JOHN HARRITY: And building the new green economy based on good jobs that workers can build a life on. And thank you very much. I'd answer any questions you may have. 166 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): John, I have to say, it's always so good to see you and hear from you. I just think you made it very clear. And it's what we all know, we want our trades to be on board with green energy projects. But how can you ask them to give up good paying jobs with benefits and not have good paying jobs if that is waiting for them? And their resistance is complicated, because they are put in a hard spot where they might not be able to support their families as they have in the past. And they're facing great unemployment. But if we replace those, you know, fossil fuel jobs, with good paying, clean energy jobs, it will go a long way to bring it all together to have that political will that you spoke about. So I really appreciate your comments. I see Representative Porter as your hand up.

JOHN HARRITY: A good afternoon.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. I have no questions for you, John. I just wanted to say hello. It's great to see you. I'm sitting over here as my grandmother would say skinning and grinning, as I listen to your testimony, because you definitely are striking a chord within me, and I'm sure a lot of other people, not just handling this committee, but the workers throughout the state, you know, and it's truly what they need. And when you live from the bottom, everyone's elevated, and no one should have to work two and three jobs to make ends meet with sustainable jobs or livable wages with benefits and retirement plans. And I think everyone should have that, you know, union and non- union, but we know it takes a union to make it happen. So thank you so much for coming here, and just -- yeah, kind of got put a pep in me. You know, it's been a long day.

JOHN HARRITY: Oh, yeah, I know, this is time for a nap.

REP. PORTER (94TH): All right. 167 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

JOHN HARRITY: I would just add one other thing.

Rep porter: Sure.

JOHN HARRITY: Mr. Trahan from solar, talked about residential installations, this Bill does not cover that at all, we're talking about projects that are million dollars and up, that are two megawatts and up, and that are involved with state assistance. So we're not talking about the residential solar installer that he was addressing?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Oh, that's very helpful to know. And I appreciate that clarification. I do think that he -- there was a little there was a question that came up about the commercial installations. And maybe you're familiar with this, because he did say that they were much smaller than the wind installation that we've had the other big solar installation that we have already endeavor, you know, have already got under way. So are there commercial projects? You mentioned, it's a two watt and a million dollars, is that correct?

JOHN HARRITY: Two megawatts in a million dollars, and those including state assistance. So you're, -- I don't know what the dividing line would be. But there's plenty of work that he's talking about that really is a smaller nature, including on businesses, but doesn't rise to the level of this type of operation. And in those cases, they do not. -- We wish that they do everything possible to have local employment and good employment and pass representation if workers want it. But this Bill does not include that as -- within his purview.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): All right, thank you. That was very helpful. Glad you added that. I don't see any other hands so we will move on. Next up, we have Attorney Nathan Shafner. Good to see you again. You need to unmute.

168 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

NATHAN SHAFNER: Got it. Can you hear me now?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes.

NATHAN SHAFNER: Wonderful. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before your Public Hearing Committee. I'm Attorney Nathan Shafner, and I'm here on behalf of the Connecticut Trial Lawyers as Chairman of its Workers’ Compensation section. We've submitted written remarks regarding the 6478. But I'd like to spend some time mostly talking about the rebuttable presumption that is currently before you. In the years that the pandemic has happened, it says -- Chairman Morelli said there's been over 3000 claims that have been filed. And I submit that, irrespective of the fact that some employers have accepted these claims, the bottom line is, is that most injured workers have no way of proving these cases, because of the insidious nature of this disease. It's a microscopic virus. And by the time they learn that they've developed the problem, most people were sent home, or they went to the doctors, and there was no way that they could ever find a way to prove where their exposure came from. If they tried to ask coworkers, they may not want to get involved. If they worked on a medical facility, there are HIPAA laws that prevented them from finding out which patient had COVID are not, and certainly, employers have rights to protect other employees' privacies. So, the deck is stacked against the injured worker, who comes forward with a positive COVID claim.

The rebuttable presumption is very simple mechanism to resolve this problem, it simply says that, "We're gonna accept this level of proof for you to proceed forward, we're also going to give the employer the opportunity to challenge that." And if the employer can challenge it, it doesn't mean the case ends, it just means that it goes forward according to the standards that have been talked about, based on reasonable medical probability, and so forth, and so on. And then the Workers' Comp system will just 169 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE normally proceed. But if the employer can't rebut it, then the claim should be deemed accepted, and the Commissioner should order it so. What we're seeing, however, is a backlog of claims that, probably, should be accepted that aren't, where people have claimed the presumption and the Commission seems to allow the opportunities for the employers and the respondents to challenge those, which is appropriate. The problem is, that, there's no system in place to set up a time frame or time work. We propose that the Workers' Comp Commission consider some sort of scheduling orders for these, that would move these cases along in a orderly, consistent fashion.

And I think it would behoove everyone, respondent side, employer side, as well as the claimant side to have some sort of a scheduling order that would move these matters forward. The last thing I wanna focus on is the need that this legislation, which is very important, that it applies to everyone who's filed claims, not in the past since last year, but also going forward. And it's very clear that a change of the presumption, making this a rebuttable presumption is a procedural change.

As both you and Representative Porter know, procedural matters can apply retroactively. But substantive changes applied prospectively, according to Section 53-3, therefore, we believe, the trial lawyers' position, that language should be included in the statute that's being proposed, that says that this is a procedural change designed to shift the burden, lessen the burden on the injured worker as the-- these types of claims. So for that basis, I'm gonna conclude my remarks with the idea that the presumption is a great idea, it's been adopted in other states as rebuttable presumptions, first in Minnesota, and I believe also in Illinois, were the first two states that adopted it, and Connecticut should also join those states as well. The other aspects of the Bill are, as I said, with increasing [Inaudible] in the funeral Bills. 170 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CLERK: Attorney Schanfer, your three minutes have ended, conclude your--

NATHAN SCHAFNER: I'll let my remarks speak for themselves. And I'm more than happy to answer any and all questions that have been posed by the Committee.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Attorney Schafner. I do see a hand now, Representative Winkler, I believe.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Yes. Attorney Schafner, through the Chair, I don't wanna put you on the spot, but there was a hint earlier that maybe the time sense for attorneys and the time sense for people waiting to see if they get Workers; Comp may be a different sense, in other words, perhaps lawyers have a different ability to tolerate the way than somebody who's anxious to get Workers' Comp. Do you believe that attorneys that work in these cases move them along faster than, say, our judicial process model?

NATHAN SCHAFNER: I think in Workers' Compensation cases, there is a important need to move cases in a expeditious and faster way for this reason only. It's one thing if you have a personal injury matter, or the motor vehicle accident, or [Inaudible] claim or a slip and fall somewhere. That's one thing, you let the judicial process take care of itself. But Workers' Compensation, as we talked about earlier, is this great bargain in 1913, was designed where the injured worker gave up rights, abandoned these lawsuits in exchange for a fast, efficient and speedy remedy. And that remedy would include the payment of medical bills for the work-related injuries and benefits based on the income that they've lost, the economic impact that it's had-- the injury is had on their work capacity.

171 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

So from the injured workers' perspective, the system doesn't move fast enough. From my perspective, yeah, it seems fine, 23 days, that's three weeks, gee, that's pretty good. But for the person that needs a- - just lives in paycheck to paycheck, and they can't afford toget behind on their bills, and they have children to support, and things like that, a work injury devastates a family. So three weeks isn't an eternity for them. And then to find out when they get to the hearing, after the three weeks, "Well, I'll talk to the adjuster about getting in advance, because we're still looking into something,” “okay. " And then maybe two or three weeks later, they get an advance, but that's it. And then you gotta go back again for another hearing and another hearing. This is why I have proposed, and the trial lawyers have proposed that some sort of a scheduling order on contested cases should be in order.

And the chairman is right, majority of cases are accepted, and that's true with benefits going on a regular basis and medical treatment is provided. But we're talking with a sum of cases that aren't. And just about every COVID case that has some sort of what they call, "Long haul," they're starting to call them, "Long Haul Claims," that have these lingering issues, where they're starting to see cardiac issues or lung issues involved. They're not going away, and the system that is, maybe, designed to handle an occasional dispute and resolve, doesn't work well with the COVID case, which is sort of just gonna keep lingering on and on. If the case is put down for some sort of scheduling order, then the client-- We'll tell my client, "Look, in three months we're gonna have a trial." They have three months to get their stuff together, we have three months to get our stuff together. And then either they accept the claim or we're going forward. I think that would work well, it works in other jurisdictions, in other states, and under other federal-- And there's a federal law program, the Longshore Act, where they do have scheduling orders for Workers' Comp cases, and they seem to go along 172 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE in proceeding in a fashionable way, in accordance to what the judge's order.

The parties want an extension, they better have good cause for the extension. Because the bottom line is, it's not my case, as the attorney, and it's not the insurance company's case, it's the injured worker's case, and with respect for the employer, it's their case. And they should be wanting a speedy resolution, as well as the injured worker. So, that's how I answer your question, sir.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you. Through the Chair, during those three months, is the worker receiving anything, the injured worker?

NATHAN SCHAFNER: Injured worker. In general, they can be. The law allows them to be paid benefits without prejudice, so there are times where that does happen. If you show up to a hearing with what's called a, prima facie case, where you've established that more likely than not, based on the evidence that there's a work injury here, but there might be other reasons why the case is being contested or slow-walked, such as they had a prior back injury, or there might be multiple employers involved. So those are legitimate defenses that get raised, but it should never be at the peril of the injured worker. So in some cases, they do get advances that go on, but I'd say to you that those advances aren't enough, because there's, oftentimes, if they're gonna make advances without prejudice, that means what they're doing is-- there's also being very slow at providing medical care.

And as most archers will tell you, the most crucial thing you can do in Workers' Compensation case is get medical treatment right away, because the chance of an injured worker returning to work who gets medical care right away, is much greater than one who lingers on. We have cases where surgical issues have been lingering around for six months, eight 173 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE months, 10 months to resolve themselves and, eventually, they do. But the detriment that's caused by lingering medical care is-- can't be calculated, it can't be, which is why the first Section of 647A is important, expanding the 308 component, and giving me those Commissioners additional discretion. So, I think that the injured worker would benefit mostly from anyone of some sort of a timeline that would move these cases along in a fast way.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And I see no other hands at this time, so thank you, Attorney Schafner.

NATHAN SCHAFNER: You're welcome.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And I am gonna call next, Yadira Bonifacio. Yadira, can you hear us?

YADIRA BONIFACIO: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes. Go ahead, we can hear you.

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): (foreign language) And I see that Frank is here, if you wouldn't mind, Frank, if you could help translate?

FRANK SOULTS: Yeah. I'm sorry, Senator, I joined kind of late, but she was asking for your support for Bill 1000, so that's--I think it has to do with driving Uber cars, and-- I didn't get to catch much of it, she's just asking for your support and she appreciates the time to be here in front of the Committee. And I'm sorry that I joined late.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's okay. But before you leave, Yadira, if you could ask her if she would 174 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE like to tell us anything, now that you're here to translate, if there's anything she'd like to add?

FRANK SOULTS: (foreign language)

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: (foreign language)

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: (foreign language) So, I'm an Uber driver and I've received some negative reports from passengers. (foreign language)

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: Sometimes they called Uber late and they're asking me to speed through the roadway so they can get where they're going quickly. And sometimes they had too many people in the car to be safe.

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: And so they give you a negative rating. They lower your rating just because you're trying to be safe on the roads.

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: Uber gives us no opportunity to defend ourselves.

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: So we're hoping that you can find some way that these bad ratings, we could be answering them, we could somehow not have our careers so disrupted, and sometimes destroyed, where they go so far as to remove the app, and we're not allowed to be Uber drivers 175 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And I think I understand, and this testimony is similar to others who wanna have an ability to negotiate with the companies so that recommendations can be made to the state that we can put into statute that will allow some kind of a process by which people can dispute any kind of negative discipline.

FRANK SOULTS: (foreign language)

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: (foreign language)

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: Okay, yes.

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: Yes, that's exactly why I'm asking you to support Bill 1000 so that Uber drivers can continue to maintain their families with dignity. SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much. We appreciate you being here and we appreciate Frank, for translating.

FRANK SOULTS: (foreign language)

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

FRANK SOULTS: It's my pleasure, thank you so much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): (foreign language)

YADIRA BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, I just said to have a nice day, in my very bad Spanish.

FRANK SOULTS: That was perfect.

176 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So next we are gonna go to number 50, I think number 50 is on the list, Olivia. Olivia Rinkes. Olivia, you're next up.

OLIVIA RINKES: Hi there. I am here, Olivia Rinkes, am in a car right now, is it okay if I don't turn on my camera?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That is fine. Go ahead.

OLIVIA RINKES: Okay thank you. My name is Olivia Rinkes, I'm from North Stonington. I'm here today to testify in favor of HB 6478, an act concerning workers' compensation. As the past year has shown us with COVID, people can attempt to prepare for a sudden injury or illness but there's really no way to anticipate the time-consuming and debilitating nature of long-term medical care on a person's ability to provide for themselves and their families in the same way as before their accident.

The state taxes incomes of every worker and I'm absolutely in favor of a portion of my taxes going towards supporting people who have become sick or injured and can no longer work at the same capacity. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you Olivia. And I don't see any hands raised for questions or comments, so I will thank you again for being with us today, and thank you for providing us your testimony. And, Madam Chair, I'm gonna send it right back to you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I was muted, I apologize, thank you. So next we have number 53, Junior Bonifacio. Junior, can you unmute yourself?

JUNIOR BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): (foreign language) Is Frank still around? Can we ask Frank to-- Junior, (foreign language) 177 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

JUNIOR BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): (foreign language)

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: He's not available, Senator, I can translate for him.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Oh, thank you. Stephanie is here. Stephanie is an intern working with our department. Thank you, I forgot you were here. Very nice to have you. So, Junior, can you ask Junior to proceed.

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: Okay (foreign language)

JUNIOR BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: (foreign language) So, Mr. Bonifacio was telling me that, in the company where he's currently working for Uber, it's kind of a game of, he says, she says, and they don't really have an opportunity to defend themselves. He was talking about a specific time where he took a client to the airport in New Haven. It was just the normal ride, they were talking and everything. And the next morning, when he got up to go to work, he realized that he didn't have any rides or anything to pick up. And he checked the app, and he contacted Uber and he said, "Oh, I just wanted to make sure there was nothing wrong on my end." And they told him, "No, you're done for the day, you got a negative review, you're not working today." And he said, "I don't understand, I didn't do anything wrong," and he said, "No, sorry, we're going with the client here."

And he said, he feels that that's very unfair, that he doesn't have a voice or a platform to be able to express himself. And he's been working for Uber for six years, and it started with them taking 15%, then it rose to 20%, and currently, they're taking 30% of his profits. And he tried to talk to the Uber 178 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE representative one day, because on a ride that was $200, he got $109. And he spoke with Uber and he said, "Listen, I just wanna talk. What's going on? I wanna know." And they said to him, "You don't need to be concerned about the percentage, you should just be grateful that you're being paid." And he said, "I didn't like that. I'm working, I'm trying to provide for my family, I'm not trying to be disrespectful or anything, and the way they responded to me, it was horrendous." And he said that that's why he's in support of a Bill 1000, and he hopes that you'll be able to pass it.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Stephanie, great job, thank you. Thank you so much, Junior, for your testimony.

JUNIOR BONIFACIO: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I don't see any hands here, but we do appreciate you being here with us today. And you have a great night.

JUNIOR BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. Thank you, Stephanie. I'm gonna move to the next person on the list, and I believe that will be, Kelly Wood, number 54. Kelly, can you unmute yourself? There you go.

KELLY WOOD: Hi, can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can.

KELLY WOOD: Okay. Good afternoon, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, and the Members of the Committee. My name is Kelly Wood, I am testifying today in support of the Senate Bill 1002 and the House Bill 6595, because of the Section on hero pay. We need the hero pay because of the risks that we take when we go to work. You can try to secure and make your workplace as safe as possible from the COVID-19, but all it takes is for one person not 179 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE following the safety measures to put all individuals and staff at risk. Sometimes it is something you cannot control, and then the next thing you know it is spreading like a wildfire within your workplace.

I caught COVID-19 in January of this year, along with the individuals and staff at my workplace. We all have gone through the experience of our health, and our bodies have been COVID-19, which affected our lives and our job performances. Because of the way this virus attacks every vital organ in your body, this virus leaves you hopeless and helpless, you will never be the same, mentally and physically. I pleaded for my life with this virus and barely made it out alive.

We have lost loved ones, our individuals, and co- workers to this COVID-19 pandemic. I'm still going through the healing from this virus. I will never get over the fact of the upper management and this administration did not, and has continued to not take this pandemic seriously. We are frontline workers, please pass the Senate Bill 1002 and the House Bill 6595, so that workers like me and our families can be compensated for the risk that we have, and continue to take. Thank you for your time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Kelly. And let me just say how sorry I am that you've gone through all this and suffered so. And we appreciate you making the time to be here to testify. Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair, and I'm just gonna join in with the sentiments you've expressed. Kelly, I just wanna say thank you. I'm thankful that you did make it out of COVID, and that you're doing better. I'm not sure if you're suffering from any other long haulers, but I hope you're not. And I do appreciate you taking the time to be here today to give us firsthand lived experience on why these Bills are so critically important to workers such as yourself that have kept 180 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE us afloat. So thank you again. Thank you, Madam Chair.

KELLY WOOD: Thank you. I'm still going through some of-- Senator, I'm still going through some of the lingering of it. I almost went into a coughing attack before explaining. I'm still going through stuff with my body, I'm tired all the time. And I just want you guys to know that I'm grateful for you listening to all the testimonies today. I'm about to cry, because I was working with an individual for 20 years and he caught COVID because of someone not following the proper protocol at work, and everybody ended up getting it, like I said in my testimony, but the individual passed away due to the COVID, and it's serious, it's real.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yeah, we know. So sorry. Thank you again for sharing with us today.

KELLY WOOD: Thank you.

REP. PORTER (94TH): And thank you for having the courage to come before us, and it's literally bare your soul. It takes a lot to do what you're doing here. It's not falling on deaf ears, we really are here to help. So thank you. And thank you, Madam Chair, for the time.

KELLY WOOD: Thank you

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Thank you, Kelly. And with seeing no more hands, I'm gonna move on to our next speaker, that is number 55, John Brady.

KELLY WOOD: Okay.

JOHN BRADY: Good afternoon, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and Members of the Committee. My name is John Brady, I'm a registered nurse, and I'm the Executive Vice President of AFT Connecticut. AFT Connecticut strongly supports Senate Bill 1002, 181 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

House Bills 6595 and 6478. The Coronavirus pandemic has highlighted and exacerbated many of the problems that are dedicated to essential workers who have labored through this pandemic, and continue to labor, to keep us all safe and care for us in our darkest hours. These Bills address several of the issues important to these heroes, denial of workers’ compensation, post-traumatic stress treatment, COVID sick time, personal protective equipment, data collection and preparation, and staffing transparency, to name a few.

I've submitted testimony on all of these issues and more. And the testimonies that have come before me and have spoken to many of the issues from personal accounts better than I can. Let me just speak on a couple of issues that have not been spoken a lot about. We were caught flat-footed, the industry was caught flat-footed in this. We were prepared to ramp up for such a deadly virus. We've all seen pictures of healthcare workers wearing garbage bags and homemade masks. We can't afford to repeat this lack of preparation.

This legislation will establish PPE stockpiles, so that in future pandemics will be better prepared. The CDC guidance for PPE during the pandemic shifted as our scientific knowledge of the virus changed, and that's appropriate. However, the CDC was also faced with a different challenge, the short supply of PPE. The solution was to develop three strategies for PPE use, based not on science but on the supplies reported by hospitals, conventional, contingency and crisis strategies. However, the Public and even DPH was frustrated with inability to get this data in a timely manner from hospitals, leaving DPH and the public unable to know if the correct strategies were being used.

It is not that the hospitals do not have this data, it was simply that they were unwilling to share the data, only John Dempsey Hospital made a good faith effort to do so. This must be corrected for the 182 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE safety of healthcare professionals and for public health, and this Bill addresses that. Similarly, this Bill addresses transparency and staffing in hospitals, this Bill will require all hospitals to post the staffing matrix, which they now report to the state and which they develop themselves, as well as post the actual daily staffing information they already gathered for the state. This posting will provide transparency and protection that the public deserves. I wanna thank the Committee for raising this important legislation, and thank you for all you do for the residents of the state of Connecticut, and for the opportunity to testify today.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, John, for being here and for testifying about the PPE, in particular, we have not had a great deal of testimony about that today. I do know, myself and Representative Porter, participated in a workgroup leading up to this session, that was responding to a report by Mathematica, an analysis of our long-term care facilities, and the issues that resulted in so many deaths and so much infection from the pandemic. And I know your organization participated in those meetings as well. And I believe you might have participated yourself, if not, I'm sure you're familiar with the report.

And with regard to the PPE, we did try and look at what were the best practices that we could then codify and make sure, going forward, that this wouldn't happen again, that there would be a system in place, as you spoke to. So are you familiar with that report? Do you feel like we captured some of the best practices?

JOHN BRADY: I'm not familiar with that report, in particular, Senator. Sorry

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. The Mathematica report?

183 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

JOHN BRADY: Yeah.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): It was the basis for the working group. And I know your union participated in it, we tried to sort of look at what came out of that, the recommendations, and then modified them into law. So that's how we came up with this PPE part of the Bill. And I believe your union participate in, so I really appreciate the work you all put into it so we could get this right going forward. Thank you.

JOHN BRADY: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And I don't see any hands at this time. Thank you for being with us today.

JOHN BRADY: Thank you, Senator.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I'm gonna move next to, Sal Luciano, who's up now, number 56.

SAL LUCIANO: Good afternoon, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and the hard working Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Sal Luciano, and I'm proud to serve as the President of the Connecticut AFL-CIO. Throughout the pandemic, our state's public health and public safety have depended heavily on the efforts of frontline workers. The jobs became essential, and highly dangerous at the same time. While most of Connecticut was under a, stay at home, order and the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases skyrocketed, these dedicated workers continue to care for patients, stock grocery store shelves, answer emergency calls, staff prisons, operate public transit systems, care for children, and ensure taxpayers had continued access to other essential services.

Despite the risks they had been asked to take, they showed up and did their jobs, while many of us work comfortably from home. Many essential employees, 184 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE such as grocery and nursing home personnel are mostly female, Black and Brown low-wage workers. They're lucky enough to have health insurance-- if they are lucky enough to have it, it comes with high deductibles and co-payments. While COVID-19 testing may be free, medical care and taking time from work to recover is not. It is extremely important that they be able to access the wage replacement and health care benefits that Workers’ Comp provides. As of Tuesday, 3123 workers have filed Worker's Comp claims for contracting COVID-19 on the job. Few have received any of the benefits they have earned. Most employer denials assert, without proof, that frontline workers have not contracted the virus in the course of their employment. Others claim that workers pre-existing conditions have caused the infection.

In July, Governor Lamont issued Executive Order 7JJJ, which created a presumption for essential workers who contracted COVID-19 between March 10th and May 20th, 2020. While well intentioned, the Executive Order was too limited in its coverage window and doesn't recognize the course the virus has taken over the last year. Transmission rates have spiked several times since May, continuing to make workplaces dangerous. May 20th, 2020 was an artificial deadline, and the virus has not recognized or respected it.

Now governor Lamont plans to lift most safety restrictions in many workplaces on March 19th. At the same time, he denied many essential workers priority access to COVID-19 vaccines, risking the health and safety of these workers, but he will not extend the Workers’ Compensation presumption Executive Order 7JJJ. Governor Lamont has chosen to let a system rigged in favor of employers and insurance corporations work instead of standing with the workers he deemed essential. He's turned his back on them, preferring not to upset hospital CEOs, agency heads and business leaders, who sit behind desks and pose for cameras. 185 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Of the 3123 COVID claims, 295 are being litigated. These cases are in various stages in the review process. Employers will likely suggest that the number of litigated claims is small compared to the overall number of cases, implying the system is working. This couldn't be more false. The number of litigated claims is predicated upon the fact that employees are within their rights--

CLERK: [Inaudible] please conclude your remarks.

SAL LUCIANO: In reality, the vast majority of workers do not understand the process. Many do not have the union to inform them of the rights, and help them navigate burdensome process. Fewer still have the capacity to seek legal representation. We'd like to thank the Committee leadership for its unrelenting courage and determination to lead on this issue. There is much we cannot control about this pandemic, but making sure workers can fairly access Workers’ Compensation is one thing we can do. We urge the Committee to support this important Bill. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Sal. You were testifying about the number of claims not really truly reflecting what's going on AT Workers’ Comp, I wonder if you could continue that line of thinking with us?

SAL LUCIANO: Sure. I think the bus drivers probably have some of the highest infection rates, and there are almost no claims, including-- I think there were eight bus drivers that died as a result of COVID, and they have not even put in a claim for the death benefit. So, so many people don't even know. When the Governor, a couple of weeks ago, when he said that essential workers would no longer be in priority for the COVID vaccine, Mustafa Saladin, the ETU President of Local 1336 said it was a slap in the face, and he said I should say that. And I told him, "You can say that yourself when you testify." 186 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

He was not able to testify today, because in the two weeks he's caught COVID and he is very ill. So, the numbers do not reflect the people who have filed. In addition, and I believe, Representative Winkler, mentioned it before, almost all claims get denied immediately by the employer, and so some people just stop right there because they think that's the end of the road

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's really unfortunate, and we did hear that testimony, even from Chairman Morelli, saying that it sort of a standard practice to deny the claim, even if you're paying out some of the benefits because you're protecting your long- term exposure, and so I can understand why people might get discouraged with that, but thank you for your testimony. And I don't see any other hands at this point, so thank you for your work and for your testimony here today.

SAL LUCIANO: Thank you for all that you do.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Take care. Next up we have number 58, Elijah Mubah.

ELIJAH MUBAH: Hi, my name is Elijah Mubah, and I'm here to support a Bill that will improve worker compensation for Uber drivers, independent contractors, and the better use of the Uber and Lyft app. And I have a testimony that I would like to share with your Committee.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Absolutely. Go ahead.

ELIJAH MUBAH: And so, I have driven for Uber for the past six years, 2015 up to present. And I also drove for Lyft, but then Lyft deactivated my account since 2017, reason being, I got a job. I live in New Haven, I got a job, I was at a train station in New Haven and I got a job from Middletown to go and pick up in Middletown, and I called the client, I said, "Where are you going?" And the client said, "I'm going [next door] Middletown." So, it wasn't worth 187 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE it to drive 10 miles from New Haven to go to Middletown and then do one mile, which could be paid for $3. So, my account was deactivated for this reason.

So, we are here, really like, we are independent contractors so we should be able to make decisions when it comes to who we pick, which trip we cancel, if you call us independent drivers, independent contractors as Uber calls. So, this is my testimony, my account [Inaudible] is deactivated because of that.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's incredible. Well, thank you for sharing that with us, and you do make a good point, that if you're independent contractors, you don't have much control over which rides you take and the work that you do, so that is an important point that we have not really heard quite the way you framed it today. So I don't see any hands, though, so thank you very much for being here and for testifying, and good luck to you.

ELIJAH MUBAH: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. So next we have never 63, Michael baldwin. Oh, I'm sorry, I missed Bill Garrity. Michael, if you'll just hold on for one minute, I'm going back and forth between different devices, so I'm gonna go in order and call Bill Garrity first.

BILL GARRITY: I was upset that you missed me, my goodness.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Sorry, and I know you're right here on the screen next to me.

BILL GARRITY: Good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and the Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. Thank you for allowing me to testify today in support of House Bill 6595 and senate Bill 1002. My name is Bill 188 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Garrity, I'm the President of University Health Professionals, AFT Connecticut Local 3837. I represent 2800 members and health care research and education at UConn health, I'm also the Divisional Vice President of health care at AFT Connecticut, representing about 8000 out of AFT's Connecticut's 30,000 members employed in 10 hospitals in VNAs. I have provided written testimony, I'd like to talk-- and let that stand, but talk on a couple other issues.

I have listened all day and I was upset with Commissioner Morelli's testimony, and then listening to some of the insurance companies patting themselves on the back saying, what a great job they've did, did not do well for me. When this started over one year ago, this has been a horrific fight for some of my members. One of the first cases that was actually going to be argued at the Attorney General's office was one of my members, okay? And she is what you would call one of those long haulers, she's still having issues, and still hasn't been back to work, I think in and out over the past year.

And it took us having to get ready to go to the Attorney General, before Governor Lamont put out his Executive Order 7JJJ. I'm hoping that this Bill 6595 and 1002 would fix that, because these things haven't changed. And again, listening to the insurance companies saying how great a job they're doing. Remember, there's a key piece of this before it gets the insurance companies, it's the actual employers. And I have been fighting with my employer, UConn health, which is a state agency, arguing with them over a number of these cases. That first one we're talking about happened in our dermatology unit, okay? And we had 12 people, 12 members, 12 employees all infected at the same time, and they wanted to argue and say, "No, they didn't get it here."

189 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

It got so bad that I had to go to the Vice President of our outpatient area and said, "You are not protecting the patient, you are not protecting the staff. I'm calling the governor and I'm gonna shut you down." And it took that threat before they shut down for two weeks. That's the painful truth about what's going on here. To continue talking about the PTSD, I've had, I can't tell you how many members who I've talked to on the phone and in my office, in tears. Frontline caregivers, depression, anger, alcoholism, thoughts of suicide. These are what we're dealing with on a daily basis right now. And we're referring people to EAP on a regular basis, the employee assistance program we have.

Now, all of these things that I've already said are wonderful for my members, because my members have me, and the other officers have UHP, and the other people at AFT, who do everything we can to provide for these people. Not everybody has a union standing in their corner. They don't have someone to ask the questions, how to fill out the 30c, what happens when you get the 43 after that, how do you go about it? I don't even know half this stuff, and I have to go ahead and send it over to Eric Chester, and I loved his testimony earlier. And I don't wanna get myself all bent out of shape, but House Bill 6595 and Senate Bill 1002 would go a long way in covering some of these things. And I didn't even touch over hazard pay. I'm tired of being heroes-- I'm tired of having them say, "heroes" and treating us like, "Zeros." I'm lucky enough to have the opportunity to talk to many legislators over this entire past year. I'm even more excited, because there are a number of UHP members who will be speaking very shortly.

CLERK: Mr.Garrity--

BILL GARRITY: Yes, sir, I'm wrapping up.

CLERK: Thank you, 190 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CLERK: I'm very lucky to be able to hear a number of UHP members who will be speaking shortly, and you will be able to hear some of the stories that I've already given you firsthand, from the people who lived it. Thank you very much, and have a great-- and I'm willing to answer any questions.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. I would like to ask you about the PTS, Post Traumatic Stress. I wonder if you could talk a little bit more about that. Because we haven't had a lot-- We had heard a lot of testimony before COVID hit from some of the people this Bill would now protect, the Department of Corrections, the EMT dispatcher, but we had not heard from the-- It hadn't happened yet, so we hadn't heard from healthcare workers, who were now endeavoring to include in this coverage. And I wondered if you could address and give us some more information about the experiences of the professionals in your hospital, and how PTSD-- You referenced it, but how is it really affected them? How does it happen? And then, how does it affect them?

BILL GARRITY: Well, the worst way it affects anybody is suicide. And on a number of occasions, I've had to have conversations, and one I will never forget was with an employee who developed COVID, was living away from his family, was in an area hotel trying to protect the rest of his family, 'cause both his wife and he was were healthcare workers. And then he got COVID, then he was kicked out of the hotel. And he was put in the-- what's it called, Central Connecticut, the dorms. And it took a lot to try and get him back. And it was a number of calls between the union to the health center and said, "You've gotta do something about this guy," and the health center then saying-- Getting back to that to the hotel saying, "You've gotta do something here, this is ridiculous."

191 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

And then it was frequent checks between his wife and everyone else, making sure everything was okay. Again, alcoholism, another issue, huge. When you end up developing-- Just taking care of these patients on a daily basis, and having to watch these people, I hate to say this, but die. I know this isn't something-- may not be something you guys deal with all the time, but having to see these people die with their families not there. You see nurses that are holding up iPads and iPhones so that they can say goodbye to their members. Now, again, this isn't the story of what's happening right now, but this is the story of what it was during its peak. I'm sorry, I'm looking here when it should be looking at the camera. This is what happened during the peak. So, those are some of the things.

And again, you get nurses who have an issue, and I don't wanna say just nurses, 'cause all healthcare workers have to go through this, you have an issue, it just starts piling on and piling on, and every day gets worse. And there's more on top of you, and it gets to the point where it takes one or two drinks before you can fall asleep. And then it gets to you can't get to work without a drink, and then, God forbid, you get caught-- you're at work and you're drunk, because you were still drunk then from the night before. You're trying to do your job. And then all of a sudden it's like, "Okay, what are we gonna do to protect this person? How do we go ahead and get her the help that she needs?" And as we fight to do that, she gets the help, she turns around, everything was right, we put her back in the health center, and she's like, "I can't do this anymore, it's just--I can't." So we lose a health care provider who just can't handle that stress any longer.

And on the PTSD Bill, I think I spoke on that to you originally, earlier, about a story I gave you about myself, about a patient bringing a gun into the emergency room. I don't wanna have to go through that again, I don't wanna take up all the time. You 192 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE cannot fill from an empty cup, and unfortunately, our healthcare workers, our cups are getting really, really empty right now. We need the help, we need the support.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Bill. I do see, Representative Porter, has her hand up.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for sharing that. Great minds think alike, because I was going down the same path Senator Kushner just went down, and I say this because I'm actually experiencing that with some workers right now. Listening to you describe the alcoholism, oh my god, I'm like, "Is he talking about why I'm talking about?" This is so real, and we haven't really addressed the mental health issues and how they impact these workers, and how these workers are becoming dependent on self-medicating. And it's alcohol and whatever else they get their hands on. And some of them are functioning, they're able to show up to work, but for those of us that see them after work, and before work, we know what they're dealing with, the depression, the anxiety. There's a multitude of mental health issues that these workers are dealing with. So I just thank you for coming here today, and giving voice to that for them, and for also just telling the truth, telling us what's really going on. Because I say it all the time, the people closest to the problems are closest to the solution. Lived experience, I'll take that any day. Anecdote, any day over the data, because what happens is what happens, and you can't change that. And we really got a huge problem here that we need to deal with. And we need to treat people that are out there sacrificing, making the ultimate sacrifices for us. We need to treat them better.

BILL GARRITY: I begged my members today to come out, because this is everything that we have been fighting for over the past eight months, 10 months, in this Bill. This just is everything, everything that I have been fighting for, and talking with you 193 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE guys is wrapped up in this Bill. And I wanna show everybody how hard we've worked and what we've done. So, thank you so much, everybody.

REP. PORTER (94TH): I'm glad they're here ‘cause there's tremendous power in tory. So I'm looking forward, in a bittersweet way, to hearing their stories, because I think the rest of this Committee, and frankly, the rest of Connecticut needs to hear those stories so they can understand what's really going on. So thank you again, Mr. Garrity. And thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And I see-- the hand came down. I don't see any other hands at this time. I do wanna say, though, this doesn't pertain to COVID, but I wanna take a moment of personal privilege and just say how sorry I was to hear about the loss of your former Secretary, Mary McQuinn, who my daughter worked for many years with, and she was a very special person to all of you, and to me and my daughter as well. So, I was sorry to hear her passing.

BILL GARRITY: 32 years in the office.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I know.

BILL GARRITY: 32 years with UHP.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I know. It just happened and I didn't wanna leave this moment without mentioning it. So thank you very much for testifying.

BILL GARRITY: Thank you, Senator.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next, we have--now we can go to Michael Baldwin.

MICHAEL BALDWIN: Hear Me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes. 194 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DR. BALDWIN: Okay. So, yes, my name is Michael Baldwin, I'm a member of the UCHC-AAUP Executive Council and our union represents over 600 physicians, dentists, and researchers, who are faculty here at UConn Health, and we're proud to work with Bill Garrity and his wonderful colleagues as well. And today I'm here to support Senate Bill number 1002 and House Bill number 6595. I do practice clinically here as a physician at UConn Health and I'm also a proud educator in the School of Medicine here. And in full disclosure, my wife, Jennifer is also a frontline worker here at UConn Health and she practices as a physician. We've chosen to dedicate our professional lives here to ensure that UConn Health is successful and to give back to the residents of Connecticut. We're both the graduates of UConn Med School here.

This past year, obviously, has tested all of us here at UConn Health, as it did our fellow residents across the state. In our efforts to care for our patients and keep our fellow caregivers safe, we fostered collaborative bonds with our colleagues in the Stores campus with the help of AUP and we worked with our physics and engineering partners in Stores as well as local businesses across the state to help make protective equipment that we've been talking about today, the PPE for our frontline workers. Our UConn Health colleagues work tirelessly on behalf of our fellow Connecticut residents, and I'll forever be proud of our efforts. My wife and I lived apart from our children for about three months, last spring, to keep them safe and we continue to practice here every day, working in some pretty tough conditions, and we kept teaching the med students, and teaching our residents so eventually, hopefully, they can take care of us someday here in the state.

I have an example of one of our colleagues or UConn Health colleague’s description of their experience and it goes like this, so approximately one year ago 195 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE we admitted our first COVID patient, it was a time of much uncertainty that intensified the stress of an already overwhelmed healthcare system. As healthcare providers, in addition to worrying about the welfare of our patients, we also now had to worry about shortages of PPE, contracting the virus, and taking it home to our loved ones, or even worse becoming disabled or potentially dying and leaving our children without parents. Staying home was simply not an option. Seeing the gratitude from our community is important, but more than road signs, calling us heroes, or clapping for us is-- We wanna make sure that the overall clinical environment in which we practice is improved.

The suffering our patients and their families have gone through, and many are still going through as we've heard with these wonderful testimonies today, are going to be-- Sorry, I'm kinda just over-- Where, basically, we witnessed this firsthand throughout the last few months and those people are always gonna be in our memories. So, being truly recognized for the sacrifices we've made and the care we provide and are providing during this pandemic means that frontline employees are insured, we have adequate PPE, workmen's compensation if we contract COVID at work, support for our families left behind when frontline workers fall to the pandemic, and other support for those who have placed the health of the community ahead of their own personal needs.

I just personally wanna say it's an honor to work at UConn health and to give back to the med school and the state that I grew up in, and continue to still grow in. And it's an honor to be here today with you guys, and I'm glad I'm still here, and I'm glad my wife is here, I'm so glad my children are here, and yeah, I'm proud of our state. Thanks for your time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Dr. Baldwin. It is good to have an opportunity to not just thank you for your testimony, but to thank you for everything 196 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE you've done to help keep us safe in the state, and to take care of people who are ill. So, I appreciate having that opportunity as well. There is a hand here, I see, Representative Winkler

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Dr. Baldwin, I once worked with UConn Health Center, and I respect everything you do. If this question is too personal, please don't answer it, but how old are your children?

DR. BALDWIN: 12 and 10

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Three months?

DR. BALDWIN: What's that, sir? 12 years and two months-- Sorry, 12 years and 10 years old.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): No, but you are apart from them for three months?

DR. BALDWIN: Oh. Yeah, so we were very fortunate-- everything is all relative, but my sister in law is a teacher, and so she was teaching remotely during those months when all the schools shut down, so she basically set up a homeschool for her kids and our kids, and we made the best of it, yeah. At that time, obviously, nobody really was sure how safe things were, what correct protocol was. As people have mentioned today, the level of our understanding was rapidly changing so we weren't sure what was going on, in terms of how safe the kids would be with us going home at night, so, yeah, we thought it would be best if we just simply had them go live with my sister in law in Cheshire, Connecticut. And she was a lifesaver, it was, Yeah, It was incredible.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you for that true sacrifice that you made. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And Dr. Baldwin, I don't see any other hands. I do wanna ask you, one 197 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE of the things that hasn't been talked about a great deal, and we were just talking to Bill about, is the PTSD. Have you seen that amongst doctors as well?

DR. BALDWIN: Yeah, I know it's hard because-- And I was just thinking about it while you were all talking. This is a really interesting session, because as a physician, it's crazy. I'm having these emotions come up now. I haven't talked about this to anybody. , My wife and I talk about it, but outside of our home, I haven't talked about anybody about this, I guess. But you just, basically, the way I look at it is, having made it into med school, and being a physician is a privilege. And so many people are out of work, like we've heard today, or struggling to make ends meet, and it's just I feel so lucky that I'm in a job that I love, that the-- So many times in our life we see people get ahead at the cost of other people, but whereas a physician or healthcare worker if we do our jobs, well that helps everybody, and so-- I don't know, do you guys hear something?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we do.

DR. BALDWIN: Okay. I'll just keep going. So, it's just there's-- all I view it as is the easiest way to cope with something is just to stay busy. And I think a lot of physicians are that way, and so we just take the nervous energy or fear, and you're just plow it into activity. So, yeah, I'm sure there's an element of PTSD, but as physicians, if we don't keep going, things fall apart, I feel like, and that's just not an option. It's not possible. So, I feel like we-- and I talk about this with our Executive Committee, people that work with us, that I think physicians just have a tendency of working ourselves into the ground, and that's the default setting. And we almost, sometimes you have to step back and you almost need protection from yourself. But it's okay, because, again, I'd much rather have the job and career that I have and have risk than not. It's a privilege and an honor. And yeah, I'm 198 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE sure there's an element of PTSD, and I'm sure we'll work on that, But over the last year that's been on the back burner, I guess.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much for everything, and for sharing all of this with us today.

DR. BALDWIN: Anytime.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I don't see any other hand, so I will move to our next speaker. And next up we have, Carlos Bonifacio. Carlos, can you unmute yourself?

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: (foreign language)

CARLOS BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: (foreign language)

CARLOS BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: (foreign language)

CARLOS BONIFACIO: Okay.

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: So, Mr. Bonifacio was talking about how--

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Can you speak up just a little louder, Stephanie, it's hard to hear you.

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: Yeah, no problem. Let me just-- there we go. Hopefully, that helps.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's much better.

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: So, Mr.--Oops, sorry about that. Mr. Bonifacio was talking about his experience with Uber. He's been a driver for five years with Uber. And he was specifically talking about an incident where he had driven a client to Hartford, the ride 199 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE went fine, they arrived and everything, and when she got out of the vehicle, she ended up smashing her or hitting her finger with the car door. And it wasn't that he was off in a rush or anything, she just misplaced the door, and she hit her finger. And, obviously, being very concerned, he asked her if she was okay, if she needed medical assistance. She said, no, she was fine, it was just a little minor injury, and that she was all set and on a way to go. And he assumed that was fine, he went on with his workday, and the following day, when he went to go do his check-in with Uber, Uber told him that he was discontinued, he was not allowed to work for the day, because he had a negative review against him.

And it turns out that that same client, who had refused medical treatment and any assistance that the driver had offered, she actually filed a report against him in Uber, claiming that they had been an accident and that he was negligent on his behalf, and that he was very disrespectful towards her. And he was saying how he felt like that was unfair treatment towards him, because he wasn't allowed to tell his side of the story and that Uber automatically just sided with the client. And so, he just really urges the Committee to support Senate-- House Bill 1000, and because drivers at the end of the day, they're just working to support their families, they're working to be able to help themselves financially. And he hope that you all have a wonderful afternoon.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Stephanie. And please give my thanks to Carlos as well. But I have a question for him. In some of our earlier testimonies and on other occasions, we've heard people suggest that Uber drivers are doing this work for extra money, that many of-- that many of them have other job. And I'm wondering if he could address that. Because what we seem to be hearing from people is, they're doing this to support their family. So I'm wondering if you can ask him about that. 200 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: Okay. You were cutting in a little bit, I don't know if I was the only one, but just to make sure that I understood your question correctly, you wanted to know if he has other means of jobs or if this is his primary job?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That's it.

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: Okay, perfect. (foreign language)

CARLOS BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Let me clarify that. I'm talking about when he was working for Uber, 'cause it's not clear if he still is working there.

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: Okay. (foreign language)

CARLOS BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: So he said that he is still currently working for Uber, and although he doesn't work any other part time jobs or any side jobs, that previously he had a bigger time schedule or time period where he would work in the day and the night time, but after enduring some very rude incidents with some current clients he decided that he wanted to-- because of alcoholic incidents, that he preferred he would rather work in the daytime, so he is currently still working for Uber, but mainly in the daytime

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for addressing that, thank you for that clarification. I don't see any other hands at this time, so please thank Mr. Bonifacio for testifying today and we're gonna keep ironing this issue for him.

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: Okay, perfect. (foreign language) 201 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CARLOS BONIFACIO: (foreign language)

STEPHANIE SUAREZ: (foreign language)

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up we have number 67, Aziz Dehkan, Did I say your last name correctly? Aziz are you with us? Number 67

AZIZ DEHKAN: I am with you. Can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes. And I wasn't sure if I pronounced your name correctly, your last name

AZIZ DEHKAN: You were good. After five hours of listening to people, you're fine, yeah. So, thank you for-- I wanna thank the Committee, I wanna thank the Chairs for having these hearings. Before I go into testimony about SB 999, I just wanna tell you that my heart goes out to all the people who've been testifying here about 1002. We've all suffered from the pandemic and I think one of the things that we need to recognize is that, as we move forward, as John Harrity, our Board President-- the Roundtable Board President said, COVID will look like a dress rehearsal, almost, for the climate crisis that we're about to face, that we are currently facing in many areas, in many ways.

So, my staff as we've been talking offline to each other, we all wanna pour our hearts out to everybody who's been testifying here. On 999, this Bill is a social justice workforce development jobs, jobs, jobs Bill. Internally we call it the Climate and Community Investment Act, because it is all about climate and community. The workforce development is a piece that's actually very close and dear to the work that I've been doing over the years. We need to lift up people, we need to bring people into good- paying jobs, we need to make sure that as the green economy starts to ramp up and bring jobs to Connecticut, that these are good, well-paying sustainable living jobs. The jobs that bring people 202 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE into apprenticeship programs, jobs that people can move forward, and as we build on the green economy, that we actually do something good for the climate and for the-- and build off the climate crisis

I wanna just address something that Mr. Trahan said about his people. And just to reiterate again what John Harrity said this Bill 999 only is for 2 megawatt projects only and greater, so it doesn't affect the work that they're doing. And just to give you a sense of what 2 megawatts look like, 2 megawatts is about five acres of rooftops, so that'll give you a sense of the size of these projects. And I wanna think about something else too, John. F. Kennedy had said at one point, that a rising tide raises all ships. And I think that as we get into this Bill, and as we see wages go up and bring people up, that the people in his association will also benefit from this. And I think that's really important to recognize. Pieces of this legislation have already been in place with the Vineyard Wind Project in New London, the PLA, in particular, and the responsible contractor provisions are our standard for big projects, I think. So, we should be able to move forward with this Bill, to bring people into a green economy, into good-paying jobs, and to make sure that communities that are disadvantaged, people who are marginalized, and who have not have access to these types of jobs, get those jobs, and make sure that we all move forward in bringing jobs to Connecticut that are well paying.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I was muted, I apologize. Thank you so much for your work. And I think that visual was really helpful to imagine 5 acres of solar equipment, that really made a difference, for me, 'cause you're correct, 2 megawatts was way over my head. So thank you for that comparison. I do wanna call, Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you, Aziz, for your testimony today and your 203 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE patience for hanging in here. Tell me, how's it working where you say they're doing this already in Connecticut? You mentioned somewhere.

AZIZ DEHKAN: Yeah. So, the Vineyard Wind Project that's proposed in New London, there is already a PLA attached to it, that the legislature passed, and I believe it passed fairly bipartisan. So, t's nothing new to any of the Senators or Representatives.

REP. PORTER (94TH): All right. Well, thank you for that, 'cause I definitely wanna check into that. I think that's it for me, I was really just interested in getting some feedback on this Vineyard you were mentioning with the PLA.

AZIZ DEHKAN: Right. And I think one other thing, Representative Porter, is that if you look at the Gravel Pit Solar Project up at East Windsor, the developer there was not going bring a PL A into that site. It looked as if he was gonna bring out-of- state low wage workers. And the Roundtable, with our partners, pushed on him, on the developer to make sure that a PLA was gonna be in place. And there's an MOU about to be signed on this project, and it's important to recognize that, that if we don't put these standards in, developers are gonna bring out- of-state low-wage workers. And even if they're not out of state, they're gonna keep low-wage workers in here. And does how does that help us? How does that help the economy? How does that help people in the communities that need it the most? So, that's why this Bill is so important.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You're right, and it doesn't help. And that's been our cry, I think that's been a rally cry for myself, Senator Kushner, and Members on this Committee. We talk about the revenues that we don't have, well, you can't hire back over 90% of the workforce since 2008, as low wage and minimum wage workers, and think that you're gonna get what you had before. We have folks that have degrees, 204 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE advanced degrees, and grown folks having to go back home and live with their elderly parents, not to mention my kid, my daughter, in school right now for her graduate, they can't afford it. So it is important, it is important that these jobs stay in Connecticut, that we put Connecticut residents to work and we make sure that they're livable, sustainable wages, with great benefits and retirement plans. So, thank you so much for bringing the extra today. We needed it.

AZIZ DEHKAN: Thank you. And just last thing to say, that is, everybody wants to talk about "Oh, we can't wait for the new normal." I don't want a new normal, the new normal is what you just described, Representative Porter, I want something new, I wanna make sure that, as you said, we bring everybody along on the economic ride.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Amen. Now one last question through you, Madam Chair, Gravel Pit Solar Project, where is that again?

AZIZ DEHKAN: That's in East Windsor.

REP. PORTER (94TH): East Windsor. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for your testimony, and really appreciate the work you're doing in this area to not only bring our state into the future, but to do it with consideration for its impact on our economy, not just on the climate. So, thank you so much for your work.

AZIZ DEHKAN: Thank you, Senator, I appreciate the time. Appreciate it.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Good to see you. Next up, I believe we're up to number 70-- I'm sorry, I see number 40 is here. Peter Zarabozo. Peter, can you unmute yourself?

205 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

PETER ZARABOZO: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Hi, Peter.

PETER ZARABOZO: Hi.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead.

PETER ZARABOZO: Okay. My name is Peter Zarabozo. I've worked at UConn Health for about one year and I, actually, started at the beginning of the COVID- 19 pandemic. I am in full support of this Bill and my experience of working at UConn Health during this pandemic, especially at the outbreak, is that we were woefully unprepared with our PPE, and we were forced to utilize basic PPE far beyond its useful life or functionality, for instance, staff and healthcare providers, alike, were issued a simple paper mask, or in some cases, a simple surgical mask and required to use it for a week. The usable life of a mask like that is eight hours max, or perhaps a workday, per manufacturer's instruction. And even with those, those were not even adequately supplied and we would sometimes exceed that one-week frame. This jeopardized the health and safety of our workers, staff, and our patients, and was essentially an embarrassment that our institution would be so unprepared.

So with that said, I strongly support this Bill, and anyone who is against this Bill clearly does not care for the well-being or safety of our staff, healthcare providers throughout the state, or friends, family, or citizenry as a whole. And I strongly, strongly urge anyone on this Committee, and anyone voting on this Bill to think about every single person whose lives and safety were affected during this pandemic and amplified by the fact that we did not have adequate PPE. Staff, healthcare workers, our friends, family and everyone who's testified in support of this Bill we'll be thinking about all of you when the vote comes up and we'll be thinking about you should the bill pass or fail. 206 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Thank you for your consideration and I strongly support this Bill.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Peter, and I have to say it must have been quite a shock to come into this work right at the beginning of the pandemic, and you sound like a young guy and I know you're approaching this in such a serious way, we really appreciate it. We're doing our best to try and fix things going forward, things that unfortunately happened and we couldn't do anything about it at the time. So, I really appreciate your emphasis on the PPE situation, and I do believe that, hopefully, the whole industry, all of us have learned that to live in our current environment we must have these stockpiles of PPE that will keep people protected. So I really appreciate your testimony.

PETER ZARABOZO: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I don't see any hands, so I’m gonna move to the next speaker. I believe there's someone who is joining us by phone, number 69, Tanya Lemanski. Tanya, if you can unmute yourself, I think it's *6

TANYA LEMANSKI: Hello

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can hear you

TANYA LEMANSKI: Okay. Good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. I am Tanya Lemanski, and I’m a 34-year-employee at Connecticut Valley Hospital. My title is, Behavioral Health Unit Supervisor, and I’m also a registered nurse. I come before you today in support of Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595. In March 2020, we were told that our detox unit was closing, and the staff on detox were gonna be working on the COVID units two days later. At that time there was not a unit set up to take care of COVID patients and the staff were all fearful of the unknown. 207 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

We knew very little about this virus. Many nurses left state service or retired for fear of dying from COVID. Detox staff went to a new unit and prepared to care for these COVID patients. The unit was to be a medical, psychiatric and addiction unit with COVID positive clients. To say the least, we were put under a tremendous amount of stress as these clients could be assaulted, and we knew that nobody was coming to help us. Staff that were assigned had to be quickly trained on medical issues, medical equipment, PPE donning and doffing and be fit tested for an N95 mask, and how to restrain an infected patient.

Once the patients started to arrive, it gave new meaning to what we and the patients were about to go through. The goal was always to give the patients the best possible care and to make sure that they were comfortable and have a rapport with the staff. It took no time at all to get to know our clients and form those strong relationship. Staff on the unit had to wear full PPE, cap, gown, gloves, booties and N95 and a face shield. It was extremely hot with all that gear, especially because we had to provide total care. We had a staff member at each doorways to monitor patients for COVID symptoms, suicidal ideation, self-harm, or fall risk. We had all clinical staff helping with feeding, monitoring and providing ADL care.

The staff were not allowed to leave on their shift, other staff were afraid of coming in contact with COVID unit staff. Our meals, both staff and patients, were put outside the door to reduce contact. We were encouraged to use the side stairway that other staff did not use. We were given the option of hotel rooms, but those who went home undressed in their garage and washed our clothes separately from our families. Most days the staff on this unit worked 16 hours as there was constant staffing shortages. As we arrived to work in the 208 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE morning, we mustered up enough strength and energy to get through our shift and then on to another. Only COVID staff could work on the COVID unit, therefore the relationships between the staff

CLERK: Thank you, Ms. Lemanski, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks

TANYA LEMANSKI: I just wanted to be known, the tremendous amount of stress the--for what the staff has been through. And in my 30 plus year career here, I have never seen anything like what our staff went through in the past 12 months, the enormous sacrifices, and we deserve this small relief. And if you ever have any questions, please feel free to call any COVID staff member at CVH. And once you spend time with our staff, there will not be a doubt in your mind that the essential staff took on a huge task to put everyone's life before our own.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Tanya. And you added a dimension that we hadn't heard yet today, about care that was given to people who were sick, they had-- sick with COVID, they had other issues as well, and the stress and the pressure that that brought to bear, and really appreciate your testimony. I don't see any hands here today, but I appreciate your offer to be in touch with you, I kind of wish we could all go to these facilities and see, with our own eyes, what you have been through. I think it would make it hard for anyone to vote against this Bill. And we'd wanna do more. So thank you so much for being here.

TANYA LEMANSKI: Thank you. And I wish you could come, because the Zenus leadership did not come on to the unit, and I hope you do. I hope you are in support of this Bill. Thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Thank you for your testimony tonight, and take care.

TANYA LEMANSKI: Thank you. 209 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next, we have, Ann Pratt, number 71.

ANN PRATT: Thank you Senator Kushner, Thank you, Representative Porter, and Members of the Labor and Appropriations Committee. It's great to be with you. My name is Ann Pratt, and I am the Organizing Director for Connecticut Citizen Action Group. I also am a member of the Connecticut Renews Coalition, an alliance of statewide environmental justice and advocacy organizations. Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony in support of SB 999.

The overlapping crisis of a global pandemic, the relentless persistence of systemic racism, massive economic disparities, and the ever-present reality of our current climate crisis all conspire to leave our future, health, and survival hanging in the balance. These realities and threats, as we know, are experienced with the greatest intensity within our Black and Brown communities. Access to good jobs, quality, affordable housing, health care, clean air and water, and protection from the onslaught of climate-related intense weather-related events are crucial steps we must take. CCAG views this Bill as an important step in addressing some of these interlocking crises.

We applaud the provisions in SB 999 that will significantly strengthen and expand access to high quality paying jobs, through placing important expectations on private companies, who are investing and profiting from large-scale renewable energy projects. We strongly support the focus and prioritization of workforce development programs and the commitment to hire workers from communities who may be impacted by the project, and or are in need of greater investment within their communities, overall. The moment of need is extraordinary, our response as a 210 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE state must meet these needs, above and beyond what we have done in years past.

President Biden has said that he wants 40% of the benefits of is clean energy investments to go to disadvantaged communities. The way we make that real in Connecticut is through our good jobs and workforce development plans, one of the ways. I believe there are strong provisions in this Bill, including prevailing wage requirements, project labor agreements, along with robust apprenticeship and community benefit provisions that will help Connecticut maximize federal investments that, hopefully, are on its way to Connecticut, and will go to communities that need it most. Thank you for this opportunity to testify in support of this very important Bill.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Ann. And I do see a hand, hold on a second. Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Ann, no questions, I just wanted say hello, and it's great to see you, and thank you for being with us today. It's been a while, so it's just nice to see your face, and I appreciate you coming out and hanging with us, and getting this testimony on the record. Thank you so much for all you do

ANN PRATT: Representative Porter, thank you so much. I so appreciate being with you, this is a amazing Bill and I thank you both for making it happen, and hope to work with you to bring it over the top.

REP. PORTER (94TH): All right. You heard that, Senator Kushner.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I know, I know. I think you, actually, said some magic words in there too, Ann, when you talked about bringing federal dollars to our state, that's certainly something we don't 211 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE wanna miss out on, and so I think that's important to emphasize in regard to this Bill.

ANN PRATT: And 40% investment in frontline communities, that makes sense in our way of looking at things, so let's make that happen, it's amazing. So thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much for being here tonight. Well it's not quite night yet, the sun is still up. I don't wanna get ahead of myself.

ANN PRATT: It's a beautiful day out there, was well so--

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That I don't know about. All right, thank you very much. Next up, I just wanna check my list. I believe next step we have-- we're gonna go to a telephone call, someone calling in line, so that is number 63. And let's see if I can find 63 on the screen. That would be-- Oh, not 63 there must be a typo here, 'cause 63 already testified, that was Michael Baldwin, so maybe 73. 73 is Astrid, Astrid can you unmute yourself?

ASTRID TAVARES: Hello. Good afternoon, can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes we can, go ahead.

ASTRID TAVARES: Hello. Good afternoon, Senator Kushner, and Representative Porter, and Members of the Committee. My name is Astrid Tavares, and I am a dental assistant and I work for the Department of Corrections, and I’m here to testify in support of Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595. I just wanted to start by saying that my job, in my work field is something I’ve always loved to do, I love the difference we make and the impact we're making people's lives, just relieving them from pain, and just putting a smile on their face. I’ve always loved doing this, I’ve been doing it for many years. And when I had an opportunity to do this in 212 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Corrections I was very excited, 'cause I’ve always been interested in criminal justice, as well as dentistry, and this was kind of a way to-- I could have the opportunity to do both.

So, we treat a lot of patients and we try to prioritize their treatment, because we have so many patients we have to tend to, and even though they're inmates we always try to provide them with the best care we can, excellent oral hygiene, oral care, express to them why it's important to have hygiene. And then, I just-- This was the first time in all these years that I’ve been working in my field that I kind of question if I wanted to work in the health field. It was just a very scary situation when COVID hit, and I just saw the fear in everyone's faces. We didn't understand it, the seriousness of what was going on, we didn't know how to properly protect ourselves, and not only that, but we really didn't have the means to protect ourselves.

We were very short on PPE, we had to share. I had to share with the nurses a lot of the times, I had to kind of-- luckily I order in bulk, so I was able to do that for them. A lot of them didn't even have something as simple as a surgical mask, let alone a N95 mask, which is what they really should have been using. So I was able to do that, this really has impacted me in a way that I definitely will never forget.

I felt like I had to really choose between the wellbeing of my patients-- of myself and my patients, but I do you love what I do, and I wanted to be able to help the nurses as best as I could. A lot of times I would help them with vitals, disinfecting surfaces, 'cause they were just so stormed and overwhelmed with everything that they were doing, it was--they were short on staff, because not only did we were just-- had so many patients to treat at once, but also we lost a couple of our nurses. Some decided to retire early, because 213 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE of they were immunocompromised, so they decided to retire early, and we lost a very great nurse, which I every time I think about her, miss her dearly, but she was kind enough, knowing our situation, she made personal protective equipment for us and would send it almost on a weekly basis, which was very nice of her, but she feared working again because her medical situation was very delicate, and it was just too risky.

CLERK: Ms. Tavares, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

ASTRID TAVARES: So, yes, basically, I just saw the nurses, they were so sleep-deprived, they would-- just have to modify their whole entire, basically, lives, staying at nearby hotels and having to take drastic measures before entering their home, they just really had to isolate themselves from their own families to be able to help the community as a whole and do their jobs and be able to protect their families as well. Can you still hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes. Thank you Astrid. Thank you for your testimony here today, and for the important work that you're doing in Corrections, so I really appreciate you being here. I don't see any hands at this time, but continue to do this great work, and we will certainly take your testimony into account when we consider this Bill. Thank you so much.

ASTRID TAVARES: Thank you so much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next we are gonna go to number 66, and again, on the phone this is Sarafa- Deen. I’m not sure I can pronounce your last name, if you'll pronounced it for us. Can you unmute yourself? You may need to press *6 to be unmuted. Sarafa-Deen, and I think it's, Gbadamosi. There you are. Can you correctly pronounce your name for us? I’m sorry I butchered it. 214 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SARAFA-DEEN GBADAMOSI: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Hi. Can you pronounce your name for us? I couldn't say correctly.

SARAFA-DEEN GBADAMOSI: My name is Sarafa-Deen.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Great. And your last name?

SARAFA-DEEN GBADAMOSI: Gbadamosi.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Go ahead with your testimony, we can hear you.

SARAFA-DEEN GBADAMOSI: Good afternoon, I’m a Member of IDG, and I support the Bill Number 1000. I've been driving with Uber since 2016, and the Uber they are betraying us because of the-- all the agreement we signed when we started, they are changing at the middle of the process. One of the problem we are facing is inconsistence in the money, or the [Inaudible]

When I started they told they will be getting 25% whatever the charge the rider. Now, sometimes Uber even gets 70%, you get 30. Sometimes you don't get money, you just work for nothing. Then they always deactivate accounts without any justification, without any reason. So when they give us the directive that whereof we'll have a problem we're to call the customer support. So the people they are justifying us here in America, they are not here. When you call the support somebody who is in Lebanon, in India will be speaking to you, without even-- They don't understand English.

When you send a message to them, they will not read the context ,or they don't understand the context of the message you send. They will be telling you different things. After 30 minute, you still reply them, another person will come, starting all over again. At the end of the day you get frustrated. So 215 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the support and about the our safety of the driver, is so poor, we're just risking our lives to be doing Uber, and most especially late in the night. So I believe that we see of problems that all of others suppose they're having, but that basically summarize what I can say today.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you.

SARAFA-DEEN GBADAMOSI: You're welcome.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thanks for being here. Thank you for your testimony, and thank you for sharing your experience with driving. I don't see any hands at this time, so we will move to our next speaker. And you have a good evening.

SARAFA-DEEN GBADAMOSI: Thank you, you too. Bye.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next we have number 74, Angelica Acevedo.

ANGELICA ACEVEDO: Good afternoon, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Senator Sampson, Representative Arora, and Members of the Labor Committee. My name is Angelica Acevedo, I live in Connecticut, I’m a coordinator for IDG, Independence Drivers Guild, and I do Uber, as well. I have been doing Uber for five years now. And today I’m here to testify about what I believe a main issue with Uber, and that is the absence of a due process.

This company can fire drivers anytime, without any good reason, not explanation. And they just don't give the drivers the opportunity to answer any accusation or defend ourself. And this happened for every problem that you may have with Uber, like low rating or false claim from passengers. Drivers simply don't have the chance to defense thyself. And I face this issue double because my husband is an Uber driver as well. I would like to ask you to support, to pass the Bill 1000 so drivers can 216 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE support their family with dignity and have a right to bragging. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Angelica. Thank you for your testimony, and for all the work you're doing to help the other drivers as well, as a coordinator, so thank you for being here. I don't see any hand, so we will move to the next person, who is also, I believe, a driver. I think number 70, Yousif Harpoon. Yousif, I know you may be joining us by phone. You might have to unmute by hitting *6. Okay, we'll give you another minute, Yousif, because we cannot hear you. There you go. Go ahead now. Okay, Yousif. Okay, I think we may have lost him. So we will go to the next person on the list, and that needs to be number 76, and that would be, Brendan Sexton. Brendon, I know I see you, you're here. Can you unmute yourself? And go on camera if you can hear here.

BRENDAN SEXTON: I am here. I apologize I am in transit right now, one of my kids had a dental emergency so I had to rush him to the dentist. So, yeah, I'm gonna we jump off camera to read my testimony.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, that's fine.

BRENDAN SEXTON: Okay. So, thank you all for having this, and your stamina through this, especially Chairs Kushner and Porter, Senator Sampson and Rep. Arora. CFTA speak today on Senate Bill 1000. My name is Brendan Sexton, I’m the Executive Director of the Independent Drivers Guild. IDG represents for hire vehicle drivers. You've heard our brothers and sisters speak today on the difficulties that they have driving for Uber and Lyft. IDG is a nonprofit affiliate of [Inaudible] whose organizing [black] car drivers, for over 20 years. We currently represent over 250,000 drivers in New York, here in Connecticut, New Jersey, and Illinois. This is very appreciative, that your Committee has raised Senate Bill 1000 for public hearing and [audio glitch] 217 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thought we lost you.

BRENDAN SEXTON: --like deed worker exploitation, and a loss of economic security. On the other side is an avenue, which leads to a future where workers are afforded the power to control their own destinies, where workers are respected. We firmly believe that now is the time to act in order to affect revolutionary and life changing reforms. Connecticut must provide for a legal framework, under which drivers can unionize and collectively bargain, without fear of discrimination or retaliation. We are calling on Connecticut to pass legislation giving the right all drivers the right to unionize and collective sectorial bargaining groups.

When Connecticut passes a right to bargain law, we'll be blazing a trail for growing a unionized workforce. Today, too many workers have no voice. The rich get richer, workers’ wages remain stagnant, it's become impossible to get ahead. Union membership has dropped in the United States, with just 6% of private sector workers represented. Among our drivers, 95% are representation according to two polls, one conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and the other way Penn State University.

The disconnect is because our system is broken and our labor laws have raked. Time and again we've seen workers bravely take on unionizing corporate giants, only to be defeated by a system that set them up for failure. The Trump Administration's National Labor Relations Board was seeking to make it harder for workers to get representation, but they made a mistake. And this mistake is the opportunity for us to pass right to bargain, to really get justice for drivers. 'Cause currently, the system of worker justice is an abject failure. And we can finally offer a comprehensive response to all the right to work for less legislation around the country. 218 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

We in Connecticut, can be the game changer, which will allow workers to organize in a real and meaningful way. This is a chance for Connecticut to live up to the pro-union reputation. What drivers need is collective bargaining. I suppose Sharon Block and Benjamin Sachs of Harvard University said about 85. The new law fails to offer gig workers one of the most important employee rights of all, the right to form a union. As important as minimum wage and overtime pay are, there're minimum protections and fall full short of ensuring that workers earn what they need. Only union and collective bargaining agreement, enable workers to demand and secure anything beyond these minimum standards. Of course, when drivers have a seat at the table, and they're receiving fair compensation and benefits, everyone wins.

CLERK: Mr. Sexton, three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

BRENDAN SEXTON: Absolutely. Everybody wins when we have a strong industry, where drivers are making middle class wages, professional, and being able to transport Connecticut residents all around the state in a health and safety way. Thank you for the time, and the opportunity to speak today, and testify on behalf of this ground-breaking legislation.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Brandon. I have to say there have been a lot of drivers who testified to their experiences, and we still have quite a few ahead of us that I believe will also testify to their experience. I do wanna say that earlier today, we also heard the testimony of Andrew, I think it's, Andrew Greenblatt, is that right?

BRENDAN SEXTON: Yes.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah. I think he did a 219 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE really good job of addressing some of the concerns that I had heard before we were in hearing about the Sherman Antitrust Laws and about preemption issues that one might have with the National Labor Relations Act, he answered those very well. This is a really different model than we've seen that has that element of worker involvement, workplace democracy built into a system, but yet it's outside of the normal, what we think of the normal ways in which workers collectively bargain under the National Labor Relations Board, or act, or some other state, or municipal Labor Relations Act. I know you were involved in working on this issue, and I wonder if you could give us a little bit of history of how you moved in this direction, and perhaps, where this is also happening around the country.

BRENDAN SEXTON: Sure. So, thank you for the opportunity. I think this has come out of years of the National Labor Relations Board failing to live up to its standards of protecting workers when they organize. Corporations have too much power when it comes to workers making decisions and voting. And then the second part of that, is it comes, really, from this new kind of workforce that's existing today. The National Labor Relations Act was incredible piece of legislation, very progressive, that was passed in 1935, to deal with the work issues that were happening at the time in the country. And now we're at a moment that we have a completely different type of workforce, one that's much more fluid, and moves a lot quicker between these companies and these app companies, and we set out to build a system in which workers can fluidly move between the apps, and not have to worry about losing benefits, not having to lose of that representation, even like pensions and retirement things, where workers actually carry their benefits with them from job to job.

We've also worked with the Clean Slate Project, out of Harvard Law School, which was a project that was 220 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE designed to say, "Hey, if we can wipe away every Federal Labor Law in the world and rewrite them, how would it look like?" And in absence of that, what can states do to help foster in some of these new Labor Laws? And then we did steal some ideas from Eastern European models as well, particularly with the sectorial bargaining and making sure that every worker in an industry is protected and benefits for any collective bargaining agreement.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, Thank you, I think it's very creative, and clearly--I’m a strong believer that as work changes, and industries change, work organizations have to change as well. Our laws have to change to really accommodate and meet the needs of the modern workplace. And through this pandemic, we've seen many, many changes, and much of the litigation-- of much of the legislation we're taking up today has to do with COVID-related relief for workers, but I am very happy that we were able to also hear this Bill about setting a new stage for worker involvement, and setting the terms and conditions that dictate their lives. And so, I really appreciate your being here and the work that you and your organization have done to bring this piece of legislation forward so, thank you. And I don't see any hands at this time.

BRENDAN SEXTON: Thank you, Senator, it actually means a lot.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): We'll let you get back to your dental emergency. I hope everything's okay.

BRENDAN SEXTON: Yeah, just a-- they're doing a quick fix on him. Thank you, I appreciate it. I appreciate everyone's standard of doing these long hearings. Thank you so much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Take care. Next up, let's see, is never 77 here? Audrey, I see you're here, Audrey Patterson. 221 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

AUDREY PATTERSON: Yes. Hi, can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can. Go ahead, Audrey.

AUDREY PATTERSON: Okay, good. Good evening. I initially was going to say, "Good afternoon," but it's evening now so, good evening, Senator Kushner, and Representative Porter, and the Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Audrey Patterson, I live in Verta, Connecticut. I’ve been a program aide for Whole Life, for 31 years, and I work a similar position at Network Eight for 11 years. I’m here today to support the Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595. At Whole Life and Network, I work with people with mental and physical disabilities. I’m sure that you are acquainted with my field, we have been doing this work for decades now. And one of the things about my field is that, over the years of this service, it has become apparent, not just to legislation but to DDS, and to our private employers, that the healthcare workers in this field are definitely essential. And that is because the people we care for have grown to depend on us for their daily living.

We provide the type of care that brings quality to their lives and it helps them to develop life skills. So we do understand how essential we are. The unfortunate of this field is that we are not rewarded for what we do. We have been underpaid for a very long time, and now that the pandemic has hit, it has put a new face on the risks that we take every day. This Bill involves risks that could mean behavioral challenges that we are combated with, sickness and diseases that we have to deal with, and we are not allowed to stay home and work during the pandemic, we must come to work when there's hazardous weather, blizzards, and storms, and dangerous driving conditions, we are still required 222 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE to report to work. So we take a risk on a daily basis just to do this work that we do.

And then everyone can't this work, it's a certain type of person that does this type of work, everyone is not willing to do it. And because we have been lured as essential, we believe, as healthcare workers and essential workers, that we could at least expect provisions by our employer, by DDS, by the Legislation, that there will be finances for wages and benefits to support us while we continue to work in this field and provide the care that we do to such a vulnerable population of people. And when the pandemic hit, we were all scattered, we didn't know if we was gonna have proper PPE in our Homes to work with, some of our residents that we work with contracted COVID, and when they got sick, we were expected to report to work and take care of them. Some of us got sick in the process, I am one of those people.

CLERK: Thank you, Ms. Patterson, three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

AUDREY PATTERSON: I was one of those people that got sick. I had to go through that, go back to work, and still do my job and help people get well from COVID. We only got $2 an hour and which ended very shortly, the COVID pay was just for two weeks, if you had to be out that ended very quickly. And now we are being told that there isn't any funding to support us if we get sick again, or had to quarantine again. This is a ongoing situation that is not going to change our situation. That's why we need you to support the Bill 1002 and Bill 6595 that is the only way we can continue our job without falling on the wayside ourselves. We need your support. We need you to stand by us while we do our job.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Audrey. I’m so sorry that you got sick, and I understand how 223 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE serious the situation is. I see that there's a hand up, and I suspect, Representative Winkler is, I’m sure you know this, is your Representative, so I will yield the floor to Representative Winkler.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Hi Audrey, it's nice to see someone from Vernon giving firm, clear testimony on these two important Bills. And I agree with you that people in your situation have been underpaid, for at least 15 years and, hopefully, we'll be able to do something about that with some of the money. We'll see yah. Thank you.

AUDREY PATTERSON: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Audrey. We don't have any other hands. Thank you for being with us this evening. I'm gonna move to the next speaker. I believe that Samantha Ligi, from Department of Corrections. I’m sorry, I don't think Samantha is here. So I’m gonna move to-- I’m getting it all screwed up, I apologize. I'm mixing up the names, it's Sam, Sam Dynowski. I’m sorry, Sam, I was reading 78 and 79 together. It's been a long day.

SAMANTHA DYNOWSKI: I understand. Thank you, Senator Kushner, and Representative Porter, and Members of the Committee for the opportunity to testify today in support of Senate Bill 999. And thank you also to the Committee Clerk, for all you're doing to make this hearing run. I have great appreciation for you all. My name is Samantha Dynowski, I'm state Director of Sierra Club Connecticut. And the Sierra Club is committed to solving the climate crisis with just and equitable solutions that will result in a healthy world for everyone. Scientific understanding of climate change is leading to policy change here in Connecticut and across the United States. Connecticut was one of the first states to adopt a law requiring greenhouse gas emission reduction, known as the Global Warming Solution Act, and in 2019, Governor Lamont issued Executive Order 3, calling for 100% zero-carbon electricity by 2040. 224 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

As a result, we expect more and more cleaner, renewable energy in our state. And we're not alone in this movement, more than one in three Americans now live in a city or state that has passed legislation committing to a 100% clean and renewable future. There's no question that this transition from fossil fuels to clean energy will grow jobs. And that is why Senate Bill 999 is so important, and we applaud the Committee for raising this Bill with the goal of growing good jobs and growing renewable energy here in Connecticut, with prevailing wage for state procurements and other large state-funded projects to promote fair and appropriate value of labor. Project labor agreements for large, renewable energy projects to protect workers by defining wages, benefits, work conditions, and more and, workforce development to prepare for Connecticut workers to the clean energy jobs that are coming. In sum, Sierra Club urges your support for Senate Bill 999, and I thank you for consideration of our testimony.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Sam, it's good to see you. And thank you for the testimony. We have had some others testifying today on this Bill, and I think it's good to see that Sierra Club is on board. I know that you have a long-standing history of wanting to move forward these renewable energy sources, but also to keep good jobs with them. So we appreciate your testimony here tonight. I don't see any hands, so we're letting you off easy without any questions tonight, but thank you for being here.

SAMANTHA DYNOWSKI: Take care, and thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Take care. Next up, let me see. So next up we have, by telephone, Dana Havens.

DANA HAVENS: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Dana, yes, go ahead, we can hear you. 225 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DANA HAVENS: Hi. Good afternoon-- Well, no, good evening sitting Members of the Committee and Members of the public. I’m here to testify in support of the House Bill 6595, 6478, and Senate Bill 1002 because I have firsthand experience of how COVID-19 can affect you long after the commonly believed 10-14 days. My positive COVID test results came back on November 24. I was unable to return to work until February 17, and I’m still experiencing some of the symptoms to this day. I work in a Group Home for the developmentally delayed. Our residents are on the profound scale and have behavioral challenges. Due to both of these issues, getting them to wear a mask is not possible for some, and only tolerated in short bursts for others.

At first the PPE equipment provided was below standard, so below that the face masks are barely more substantial than a facial tissue and below that, the paper towel. This implies I know better, but the quantity is still very limited. The COVID-19 virus eventually struck our facility very hard, three of our staff were infected by it at the same time, and 75% of our residents also became infected. I was the last of the staff to become infected as of to this date. We were, obviously, running short- staffed at the time, so I was so busy I was unable to even check my test results until just before leaving at 9 pm. Now, you should know that I was supposed to be off at 9:30 am that day, but due to everyone being sick and staffing shortages, I was still there.

You might be thinking I must not have had symptoms if I was working every day and so many hours, you'd be partially correct, I didn't have a fever and I was still able to taste and smell however, I did have body aches, exhaustion, and a cough. I didn't think twice about any of these symptoms. I have a mild allergy, so I attributed my cough to that, and body aches and all the rest was just I was working too much. Soon after my diagnosis, that cough 226 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE progressed to the point that I need to use a nebulizer, a steroid inhaler, a rescue inhaler, and oral steroids, all for over a month.

While the breathing issues were going on, I noticed weakness and numbness in my legs, but attributed it to lingering exhaustion and feeling weak. However, as my lungs began to clear I noticed my legs were actually getting worse. Here's one thing many of us don't, and didn't realize about COVID-19, is referred to as a respiratory illness, as in one of these Bills, but it's also has a neurological component, and that is why many people who contact it lose their sense of taste and smell. Some, like myself, suffer other neurological symptoms, mine progressed to the point that I was unable to walk safely, unassisted. I had very little feeling in my legs, from below my knees down to my toes. When I would walk it felt like I was walking with sponges strapped under the bottom my feet while trying to walk on quicksand, and my ankles, well, sometimes they just kind of disappeared.

Due to the symptoms and the nature of my job, I was unable to return to work until February--

CLERK: Ms.Havens, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

DANA HAVENS: Sure. I just like to conclude by saying that, although I did get paid for two weeks of that time, I had to pay the other 10 weeks out of my own self. And I don't think that any frontline worker or essential worker should have to bear that burden. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Dana. I just wanna clarify your last comment, so you were paid for two weeks, 'cause you had accrued time and then you were out another 10 weeks without any payment, is that correct?

227 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DANA HAVENS: Right. Yeah, I had to use any accrued time I had, which of course brought me back probably a little sooner than I should have, just judging by the pain I’m now feeling in my hip, because I’m still not walking normally, so I’m kinda waddling. So it's all my weight on the left and then all my weight on the right. So, yeah, it's been rough.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah. No, but I still don't quite understand and I wanna make sure I get it right.

DANA HAVENS: Okay.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So when you say you use your accrued time for that 10 weeks, what is that-- That was time you had banked?

DANA HAVENS: Yes, that was time I have banked. I’m getting older, so I haven't been-- I don't take vacations or sick time, really, 'cause as you get older things happen, and so I wanted to make sure I had everything saved up in case I had a heart attack or some other long lingering illness. So, I was lucky 'cause I did have most of the time saved.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So you had saved that time from this time your years of service, and not using sick or personal time, or even vacation time on occasions?

DANA HAVENS: Correct.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And so, now you are back to work, if you were sick or need to stay out, would you have any income at all, at this point?

DANA HAVENS: I’m sorry, can you repeat that question?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): If you were to get sick or need to take time off from work for any reason, 228 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE would you have any accrued banked time at this point?

DANA HAVENS: Yes. And then, I do get to earn it now that I’m back, so I'll be earning more time back, and hopefully, I won't get it again. I’m scheduled for my shot the end of this month.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay.

DANA HAVENS: And let's just hope those shots work.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah. And, did you put in for Workers’ Compensation?

DANA HAVENS: Actually, no. I’ve been listening to this since 10 o'clock this morning, and I really wish I had, but I was told by my supervisors, and even my union, that this wasn't covered under Comp, but to wait, because these sorts of Bills are coming out, and then maybe I could apply. So, no, I didn't. And wishing I had, 'cause then a lot of stress would have been taken off.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And when did you contract COVID?

DANA HAVENS: My diagnosis was the day before Thanksgiving. Well, the test results came in the day before Thanksgiving, so November 24th.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So you still have the possibility. You should definitely check in again about filing for Workers’ Comp, of course, you'll have to-- right now there is no presumption, there's no-- you would have the responsibility of showing that there was a probable likelihood that you got it at work.

DANA HAVENS: Oh, yeah, that's for sure, because with the mandation-- I went fast so maybe you didn't hear it. But I was working every day, 14, 16, even more, even though we weren't supposed to, because 229 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE everybody was out sick. So, basically, it was work, home to isolate in my bedroom, so I didn't give it to my family, and then back to work.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So I would encourage you to-- As you've heard today, it is not too late, you should definitely look into filing for Workers’ Compensation, that's part of what this Bill allows for so, I hope you'll take that to heart. Because all that time that you use, part of what Workers' Comp does is it reimburses for the time that was lost, so you don't have to pay that time back.

DANA HAVENS: Right. It would be nice to get it back. And I’m so lucky that, on a time off order, I'm sure that I had it. But there's other people out there, there's other people I worked with who were out for a while and didn't have enough time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, thank you so much for testifying tonight, and I do hope they get over those other lingering symptoms that you have. And thank you for bringing this to our attention. And I don't see any other hand, so I think we're gonna let you go, and be well and be safe.

DANA HAVENS: Thank you, and the same to you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. So next up, let me see if we have number--I think I see, Yousif Harpoon, and that was from our previous page. I don't see your number, Yousif, but have you already testified?

YOUSIF HARPOON: Hey.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yousif, we can hear you now. Do you wanna go ahead and testify? Hello, Yousif. Okay. Yousif, can you hear us now?

YOUSIF HARPOON: Yeah. [Inaudible]

230 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead, and you can testify. Oh, he just put himself on mute. Okay, Devin, you might wanna reach out to him and see if we can figure that one out. Next up is, do we have Ciro Guitierrez with us? Ciro, you are next.

CIRO GUITIERREZ: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Hello. Go ahead.

CIRO GUITIERREZ: Can you hear me right?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can.

CIRO GUITIERREZ: Hi. Good afternoon Members of the Connecticut Legislative Assembly, Labor Committee. My name is Ciro Guitierrez, and I am grateful to you for allowing me to give a testimony in support of the approval of the Bill SB 6595, 2021 regarding COVID-19 and its effects on working conditions. I have been working as a janitor for 11 years at the University of Connecticut, School of Social Work in the city [of Hartford] Throughout the pandemic, we have not stopped our work at UConn in order to keep it clean and disinfected for the fewer students and worker, for during the academic semester half attended daily.

As cleaners we're considered essential workers, this mean that while the building is close due to either a storm or a lot of time of emergency, we must remain working, complying with our regular schedule, even when there is not attendance of students or administrative workers. For this effort we have never received any extra compensation, even though all the workers is a stay at home under the same circumstances. But with COVID-19 it is different, because by nature our work we have to do in person. And then means constant contact with other people, not only our work but on the street, which puts on our health and our life at risk. Not only that but it also endangers the life and the stability of our 231 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE members of our families. I have witnessed how some family and friends were in the cleaning industry have fallen ill and some of them have die, leaving their wife a widow and their children as orphans. If we are essential workers and our work is necessary and imperative, I believe that our sacrifice should be compensated with an extra payment in case when contracted or temporary disability.

We cannot be in the hands of the goodwill of entrepreneurs, we must be protected by compensatory like legislation for our effort sacrifice. Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Thank you, Ciro. Thank you for your testimony, and thank you for your work. I don't see any hands at this time, so thank you for being-- Oh, I see Robin is looking. Go ahead, Rep Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): I’m sorry, Madam Chair. I was just saying hi to Ciro.

CIRO GUITIERREZ: Hi, Robin.

REP. PORTER (94TH): (foreign language)

CIRO GUITIERREZ: (foreign language)

REP. PORTER (94TH): All right.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you very much, Ciro.

CIRO GUITIERREZ: You're welcome.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for being with us tonight. Next, we are going to go to-- I believe next is number 82, Chris DeFrancesco

CHRIS DEFRANCESCO: Hi, thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you.

232 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

CHRIS DEFRANCESCO: You can hear me okay?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes we can, go ahead.

CHRIS DEFRANCESCO: Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Chris DeFrancesco and I’ve been a communication specialist at UConn Health for nearly 14years. I’m also the elected Vice President for Communication at University Health Professionals Local 3837, and I’m here to speak in favor of HB Number 6595, an act concerning labor matters related to COVID-19, personal protective equipment, and other staffing issues. This Bill provides long-overdue benefits to those who've been lauded as heroes over the last year. Imagine being a nurse in the intensive care unit, reporting to work every day during a pandemic, exposed to a highly contagious infectious disease, working extra hours with the burden of uncertainty of the health of yourself, your co-workers, your patients, your family. Yet despite painstaking precautions, you end up with a disease you've been working to save others from, and now for the purpose of worker's compensation, you have to provide proof that you were infected on the job.

Now imagine all those things you put on the line to serve your patients, your community, the greater good to help shoulder the yoke weighing down your co-workers, because there are only so many of you who are qualified to do this life-saving work. Knowing any night you risk bringing home a potentially fatal illness to your family. If hazard pay isn't appropriate here, when is it? What qualifies me to speak about this? I’m part of the group at UConn Health that tells the stories of these healthcare workers, not only the clinical providers, by the way, but also the support staff who may not deliver health care directly, but make it possible for the providers to do so.

One story that comes to mind is that of nurse, Maria Budzinski, assigned to one of the COVID floors of UConn John Dempsey Hospital last spring, caring for 233 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

COVID-19 patients, then after several weeks, becoming a COVID-19 patient herself. Her illness was severe and breathing was difficult. Now, Maria did eventually recover, and she is convinced it was the convalescent plasma treatment she received that saved her life, so much so that she decided that she would be a plasma donor herself. What also qualifies me to speak on this is, as a union officer, I represent nurses like Maria and her peers. You've heard from some other members of my local UHP today, we fight for their rights as they face the challenges of the pandemic that threaten their livelihood and their lives.

And it's our belief that workers like Maria, and Dana Havens, and Ciro Guitierrez, from a few minutes ago are deserving of hazard pay, even if their own employers disagree. But the beauty of this Bill is it recognizes they most certainly are deserving of it, even if their employers don't see it the same way. And most importantly, it recognizes as much for health care workers across the state, not just my members, this goes beyond UConn Health employees or union contracts. It's really bigger than all of us, and it's what's right. Thankfully, the federal funding to power this ambitious legislation is coming through, and now you have the power to make it right, not just for UConn Health workers, but for healthcare workers throughout Connecticut. Thank you for your time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much for sharing your experience and the experience of the other people at UConn Health. So, I’m looking to see if there are other hands here. I don't see any more questions for you, we've had a number of people testify. But I know that the work you're doing is really important, and I think you put it in perspective when you talked about the importance of recognizing if we don't do hazard pay or pandemic pay now, when would you ever consider doing it, based on what's happened and the work that you've 234 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE done. So, thank you so much for everything you shared with us this evening.

CHRIS DEFRANCESCO: Thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay. Next up, we are gonna go to Yousif Harpoon. And I know, Yousif, we were having trouble hearing you, hopefully, you can hear me now, and you can unmute yourself. Yousif, we're gonna give you one more shot at this. If you can unmute yourself, we're ready to hear your testimony, if not, we will move you to the attendee. Okay, I know we're probably having some technical difficulties, we gave it our best shot. We have heard from a number of drivers, so hopefully, their stories have touched on the things you wanted to share with us as well. So, now we are gonna move to, I believe it's number-- Well, I see number 84, I saw you a minute ago. Are you here Renee? Yes. Go ahead, Renee.

RENEE HAMEL: Hi. Thanks, I appreciate being here with you all tonight. Good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, and Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Renee Hamel, I live in West Hartford. I’m a board member of the Connecticut Roundtable on Climate and Jobs, and I work as field representative for AFSCME Council 4, our union representing 30,000 public and private employee members. And our union is in support of SB 999. This Bill addresses the climate crisis by investing in clean, renewable energy projects that ensure that the communities that are most vulnerable to climate change are part of the solution. And I think this Bill is really important because it really touches on a lot of equity issues. As we've seen from the COVID-19 pandemic, working-class families is predominantly Black and Brown communities. They're gonna be the ones that are gonna face the most severe consequences of climate change.

235 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

50% of our members are women and people of color, most of whom live in our largest cities, where the impacts of climate change will be greater. My brothers, Dave Roche and Joe Toner, and John Harrity shared about the job aspects of it, but other equity aspects are the project labor agreements. My former high school in Meriden, that high school was rebuilt with a project labor agreement, and it's really amazing to see when students next door from the Technical High School are helping to rebuild the school, along with local residents, and under representative groups that can be a part of building this new school. And the wages earned by the workers are going right back into the local economy.

Another issue that climate change is going to impact are our local state and federal budgets. The more extreme weather events that are tied to climate change that are happening, the more that it's gonna cost our local and state governments. This is gonna have a dramatic impact on the jobs and the services that our members provide. And we've already seen the economic damage that's happened from the COVID-19 pandemic. So it's really important that we act now before the costs become greater. Climate change is already affecting our communities’ livelihoods in the environment, so the need has never been more urgent. It's important for us to have a just transition for workers, minimize the harm to communities that have been impacted by climate change and economic and racial inequality, and to boost job and economic growth in Connecticut, and do so equitably. And as my brother, John Harrity shared, this is a really great Bill to have communities be a part of ownership in these projects for renewable energy, and have a voice, and be a part of it, of what's happening to their neighborhoods. So SB 999 does all of this, and I urge you to vote in favor of SB 99.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much, Renee, it's good to see you. We missed you out here in western Connecticut, though. 236 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

RENEE HAMEL: I miss you all, too.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for testifying on this Bill. We've had some great testimony over the day about SB 999. So, I don't see any questions. I think when you testify later in the day, there are fewer and fewer questions.

RENEE HAMEL: Lucky me.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for being with us and thank you for showing support for the Bill.

RENEE HAMEL: Thank you all.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Take care. Next up, I see, Kim Ackerman, number 87.

KIM ACKERMAN: Good evening, Senator Kushner and, Representative Porter, and the Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. I thank you for allowing me to testify this evening. My name is Kim Ackerman and I live in Canton, Connecticut. I am a direct-support staff member at Whole Life and have been in healthcare for over 25 years. I come before you today in support of SB 1002 and HB 6595. I have been working at the Mullen Hill Whole Life location for three years, but I have worked in Group Homes for the last eight years. In my role as a direct support staff, I work very closely with highly behavioral autistic individuals. Some of these individuals don't have families that visit that often, so we as staff become their families. Being able to build these relationships with our individuals is one of the most fulfilling parts of my job.

With that said, my job is also incredibly challenging, not everyone could do this job. Working with highly behavioral autistic individuals can sometimes be very difficult. On top of that my co- 237 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE workers and I deal with low staffing, low wages, and long hours. This was before the pandemic. The pandemic amplified existing problems while creating new ones. We didn't have PPE for a while, even now, we often have to borrow PPE from our other Group Homes because our managers don't provide an adequate supply of masks and gloves. In addition, some of us have latex allergies but have to ask for non-latex gloves to be ordered, because otherwise, they won't do so. I buy and bring my own non-latex gloves to work and do not get reimbursed for it.

I tested positive for COVID-19 on Christmas Eve. I believe I contracted COVID from someone at work, because I don't go anywhere else except from work to home. We were given 80 hours of COVID leave to cover for the two weeks that I was out of work. If we go over the 80 hours, we are forced to use up our three days of personal time and whatever sick and vacation time that we have accrued. If we are sick any longer than that, or if we get sick again, we have to get permission from management to take any further time off. It's not certain to be granted, if you are not given permission, you have to come to work even if you're sick, or you will get written up. If you're lucky enough, you are able to be granted extra time off. It will be unpaid if you don't have the hours accrued. We are not given another 80 hours if we contract COVID again.

The company stated that as of March 31, there is no more COVID pay. If anyone gets COVID after March 31st, they will have to use their personal second vacation time to fall back on. This places newer employees in a tough position, since they have not been employed long enough to have earned any sick, or vacation time, or even personal time. This is very unfair, I don't think it's right for them--

CLERK: Thank you, Ms. Ackerman, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

238 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

KIM ACKERMAN: I don't think that it's fair or right to stop the COVID leave after March. We're called heroes and essential workers, we take care of other people, yet so little regard is given for our own health and wellbeing, we deserve better. Please pass SB 1002 and HB 6595. Thank you for your time and for allowing me to testify this evening.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Kim. The detail that you provided to inform us about your situation is really helpful. We have heard stories like yours but we haven't had testimony quite as precisely as yours, as you gave just now. And it really is helpful to us to understand why these Bills are important to really protect people like you who are taking care of us. So, thank you so much. I do see a hand here, Representative Arora.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Kimberly, for-- Ms. Ackerman, for your testimony. Quick question, in the situation you describe, once the 80 hours has been exhausted, has anybody at work or at the Human Resources suggested that the PEUA program allows for special benefits for as many weeks as you would be out for COVID, for contracting COVID, and having sickness? Have you been informed of that, and has anybody availed of that?

KIM ACKERMAN: No. Actually, my employer tried to make me come back to work early before my COVID time was up, even though I had a doctor's note.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Yeah. I specifically would like you to know that there is a program which is done. I know it's not a state program, it's a federal program, that if you have-- This is a special, this is not like a normal unemployment program, this is a special program that if you have COVID if at work and cannot go to work for COVID, so you're not available to work because of COVID, it does not matter how many weeks it is, it's up to 50 weeks, you can actually collect up to-- it ends up being 239 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the maximum right now is $950 a week. And I know the merits of this law we are discussing, but I just wanna point that out, that for any of your colleagues who have that, they should avail of that because that's a current law which is available to them and recently it has been extended all the way up to September.

So that is available to you, I do, really would like you to explore and not let a law which is already on the books not be put to use or not be providing the advantage to those who are-- it is meant for. That's just my kind of thoughts for you. I don't have any questions. Thank you very much for testifying.

KIM ACKERMAN: Thank you very much for that viable information.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Kim. I don't see any other hand at this time. So, I thank you for your testimony tonight, it's very important that people hear. So, if you can just hold on one second. I apologize, give me one second, I’m having a little technical problem here. I’m sorry. Thank you for indulging me there for a moment. And I believe we can move on to our next person here, Queenie Abad, number 88.

QUEENIE ABAD: Okay, am I unmuted?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can hear you now.

DR. ABAD: Okay. Wonderful. Thank you so much. Good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, and other Members of the Committee. My name is Dr. Queenie Abad, and I am in support of HB 6478, an act concerning Workers’ Compensation COVID-19 presumption. I’m a board-certified internal medicine physician, and my specialty is in Occupational Environmental Medicine. The clinic that I practice in specializes in determining work-relatedness for 240 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE on-the-job injuries, illnesses, and exposures that lead to negative health outcomes. And during this COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen patients in our clinic who are recovering from COVID-19 that were most likely from work. Thankfully, this is only a small subset of the population of patients who end up becoming long-haulers from COVID-19, and as we all know, individuals who have persistent chronic respiratory symptoms, persistent fatigue, who have not been able to return to their baseline functioning status.

And basically, my job boils down to hearing workers' stories, so I'll tell you a couple of the stories that I’ve heard in clinic. I’ve heard the story of a physical therapist who was working during the pandemic, who was doing home physical therapy visits with patients who were recently discharged from the hospital. This physical therapist had close prolong contact with patients, only using a surgical mask, and one of the patients that he took care of was diagnosed with COVID-19 after the fact. The physical therapist spent more than 15 minutes, close contact with this individual. Several days later ended up becoming ill himself from COVID-19, ended up using, as own paid time off for his isolation period. Because he had persistent symptoms, he had to use his sick leave and ran out of that. He's been unable to return to work, it's been about six weeks already. No one told him about benefits that he could access or that he could apply for workers compensation or that he could file a first report of injury.

I'll tell you another story of a Corrections officer who also had prolonged close contact with an incarcerated individual while they were transferring them to another facility. The incarcerated individual was later found to be COVID positive, and the corrections officer had pre-existing asthma. So as you can imagine, she has contracted COVID herself and ended up getting a pretty severe outcome. This Corrections officer has also not been able to return 241 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE to work, and it's been two months already. And so the story that we've been hearing in our clinic is the same, folks who have been essential workers, who've been healthcare heroes, who had to use their own paid time off to self-isolate or quarantine, who had to use their own sick time, and unclear if they were-- will ever return to their baseline and unclear if they will be able to return to the job that they were doing prior to their illness.

The other thing that is in common with a lot of the cases that we have heard their stories is this issue of workers not knowing what to do next after they've not been able to return to work and after they've not recovered from the symptoms. We've heard stories of supervisors telling these workers, "Don't apply for Workers' Comp," or not even telling them where to go, how to talk to HR. And I'll tell you, I'm still in clinic right now, we just had to walk a worker through the Connecticut Workers' Compensation website. I had to go and find this first report of injury, send it to her myself. And this is really the job-- I don't mind doing it, but this should be the job of the supervisors and the managers at the workplaces. So, we know that this guidance is not happening. And so, I hope that you will-- I'm here to support this, HB 6478, and thank you for supporting it. I'm happy to take any questions or comments.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you so much for the work you're doing at the clinic. And I just heard you testified that you have to walk workers through the process of applying for Workers' Comp, and I know that can be quite difficult for them, so I appreciate that. Are you finding that in helping them get through that process, do you feel like once you get them started, they're on the road to figuring out how they can get compensated or get the help they need?

DR. ABAD: So, not always. So, some workplaces have their own ways to report injuries or illnesses. And so, the patient that we saw, asked help from her manager about how to navigate the website. Basically 242 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE was told, "Everyone else can figure it out, so why can't you?" So what we had to do is I had to log on and also share a zoom screen with her and walk her through, and even I got stuck navigating the website of this employers' website. So, the next thing that I had to do was go to the Connecticut Workers' Compensation website with her and then also look for that packet. I also was able to find the first report of injury that workers have to fill out and send to Workers' Compensation, and was able to email that to her. And so as you can imagine, that takes time, I'm not able to do it in the amount of time that I have for patients that I'm allotted, so I ended up having to spend after-hours time doing it. And I don't mind that, I just wish that these workers had the support from their HR, from their supervisors, from their managers. And just from experience from other work-related injuries and illnesses.

More often than not, the first application for Workers’ Comp is often denied. Some people will give up. We tell people, "Apply for a second time or third time," we write a summary letter of support if we believe that it is work-related, and we are on a more probable than not basis. So, we only have to be 51%. Sure. But in many of these cases that I've heard, they're all essential workers, they all had inadequate PPE, they all had close prolong contact with a known COVID positive individual, and so for us, these cases are clear cut. There are other cases, unfortunately, especially in March and April, where someone was severely ill, testing was not available and they may never know what that illness was that they had. But, if they were an essential worker during a period of time where there were infections and there was a known COVID positive individual, it's more probable than not that they got COVID, if it was temporarily related to when they had close contact with that known COVID positive individual. So even for these cases, I would be comfortable to say that it may be work- related.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Thank you for that clarification. And I see that Senator-- I mean Representative Arora has his hand up, but before I moved to him, I know he mentioned to our previous speaker, and you may have heard this that PUA is 243 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE available for people who get sick at work, and I wondered if you had been advising-- this may be out of your expertise, your area, but I wondered if you had been aware of this, and if you had advised any of these folks to go file for unemployment.

DR. ABAD: That's not my area of expertise, but I will definitely look into it. If that's another way that these patients can get access to benefits that they need, that's something that we would be able to do and guide them if we had the information of how to do that. And that's the issue that I'm raising, is that there should be individuals who are-- that people can contact at work, HR, their supervisor, their manager, who could walk them through what happens here. So what I've also been doing is been suggesting to patients, "Get in contact with your HR individual who may have more knowledge on all the benefits that may be available to you."

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Thank you so much. And I'm asking you that, I think you can look into it, although I will say that, my understanding of PUA is that it's more complicated than that, and that an individual-- it's difficult to qualify for PUA and you must first be laid off from your job in order to qualify for that. That is the information I've been told, but I know Representative Arora has his hand up and he'll have an opportunity to share with us his knowledge on unemployment insurance. So go ahead, Representative Arora.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Madam Chair. Once again, I'll keep it short and I'll provide-- you can look it up and I'll provide you my cell as well. I'm working extensively with constituents here just force it for various situations, because the law which was passed was very complex. It had many angles, part of it was for unemployment. It is all administered through Department of Labor and through an unemployment program, but the PUA has got one category, specific category which deals with people who have actually been-- who have gotten infected with COVID-19, no cause needed, but they have symptoms, and you have to have symptoms or diagnosed. And as long as one of those things is satisfied and they cannot go to work, so they're not getting paid at work, then they're eligible for PUA, which is basically equaling to, as I said right now, 244 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the maximum is $950 a week, earlier in last year, it was traveling at $1250 a week.

And it's also a retrospective. So if, for example, somebody got two weeks ago or four weeks ago, they didn't apply then, and DOL right now, and we were having this discussion only in the last hearing, has been quite caught up with everything, it takes more or less a week or less than that, especially if you have a diagnosis which is clear that you got--you had the COVID. So, please do that specific--and then there is a big part of PUA which is a traditional unemployment program for those who are gig workers or who are independent consultants. So most of the time when people think about PUA they think about that part of PUA and not about this eligibility because of COVID. So please do take advantage of that program.

As I said, the government is putting significant resources, whether it's state or federal. This is a federal program but administered through the state, we administer it, the DOL administers it, so please do take advantage of it. Please reach out to me separately, I'll give you my cell phone, and we can- - we will help anyone, I've helped hundreds and many, many people in my constituency, but I'm available to help anyone, that's a big purpose of service which we have to do so. So thank you again, and thank you, Madam Chair, for allowing me to say this.

DR. ABAD: Thank you, and I will reach out to you to get that information. My other comment was about short-term disability. This individual that I just helped, basically applied for short-term disability and showed me her denial letter on zoom. And so, this person tried different avenues to access different benefits and just kept getting turned away, and so I'm hoping for transparency, and I'm hoping for guidance for workers, I'm hoping for an easy process, I'm hoping for awareness that these programs exist, and I'm also hoping for transparency in data to see how many claims are being filed, how many are being denied, adjudicated, hearings that are being done, because that information has been very difficult to get.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes. Well did, through the 245 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Executive Order there were some requirements for reporting, but I think you may have heard Commissioner Morelli this morning testify about the difficulty on even the reporting side of it because the way the process works. , They still don't know how many cases that have been filed or are actually being litigated, because there's sort of an automatic process where your claim is denied in order for the employer to preserve their right to contest it if it's a bigger problem than they anticipated, for instance, long-term repercussions from the illness. So, we agree with you, the data is important and it's still very, very hard to get. But I don't see any other hands at this time, but I really appreciate, not just your willingness to testify tonight, but all the work that you're doing and the way you're pursuing it in such an aggressive way to try and help these folks get assistance. It's amazing work that you're doing. So thank you so much.

DR. ABAD: Thank you. And thank you for hearing testimonies this late in the evening.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah. Okay, thank you. Before I call the next witness, I do wanna clarify that Representative Arora I understand that you have had some-- sounds like some experience with constituents, but I do wanna question the public about the PUA program, my information from the Department of Labor that it's not quite that easy, that in fact, you have to either be laid off or show reduced employment as a result of COVID and you must be denied regular state unemployment, in these instances, there's a number of qualifying conditions that you have to meet in order to qualify for the PUA program. I don't think it's as readily available to workers who contract COVID at work as may have been suggested.

I just want everyone to be aware of that before they think they can go file an unemployment claim with the DOL, and that's based on information I have received this evening from DOL. So we wanna be a little careful on-- and I have to say, in the work that we've been doing over the last many months, with people about trying to fix this Workers' Compensation System, I think if there was an easy fix to get people federal dollars that were so 246 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE readily available, we probably wouldn't consider that. I do also wanna, though, mention that I think folks are aware of this, but we need to be cognizant of the fact that these are long-term-- these have a potential of turning into long-term illnesses, and that in addition to wage replacement, workers are often hit with really big medical bills, and so there's a lot to this that we're trying to unpack with this Workers' Compensation presumption. So, I just sort of wanted to set the stage here and make sure that folks aren't led to believe this is something easily they could do instead of applying for Workers’ Compensation. So I will move to our next speaker, and I'm just checking my list here, give me a minute. I think we have a number 89, Latiera Massey. Are you here with us, Latiera? Did I say that correctly? I see that you're here, can you unmute? Latiera, did I say that correctly? You need to unmute. We can see you now but we can't hear you.

LATIERA MASSEY: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah, go ahead.

LATIERA MASSEY: Hello. Hi, how are you?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Doing well, go ahead.

LATIERA MASSEY: Hi, my name Latiera Massey. Good evening, I'm a member of the Labor Committee, my name is Latiera Massey, I'm a member of the 32BJ. Can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes, we can. Go ahead.

LATIERA MASSEY: Can you hear me?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes.

LATIERA MASSEY: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead, we can hear you.

LATIERA MASSEY: Hello.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Go ahead.

LATIERA MASSEY: Oh, okay. I'm a member of the 32 [audio glitch]. Okay, I'm a member of the 32BJ 247 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

[audio glitch] SEIU and I have been an employee of TIM since 2015. I first started as a head teacher and a few months later I became a home visitor there. I have been in the early childhood education field for 24 consecutive years, and have always excelled at caring for the families and children I serve. I like to speak to you today about the essential work I perform, and why I think the labor Bill related to the COVID-19 should have your support.

Home visitors were out only first week down after the shutdown. [audio glitch] working during the shutdown by calling families [[audio glitch] I provided families support by making sure [audio glitch] I actively listened to families who were struggling with adjusting to the pandemic and provided valuable information to help ease their minds and their anxiety.

I kept in touch with the community outreach program to confirm that the information being shared with the families at that time were accurate and up to date, so that [audio glitch] working days and hours with the COVID restrictions. I, overall, provided a sense of assurance that the families are supported and valued by the program and myself, and we are all in the pandemic together working as a team. During this time, I had two Coronavirus exposures, one in April and another one in November, and was required to quarantine for 14 days both times. I was paid-- The second quarantine utilizing my sick time, personal time, and vacation time.

I sent an email requesting that I do not be paid at all if they had to use my PTO time because of the Coronavirus, and HR informed me that I did not have enough time to cover the second quarantine, and I was verbally told that it was against TIM policy to not be paid if I had PTO time to be used. As workers with preschool children and families, we should be recognized for the sacrifices we perform and have the hazard paid included in the Bill. Furthermore, I believe the hazards of the job should also allow us to be paid without sacrificing our PTO time. Thank you this afternoon for your attention to this matter and allowing me to share my [audio glitch]

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Unfortunately, 248 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE your connection was not great throughout the whole time, but I think we got the gist of what you were saying. And I appreciate you being here tonight to testify, thank you so much. Thank you. So we will go on to the next speaker on the list, that is, Rick Hart. Hi Rick, how are you?

RICK HART: Good Senator, how are you?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Doing well.

RICK HART: Good. Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Ranking Member Arora, Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, my name is Rick Hart, I represent the Uniformed Professional Firefighters Association in Connecticut, which is comprised of 4000 career firefighters in the state of Connecticut, and I'm here to testify in support of House Bill 6478. Just a year ago, our world was turned upside down. Governor shut down the state, all of non-essential employees were forced to stay at home except firefighters, police officers, transit workers, EMS workers, healthcare workers, all still had to go to work. Whenever I went to work in the morning, it was amazing that I-84 I had the whole highway to myself, there was no one, it was a ghost town.

We didn't have the ability to work from home, it's hard to put a fire out when you're at home in the firehouse. On a daily basis, firefighters across the state of Connecticut responded to countless emergency medical calls that required dressing out and PPE that we are not accustomed to, hospital gowns, masks, face shields, in the event that we encountered a patient with COVID. But at the very beginning, there was no PPE, there was no directive, response parameters were vague at best, as was everyone else, we were evolving in our response to the pandemic. But as usual, patient care in the state of Connecticut was exemplary, as usual. And I find it ironic that all the testimony in opposition that we heard today were from people that work from home. In my testimony, I said I gave an invitation to any of those people offering opposition testimony to go to their fire department, ride with them, or their police department, take a walk through an ER and ICU, then you can truly see what we are going through in the past year and into the future, 249 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE because no one knows exactly when this is gonna end and how it's gonna end.

One of the questions that every emergency public safety worker asked when they went home was, "Am I infected, and if so, am I gonna give it to my family?" Many of my colleagues quarantined in hotels, in their basements just so they wouldn't give them-- pass this on to their families. Now the International Association of Firefighters broke down the American Rescue and Recovery Act that President Biden signed today. One of the things it establishes is COVID-19 presumptive, Workers’ Compensation for federal firefighters. So, if the federal government can do it, and federal firefighters are some of the lowest-paid, and have the least benefits of all firefighters in the United States and Canada. So if they can get it, why can't we? And it also provides $195.3 Billion to state and $130.2 Billion to cities and counties to address shortfalls and budgets for fire departments and other governmental services and premium pay for essential workers. That's important, the money's coming.

I can see how people will say, "Well, we're not gonna give it to--we're gonna sock that away, put it in a rainy day fund, put it elsewhere, " but that's money that's to go to the workers that have been suffering for the last year in responding to treating our patients, treating family members during this pandemic. And so as an organization on we ask that the Committee move this 6478 forward, and I'll be happy to take any questions.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Rick. I really appreciate your testimony here tonight, and all you have done on behalf of the firefighters, and the other first responders, and also your recognition that all these workers need it. So, we are pleased to hear that-- we've been in the hearing all day, so we haven't had a chance to even look at any of the social media or video, but it is good to know that President Biden signed that Bill into federal law and that it does provide some-- the presumption for firefighters and hopefully, we'll be able to do something similarly here in Connecticut. So thank you so much for your testimony today, and for all the work you do. 250 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

RICK HART: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Robyn is waving to you.

RICK HART: Yes, I see her.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, next up, we have, Jesse Martin. Jesse, thank you for being with us, go ahead.

JESSE MARTIN: Thank you. My name is Jesse Martin, I'm a Vice President with District 1199 New England. We represent 26,000 healthcare workers, both in public and private health care settings, and of those 26,000, 15,000 are long-term care workers, group home workers, homecare workers, and nursing home workers. And I'm here to talk about nursing home workers. I work, specifically, on behalf of over 35% of all the nursing home workers here in the state of Connecticut. And we know that nursing homes have suffered tremendously during this pandemic, we have lost over 17 members of 1199, who've given their lives after contracting COVID on the job in our long-term care divisions. And these three Bills that we are in support of, SBS 1002, HB 6595, and HB 64761. 1, establish the necessary protocols that the state must take on to ensure that personal protective gear is available to nursing home workers. Far too many times during this pandemic I've received phone calls of frontline healthcare workers and nursing homes working in trash bags, running out of medical gloves, not having face shields. And time and time again, The Department of Public Health has not protected those individuals by ensuring that they got the protective gear they needed from their employers.

Furthermore, subcontracted employees in nursing homes have regularly been denied protective gear by the nursing homes themselves. And this Bill would ensure that the state be the provider of that protective gear as a last resort. Those are workers in dietary, housekeeping, and laundry services that are so vital in keeping this virus under control in nursing homes. Furthermore, I'd like to say that many of our members are paid poverty-level wages in nursing homes, and when they get sick with COVID, 251 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE which many of them have, thousands of our members in nursing home workers in the state have gotten sick, they're left with no income. And it's not just the income that they lose, it's the medical bills.

We have several members who are not covered by the Emergency Order by the Governor who contracted COVID much later in 2020, and they have over $1 million worth of medical bills. Some of them have even lost their family members to this virus that they brought home. And I know that there's been ongoing discussion about unemployment benefits, but these employers should pay their fair share of exposing their workforce to this pandemic and to this virus. And in particular, there's a death benefit under workman's compensation. Some of the individuals that we are represented by our union do not qualify, and their claims have been denied post losing their life, and there're families who receive no compensation whatsoever. That, to me, is a travesty. Their families deserve to be compensated fairly for the loss of their loved one, their mother, or their father.

Hazard pay was a very a difficult issue in nursing homes, and so was sick time. Nursing home workers were written out of the Federal Bill that provided 80 hours, worth of sick time, many of our members are still indentured to their employers, because their employers allow them to go negative--

CLERK: Excuse me, Mr. Martin, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

JESSE MARTIN: Thank you. Many workers have been indentured to their employers in the nursing home industry because they weren't given access to paid sick time while they got sick. Furthermore, thousands more who contracted the virus after June 20th have been denied Workman's compensation by their employers. Again, 1199 is in support of these Bills. Thank you,

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): [audio glitch]

JESSE MARTIN: I'm sorry, I didn't make that out. That's why I turned off my video so that I can try to hear better. 252 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): You know what? I forget when I sit back sometimes people can't hear me so well, and I should know after so many people this stuff. But my question to you is, I wondered if any of your members did receive that-- Were kind of given benefit.

JESSE MARTIN: Some have. But really, it's still quite difficult. Some nursing homes have even tried to deny Workman's Compensation during this time by forcing workers to come back to work while they're still medically unable to come back. The reason being for that is because of this severe staffing crisis in nursing homes. And it's really a double- edged sword in the sense that nursing home employers are using the denial of Workman's Compensation and unemployment benefits to force workers to come back to work to alleviate the massive staffing crisis that's ongoing in these facilities. And what's even more disturbing is that, the guidance given by the Department of Public Health and the Center for Disease Control for nursing homes allows nursing home employers to bring actively sick COVID positive workers back into nursing homes f there is a staffing crisis. It is tremendously terrible to think that you could be actively shedding this virus, and under the federal and state guidelines be required to come back to work within that 10 day period, even if you're non-symptomatic, because the nursing home is run out of other workers. And so, the denial of these two benefits has really been a way that this industry has tried to maintain their staffing levels, and to the detriment of our membership, and nursing home workers around the state.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for that response. And I just have one more question, and then I see another hand up, and I'll call on Representative Porter in a minute. But I wanted to ask you, I mistakenly earlier this evening or earlier today was asking the AFP about Mathematica reporting. Remembered afterwards there is this one that was designated for long-term care facilities and that [Inaudible]

JESSE MARTIN: Yes, we did participate, both in the Mathematica report, much later in the Mathematica 253 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE report process. And we also did participate, very heavily, directly with some of our CNA Members. There was a CNA member who worked in the Trumbull area who sat on the long-term care working group subcommittee on staffing, and yeah, we did participate in those.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And, so I know one of the things that Representative Porter and I were intending to do with this Bill, particularly, [Inaudible] we tried to get that right in this Bill. Do you feel like [Inaudible]?

JESSE MARTIN: Absolutely. Establishing the stockpile and establishing that the state has this responsibility to the resident. At this point, 90% of residents in nursing homes are Medicaid recipients, which means that the state is providing the payment of their health care, and the state has the responsibility to this workforce, and to those residents, that their staff is protected, no matter what the for-profit company wants to do. And I think this Bill absolutely establishes the appropriate level of accountability and the appropriate level of stockpiling that is necessary to forego future crises.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thanks. That was our goal here, so I appreciate your response of that. I see Representative Winkler has his hand up. Representative Winkler. And Jesse, you can turn your camera back on, I think it was me. [Inaudible]

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you. So, all of these homes are run by for-profit companies, maybe not the Little Sisters of the Poor, but most of--

JESSE MARTIN: The majority of them, yeah.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): So, the Department of Public Health when we set it up, it was like advice, guidelines, statistics, research. We never put them in charge of hardware, masks or anything like that. That was the Office of Emergency Management. So, if 254 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE we want to take on that responsibility in the future, which is fine with me, do we-- do you believe that in the Office of Emergency Management won't let off the hook because it was a rubric forever. So, worry about protective equipment, if you need it, the federal government has a stockpile. Well, nobody will ever be out again. But it was believed at the time. So, do you want the state of Connecticut itself to have a stockpile out at the various buildings around the state to be a stockpile, or do you want us to also order the convalescent homes themselves for the long-term care facilities to have their own stuff?

JESSE MARTIN: I think both. Why should we ever be in the situation we were in this last spring, a year ago? There was a member, her name is Lia Hoffman, she worked at Madison House in Madison, Connecticut, I talked with her family, she died in January after contracting the virus in April. In April, she was caring for 30 residents on day shift, and given one medical gal to share with a co-worker, one medical gown. And she eventually lost her life, and many other residents lost their lives. I think it's worth paying and having the redundancies of requiring the nursing home to have a stockpile and any other statewide stockpiles because I just don't-- I see a value in saving our lives in our most vulnerable citizens. I think it's dollar for dollar, it's money well spent to save a life.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): And through the Chair, if we are gonna take over this responsibility, do you think it should be the Office of Emergency Management or the Department of Public Health? Since it's a new responsibility, we can assign it as we wish, have any personal preference?

JESSE MARTIN: I don't. We just need it, whoever has it, great. I really don't have an opinion on that one.

255 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. WINKLER (56TH): And you wouldn't trust that the private sector has learned its lesson.

JESSE MARTIN: No.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): That was a softball question there. Is good you're asking about too. Okay, thank you. Representative Porter, I see your hand up.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Madam Chair. Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Martin. A couple of clarity questions on things you mentioned, you said the nursing homes, was it 90% of the residents are Medicaid recipients?

JESSE MARTIN: Yeah, we represent some facilities, like Rico Care of New Haven, where over 95% of the residents are Medicaid recipients. What's interesting is that, because of the COVID outbreak, the percentage of Medicaid residents in nursing homes has increased. Before COVID, statewide average was hovering around 80%, but because of those Medicare patients, the people who come to nursing homes for short-term rehabilitation aren't going to nursing homes because they don't wanna expose themselves to COVID or have limited their elective procedures that would end them in a nursing home for short-term rehab. The number of overall residents in the state population has really blossomed to be much greater portion of Medicaid patients.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you. And Lia Hoffman, where was she working?

JESSE MARTIN: She was working at Madison House in Madison, Connecticut, and she worked for Genesis, the largest nursing home for-profit company in the United States, and they operate 15 facilities here in the state of Connecticut.

256 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. PORTER (94TH): I'm very familiar with Genesis, my sister worked for them. Thank you.

JESSE MARTIN: No problem.

REP. PORTER (94TH): And thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Thank you, Jesse. I do see another hand, Rep. Arora.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Mr. Martin. I have been a very strong advocate and I've written several op-eds on the PPE scarcity at that period of time, and I'm so sorry to hear about but you just described, it's heartbreaking that we didn't act faster. I have two questions. One short question for you really, which is that, when you talk about PPE in the stockpiles, most stockpiles are always built at state or federal level, and I think the state level makes sense. Do you think that the rules of access should be decided by the industry, by the state? Who do you think should be involved? And I think it's following up to Rep Winkler's question. And who decides on the size? Because these are very important questions. And what all do we keep?

JESSE MARTIN: Look, I think the state should decide or you all, good Representatives and Senators should decide on who has access to that stockpile. I don't think we should leave that to for-profit institutions that provide care in the state of Connecticut and or have self-interest in how they decide who gets PPE and who doesn't. The size, more is better. Again, my daily life for the last year has received nursing home calls from our membership through the most terrific and the most unimaginable crisis that they've ever seen in their lives. And I know the membership of District 1199 wants to make sure that we can make sure that this never, ever happens again.

257 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. ARORA (151ST): No, thank you, Mr. Martin. I 100% I'm with you. I think the stockpile issue, there are other parts of the law, which from hospital perspective, I think it's not the best idea to keep these stockpiles either from a financial perspective or either from a viability perspective at the local hospital or nursing home level. I think centralize stockpiles make a lot of sense. Now, can you also tell to the hoarding issue? Did you see that the more larger institutions were hoarding at that time, or let me soften the word, we're really being risk-averse and keeping materials that time and the smaller institutions and the smaller firms just could not-- Did you see that as well? Could you speak a little bit to it?

JESSE MARTIN: So, experiences of hoarding or rationing of PPE was something that was very commonplace in nursing homes. I know I received phone calls of workers who are coming on shift and given one mask to wear for three months, where they had supply closets that were full of masks, and full of other materials. And it wasn't until the Department of Public Health and the National Guard started to enter nursing homes in the month of June, two and a half, three months after the pandemic started in the state that we started to see accountability on the shop floor, accountability on the nursing care units for people to get access to those materials.

I think it's very clear in the Mathematica report that in the state's preparation, what little there was for COVID was all centered on hospitals and none of it was centered on long-term care. There was a very direct finding by the Mathematica report. And there should be accountability at both levels, both the state, because the number of residents that are receiving benefits through the Medicaid system, and there should be accountability by the employer to have both stockpiles. And again, more is better than none. But the unfortunate part, Representative, is that the state of Connecticut's Department of Public 258 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Health and the National Guard saw these hoarding issues first firsthand, they were reported, they witnessed them physically in the homes, and all virtually no fines, and no accountability was ever given to these nursing home operators. And that is a piece that with additional stockpiles and responsibilities, as this legislation lays out, we hope to alleviate.

REP. ARORA (151ST): Thank you, Mr. Martin, point well taken. If you have a moment read what we had written-- I'd written in May in op-eds around the state that that was necessary, and I think we got to it at that time. But just to your point, I fully understand that was late in June that that happened, and there was a lot of issues there. And I don't think this is the format to discuss it. But having said that, I do think you're right, that we need to create a strong stockpile. And I strongly believe based upon stockpiles of various of commodities and lifesaving equipment, it does not have to be at localized because that's not effective, it has to be at the state level administered by the state DPH or something. And I thank you for your input on that. And thank you, Madam Chair, I think this is a very important point. We should-- of the Bill we need to work on.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Jesse. I don't see any other hand [Inaudible]

JESSE MARTIN: Thank you very much.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up--

REP. PORTER (94TH): I'm sorry, Madam Chair, I was just gonna jump in real quick and let you know that you're coming through-- You must have some unstable internet going on, 'cause you're a little choppy and you've been like that for few minutes now, so I just wanted to let you know.

259 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): All right, great. I am actually going to turn over the Chair now to Senator Cabrera, I will be listening in. I'll see if I can address my internet issues and clear that up, maybe rejoin by phone, but--

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. Up next we have, Melissa Chinhing. Is Melissa in the room?

MELISSA CHINHING: Good evening everyone. Good evening, Senator Cabrera, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and the various Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Melissa Chinhing, and I've been an adult probation officer at the State of Connecticut Court Support Services Office of Adult Probation in Hartford for over 13 years. I currently work in the capacity of a warrant officer, and I'm here to testify in favor of SB 1002, an act concerning labor issues related to COVID-19, personal protective equipment, and other staffing matters. I'll first state that I'm in full support of this Bill, and my testimony is specifically with regards to Section 12 of the Bill.

As we all know, the rapid spread of COVID-19 in February 2020 changed the way we live our everyday lives on a global scale. Before the Plexi glass partitions went up, before we hired all the professional cleaning crews to regularly decontaminate our offices and workspaces, before the vaccinations rolled out, many probation officers like myself were there on the front lines. Although we didn't have an abundance of PPE at the time, we still went to work when called upon and we did our jobs as best we could with whatever tools we had in order to keep ourselves safe and to navigate the imminent threat of COVID-19. Since a pandemic, a typical day for me in the office, more often than not, includes traveling to court, where I physically take people into custody when serving violation of probation arrest warrants, I personally fingerprint 260 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE clients in lockup, an area that's filled with other prisoners, marshals, various court personnel, and I also serve probation wards at offender's residences and in the field, as we call it. I transport them in the back have our sedans or SUVs with merely like a cage or a partial, like a partition separating the offender from myself and my co-workers.

So on a regular basis, I also interact with state's attorneys, judicial marshals and other court personnel, as well as the offenders who are at courts, if you heard on the docket. In March 2020 alone, at the onset of the global pandemic, I flew to several states on extraditions, I was in both Chicago and Las Vegas within a week of both of these states shutting down due to COVID. And because of airline constraints, probation often find ourselves in the busiest airport in the world, Atlanta. So this was and continues to be our primary airport hub, and I actually traveled to it several times during the pandemic. Probation officers perform these expeditions at the onset of COVID, when there was no mask mandate on airlines, when there was no empty middle row for flights, and before there were the state of art air filtration systems that we're now seeing getting rolled out.

In fact, my partner, the offender, and I still had the pile on the back row like sardines, like three in a row during this pandemic. I recall a couple of days after coming back from my Las Vegas extradition, I was actually coughing, wheezing, feverish. I called my doctor fearful of the imminent, and I was told that my fever wasn't high enough to go to one of those-- at the time, we only had to drive through testing centers, so I wasn't able to get tested. So, whatever it was, it passed, and luckily, I'm still here to be able to talk about it. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for everyone else who's been impacted by this disease. I easily could have become a statistic, I had a co-worker a peer, a PO, who was a husband and father of two, who unfortunately passed away in his early 30s of this 261 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE disease. And I have several other co-workers and peers whose lives this disease has impacted forever. So this is just my story, and we all have our respective stories. But to backtrack, I subsequently was informed that the facility that we extradited the offender from in Cook County, Illinois, had the highest COVID-19 rate in the state, and that there's a large uptick in the same prison population that has offended that we transported.

Numerous people have told me that I'm crazy when I tell them stories about all my interstate travel. I've been on several additional flight and driving extradition since the ones I referenced. And in hindsight, I can honestly say that it really doesn't get more hazardous than what we do. No monetary amount on earth is worth the trade-off of our physical health, our mental well-being, our peace of mind, per se. But the fact is that, like many other public safety positions, probation has been there throughout the pandemic, performing our jobs, putting ourselves at high risk of transmission of this deadly disease. So, if we fast forward to where we are now, yes, we have more PPE we have Plexiglas partitions, we have mandatory-- but we still have to do our mandatory face-to-face contacts through office visits, we still have to go out and serve warrants, we still have to transport offenders, conduct searches, mandatory home visits, etc, the list goes on. So it's very similar to parole, in fact, and our administration has implemented several tools and policies that minimize the spread of this disease, but as you can see, we've been putting ourselves in harm's way from day one.

CLERK: Thank you, Ms. Chinhing, your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

MELISSA CHINHING: Thank you so much. Well, in conclusion, I've received notice after notice of both staff, and offenders that have tested positive that were in either my office building or whom I was in close proximity to. And this is like a real 262 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE thing, the hazard, the risk, and the daily sacrifice that we continue to make to perform our jobs effectively, and serve our community is real. So, just thank you for your time and this opportunity to speak. And in closing, I urge you to support this legislation.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Chinhing, we appreciate your time this evening.

MELISSA CHINHINSENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Any question? Seeing none, thank you so much for your time this evening.

MELISSA CHINHING: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good day. Next we have, Mr. Carl Chisem. Is Mr. Chisem in the room?

CARL CHISEM: Yes. Thank you

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Mr.Chisem, how are you?

CARL CHISEM: Good. How are you?

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Good. The floor is yours, sir.

CARL CHISEM: Thank you. Senator Cabrera, Representative Porter, and distinguished Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, my name is Carl Chisem and I am President of the Connecticut Employees Union Independent, SEIU Local 511 and the Municipal Employees Union independent SEIU Local 506. At the state level, we represent over 3600 blue-collar maintenance and service state workers who provide valuable service within our state facilities. They cook, clean, repair, maintain, and deliver in Connecticut state buildings, hospitals, college campuses, airports, roads, bridges and parks. At the municipal level, we represent over 1000 workers who are paraprofessionals 263 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE administrative assistants, cafeteria workers, custodians, and maintainers. I submit this testimony in support of SB 1002, House Bill 6478, and House Bill 6595.

The COVID pandemic has forced all of us to recognize the factual definition of a essential worker. For too long these now deemed essential workers have been treated unfairly and with tremendous disrespect, what they are paid, the duties they are expected to perform, and the struggles they endure must not be ignored any longer. Support of these three Bills is necessary for step and rectifying an unequal and disparate treatment they endure and will go a long way in restoring the dignity they deserve. Establishing a Workers’ Comp presumption for essential workers who have worked on the frontlines throughout this public health crisis that prevents employers from firing or disciplining employees for filing Workers’ Comp claims and prevents employees from deliberately dissuading an employee from filing a claim is necessary. Allowing employees to bring civil actions, employees who violate these provisions is necessary. Expanding partial disability Workers’ Comp benefits for workers is necessary. Raising the Workers’ Comp burial benefit retroactively for essential workers who die due to COVID-19 is necessary. Establishing recall rights to workers who were laid off during the pandemic. Requiring PPE stockpile distribution and inventory mandates. Paying essential workers hazard pay for their continued dedication and service throughout the pandemic. Establishing paid sick days definitions to discourage prohibited-- Sorry, retaliatory actions by employees and requiring data reports for hospitals and nursing homes are all necessary measures to ensure that we support these workers now and in the future, that is so important.

Supporting these Bills and working hard to ensure they are put into statute is the least we can do for each and every one of these workers who have put 264 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE their and their family's health at risk for so long. Furthermore, once this pandemic is over, we must not forget their jobs are still as essential and important as we move forward. All workers deserve dignity, respect, and fairness, no matter the job title. I hope we all have learned, at least, that from this painful period in our lives. And in closing, what I'd like to say is I strongly urge the Committee to support these three Bills, and please, please don't let these people down. Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chisem, for your testimony this evening. Any questions for Mr. Chisem? Seeing none, thank you, sir, for taking time out of your day to talk to us today.

CARL CHISEM: Thank you, I appreciate it.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good evening.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): You're welcome. Up next we have, Ms. Tara Maxwell. Is Maxwell in the room? Ms. Tara Maxwell?

TARA MAXWELL: Hello.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Hi, Ms. Maxwell. The floor is yours, ma'am.

TARA MAXWELL: Hi, how are you?

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Good. How are you?

TARA MAXWELL: I'm good, and yourself?

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): I'm well, please proceed.

TARA MAXWELL: Okay. Yes, good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Members of the Committee. I'm currently at work so I have to wear my gear. My name is Tara Maxwell, and I'm a direct support staffer at Mosaic and I have been working 265 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE here since 2017. I'm here today to share some of my experience and ask you to support the Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595 so that the frontline essential workers like me and others will have some support. I enjoy working because I give the help to the individuals I work with a normal life. I give them joy to their life as well. My job is usually spent helping these individuals shower, go to the restroom, I give meds, cook, clean. Since COVID individuals aren't allowed to go out of the communities as they used to and do activities with them at home. We are trying to take them to the backyard on nice days and try to keep them active as much as possible during this lockdown.

When COVID first hit our clients didn't get sick right away, eventually, they got sick, including some staff members. One of the individuals, however, went to the hospital because of it. He was in hospital for three weeks, and had to be sent back home, to the group home, for us to care for him because they wanted his bed. For somebody that was worse off. It took every staff member around the clock to get him ready. It was stressful to see him in that mode, and to put the staff in that situation on a daily basis, not to mention we had other clients that we had to take care of as well. And because of the short staffing, luckily, with care and understanding, and a tight-knit family as we have, none of our staff has passed away from it and none of our clients have either.

So in this, I'm saying the COVID pay we receive only lasted seven days and with all the pandemic has already-- Sorry, and we all know the pandemic has already lasted over a year. Management didn't pay us any extra, past seven days, even though we still have sick individuals in our house. If you pass Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595 today, we will have better guidelines to follow for the COVID and some of the encouragement to our jobs. It will make us feel a little more safer, and I do understand that what we do on a day-to-day basis is essential. 266 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Please support this Bill, so that the frontline workers, like me and others, have something to look forward to.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you.

TARA MAXWELL: And with that, I thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you Ms. Maxwell, very much. Any questions for Ms. Maxwell? Ms. Maxwell, thank you so much for taking time, I know you're at work. It says a lot that you're willing to take the time to come to testify in the middle of work, and thank you for all you do to keep your folks safe.

TARA MAXWELL: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good evening.

TARA MAXWELL: You too.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Up next we have, Mr. Ed Hawthorne. Hey Ed, how are you?

ED HAWTHORNE: Good Senator. Good evening everyone. Good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Senator Cabrera, and Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Ed Hawthorne, I reside in Wolcott. I'm proud to represent the working men and women of Connecticut as the president of the AFL, Western Connecticut Area Labor Federation. I'm here today to testify in favor of House Bill 6478. I support this Bill because essential workers who put their lives at risk to feed us, stock the shelves, educate our children, transporters to work, nurse us back to health, and protect us from harm deserve a fighting chance at receiving fair and just compensation, Workers’ Compensation benefits when they contract COVID-19 at the workplace. It's safe to assume that every person here has referred to an individual putting their life at risk to report to work during this public health emergency as a hero. But we all 267 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE know that actions speak louder than mere words. This Bill is more than words, it is action. It demonstrates to these workers that they are heroes who deserve to be protected. It achieves this protection of these workers by shifting a burden of proof in a Workers’ Compensation proceeding to the employer. This is a rebuttable presumption that merely ensures the workers who have suffered harm by being forced to report to work during this public health crisis are fairly compensated for any loss they may have resulted from their extreme sacrifice.

Also, one thing that has been brought up time and time again but I wish to highlight, is the deaths are just the beginning of this. There are long-term COVID suffers that a recent report says is approximately 10% of those who have suffered from COVID-19, and according to the CDC, they could last for weeks and months after their acute illness has been recovered. Another Section that I really wanna highlight and really hits home for me is Section 2 of the Bill that prevents employers from firing and disciplining employees for filing Workers’ Compensation claims. As President of the Western Connecticut Area Labor Federation, I work very closely with the employees of Waterbury Hospital and have since the beginning of the pandemic.

On January 13th of this year we held a virtual meeting with these workers to discuss the current working conditions. A nurse who regularly interacts with COVID-19 patients tested positive for the virus. When she informed Human Resources she expected to receive help. Instead, she received immediate advice from the Human Resources professional that she should not file a Workers’ Compensation claim because the hospital provided her with adequate protective equipment. Fortunately, I was there and I was able to provide this nurse with the legal guidance that they don't get to make that decision. It's in our best interest to file a claim that preserve her own rights. As we've seen time and 268 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE time again, you've heard throughout this very long hearing, and thank you all for bearing with us today, employers who put their employees in harm's way will do anything within their power to achieve maximum profits for very minimal liability for their actions. Fortunately, the Bill before us does a great deal to provide these heroes with a fighting chance. I conclude by asking you to let your actions speak louder than words, demonstrate to these essential workers, whom we all rightfully refer to as heroes, that we will fight for them in their time of need. And please, I ask, I implore you to put their best interests ahead of those who wish to unjustly profit from their sacrifice and vote in favor of House Bill 6478. Thank you all for your time, and everything that you do, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hawthorne, for your testimony. Any questions for Mr. Hawthorne? Seeing none, thank you, sir, for taking the time to come talk to us.

ED HAWTHORNE: Thank you, stay safe everyone.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good evening. Up next, we have Mr. John Murphy. Hey, how are you?

JOHN MURPH: Good, Senator, how are you? Good to see you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Good to see you as well. Please proceed.

JOHN MURPH: Okay. So, Senator Cabrera, other Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, my name is John Murphy, I live in East Hartford and I'm testifying on behalf of the United Auto Workers Local 376 in favor of House Bill 6478, an act concerning Workers’ Compensation, and Senate Bill 1002, and House Bill 6595, both entitled an act concerning labor matters related to COVID-19. Section 1 of House Bill 6478 expands worker 269 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE compensation benefits for workers who lost a, or function of a member or limb. Some of my co-workers from when I used to work on construction have experienced extreme financial hardship due to the loss of functioning limbs. As for Section 2, these protections are sorely needed as well. Again, as a construction worker, I witnessed co-workers who were pressured from filing Workers’ Compensation claims, or deliberately misled that a claim had been filed in their behalf. Firing is their disguise through laying off workers for lack of work, but there was a direct correlation between workers who filed Workers’ Comp claims or raised health and safety concerns, and they happen to be the first workers that were laid off.

Hopefully, the provision allowing workers to bring civil action against defending employers will make these employers think twice. Section 4 extends the period for essential workers who have contracted COVID-19 to be presumed to have contracted COVID on the job for as long as the Governor's public health emergency is in effect. I have a neighbor who works in the medical field who contracted COVID-19 last April, which is within the timeframe of Executive Order 7JJJ. While his employer filed his claim properly, and he started receiving checks during his 59-day hospital stay, he knows of other people in the medical field working for different employers who contracted COVID-19 after the Executive Order expired, they had their Workers’ Compensation claims contested. Section 4 delivers justice to these essential workers who have put their lives on the line just by going to work every day to serve and protect us. Raising the Workers’ Compensation Burial benefit in Section 5 has been sorely overdue since the benefit has not been increased for 24 years. For these reasons, please pass House Bill 6478 and Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595, both of which share many of the same points contained in House Bill 6478. Thank you.

270 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Thank you so much. Any questions for Mr. Murphy? Okay, thank you so much, sir, for taking the time to talk to us.

JOHN MURPH: Thanks for hearing us here-- hearing me. And thank you for your patience and your stammer, all of you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Have a good evening. Up next is Ms. Cynthia Johnson. Miss Johnson, good evening.

CYNTHIA JOHNSON: Good evening.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Good evening. The floor is yours.

CYNTHIA JOHNSON: Good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, and Members of the Committee. My name is Cynthia Johnson, and this is my daughter, Anisa Johnson. We live here in New Haven and I have worked for the last five years, caring for my daughter as a personal care attendant. I come before you today to ask that you pass Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 659 so that PCAs like myself have protection during the COVID pandemic. I love my daughter and have cared for her, her entire life. However, a series of events that begin in 2015 led me to become her PCA. My daughter understood this from a rare case of either epilepsy syndrome, which causes her to experience a variety of seizures, one of which are known as drop seizures. And in 2015 Anisa was walking to the store when she experienced the drop seizure and fell to the ground. When she hit the ground, the doctor says she hit a face so hard her gums released her teeth, and she broke her jaw in three places. Her teeth were not broken, the gums just released them. Recovering from this fall took almost two years. There were complications with the wire they put in her jaw. My daughter was supposed to drink and eat liquids for many months. She lost weight during that time, from 156 to 93 pounds. In addition with her battle with epilepsy, 271 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE she struggles even to this day with vertigo and some form of PTSD from the trauma of that fall. It was during my daughter's recovery that she was put on the Medicaid waiver program. And we would not have been able--I would not have been able to get paid without it. It has meant a lot to both of us, for me to be able to stay at home and care for her, and to know her needs are being met. However, as a PCA, working in the state of Connecticut, I am deeply saddened and angered that the needs of PCAs like myself are not met, especially during the pandemic. PCAs are professional caregivers. We go to work every day to ensure our consumers have the care they depend on. Yet we are paid poverty wages and provided barely any benefits.

PCAs like me live paycheck to paycheck. On top of our inadequate wages, we are not offered the type of benefits others are offered to their jobs. We are not given any paid sick leave or health insurance plan to fall back on if we become sick. This has been especially stressful during the COVID pandemic. Because if a PCA like me gets sick, we have to lose a day or more wages, we don't get paid sick leave. Losing wages means that we are forced to come back to work sooner, even if even if we might need extra time to recover. Connecticut needs to be more for the needs of home-care workers. We are an important part of a long term infrastructure it can navigate and must be treated as such. The work we do allows people to live and receive and--

CLERK: Thank you Ms. Johnson. Your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

CYNTHIA JOHNSON: Sure, and must be treated as such. We allow those to stay in their own homes with dignity. Although we are grateful for what Connecticut does, please don't turn back now. We know that if you believed in other places we will you'll be a rough shape. But does that mean that we are in such good shape that we don't need the help that we are getting from the state of Connecticut 272 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE because of the care as shown me and my daughter. Please, please don't turn your backs on us now or those that are in need. Please pass Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595. Thank you for your time.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Thank you Ms. Johnson for testimony this evening. Are there any questions for Ms. Johnson? Seeing none. Thank you so much Miss Johnson for taking the time to come speak to us.

CYNTHIA JOHNSON: You're welcome.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good evening. Next up, we have Mr. Julio Reyes. Mr. Reyes are you in the room? Mr. Julio Reyes?

JULIO REYES: Yep, I'm here.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Hey, Mr. Reyes? How are you this evening?

JULIO REYES: Good. I wasn't. Let me start my video.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Okay. There you go. Now we gotcha.

JULIO REYES: Good evening to the Committee. And to all the people who have testified. I've been here all day. It's been something to behold. So, my name is Julio Reyes, as you said, and I work for young adults services for the Department of Mental Health. I've dedicated my life now to working with young people who have mental health challenges. And the work that I do has been a great source of perspective for me, insight on what it means to be vulnerable and how close we all come at times to tragedy in our lives. The people I work with, they've often survived tragedies in their young lives. And this fact usually if I'm working with them it's because it's those circumstances has set them on a path that has really compounding challenges. 273 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

When you suffer serious trauma in your young life, you have--your brain becomes rewired and you subsequently have trouble with school and that leads to trouble with work. You have trouble forming relationships and trusting people which just leads to mental health issues. And so the people that I work with are usually depending on the system and near poverty in terms of their economic means, and that carries with it poor health outcomes as well.

These are just sort of the way that things are. As health care workers, we try to help our people shoulder these struggles. We share their trauma vicariously. We get injured sometimes in the course of our work, and we get sick. I myself got sick. I got the Corona Virus and I passed it to my daughter. Luckily I fared rather well. I know of people that I work with, who did worse and people that work within my department that have lost their lives. So over the past year, actually health care workers have accounted for 25% of the serious cases of Corona Virus. And if you look quickly at the OSHA website, this is really nothing new. This has been historically the case, healthcare workers it says I quote directly, "More workers are injured in the healthcare and social assistance industry sector than any other." That's pretty unequivocal. So--

CLERK: Thank you Mr. Reyes. Your three minutes have ended. Please conclude your remarks.

JULIO REYES: Okay, I'll wrap it up. Today I come before you just say that if being a hero, as these Bills invoke the word hero. If it means that you're just going to ignore the sacrifice, the real sacrifice that real people have made then don't call us a hero. This is a chance as other people have said to put action behind those words. So I urge you to take action. And I support Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Thank you, Mr. 274 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

Reyes for your testimony. Any questions for Mr. Reyes? No. Okay. Well, Mr. Reyes thank you so much for all your hard work and for taking the time to come speak to us.

JULIO REYES: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good evening. Up next we have Aniece Jones. Ms. Jones are you in the room?

ANIECE JONES: Can you hear me?

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): I can hear you.

ANIECE JONES: Okay. Good afternoon Senator Kushner, Representative--well, good evening, Senator Kushner and Representative Porter and Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Aniece Jones and I am a LPN at Autumn Lake off Box Hill. I have worked there for over three years. I'm here to testify in support of House Bill 6478. I enjoy my work because I enjoy the care of my residents, seeing them improve their treatments. I work on the rehab unit so it is always a great feeling seeing them get well enough to go home to their families and also taking care of my long term care workers, advocating for them et cetera. On December 1 2020, I tested positive for COVID-19. After having a negative test on November 23 2020, I had every symptom possible. I ended up being hospitalized for three days due to me being chronically anemic. While in the hospital, I had to get two units of blood. My return home after the hospital was two weeks of pure misery. I was literally fighting for my life.

I truly thought that I was not going to make it. I thought I was going to die. I am an asthmatic and when I couldn't breathe, I was told by my doctors that I couldn't even use my pump because it would do me nothing. It was gonna do more harm than good. I was quarantined myself two weeks away from my children in my room because I did not want them to 275 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE contract it. My youngest was 11 years old. My daughter, she became very depressed, she was paranoid, I was unable to see my grandchildren. Overall, it was the most horrible thing that I ever had to go through.

I returned to work around the 15th or 16th of December, even though I was not ready to go back to work, I could barely walk, I had trouble breathing. And it took me it seemed like forever to get my regular work done. And ended working like longer hours because of it. I really had no choice. I had to go back to work because I needed the money. I needed to catch up on my bills et cetera. On December 21, my job provided me with the paperwork work documents and encouraged me to file for Workman's Comp.

Still, to this day I have not heard back from them. It would have meant a lot to me if they could have said something. I felt as if--that I didn't matter, like the state didn't care about me, it was like, I was nothing to them. I worked so hard and taking care of my residents. And when it came my turn to be taken care of, I felt like management and the state of Connecticut, they turned their backs on me. I felt like nothing. I felt like it was a front when they were calling us heroes and talking about protecting us. In conclusion, the Bill would be a step towards making the frontline healthcare workers impacted by the COVID-19 again, we put our lives on the line to care for our residents and to save our communities. We deserve a better. Please pass Bill 6478.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you, Ms. Jones so much. Any questions for Ms. Jones? Seeing none. Ms. Jones thank you so much for taking the time to testify today.

ANIECE JONES: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good evening. 276 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

ANIECE JONES: You too.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Next up is Ms. Natasha Cruz. Ms. Cruz.

NATASHA CRUZ: Hello. I'm here.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Hi, good evening?

NATASHA CRUZ: Good evening. Sorry, I'm gonna close the door because you guys aren't even gonna hear me. You are gonna hear my daughter screaming. Okay, sorry, I got this written down. Sorry.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Take your time. Begin when you're ready.

NATASHA CRUZ: Okay. Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Members of the Committee. My name is Natasha Marie Cruz. I'm from Bridgeport, Connecticut, and I've been a Personal Care Attendant for nearly 10 years. I've cared for at least six different consumers who have physical disabilities or who are elderly who need support to live independently. I like that homecare is a one on one setting and I've become close with my current consumer who is suddenly now hospitalized with COVID-19. I'm here today to testify in support of Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595.

Providing support to my consumer is a very physical job, but the job is mentally challenging too. She is a stroke survivor and that brings some behavioral challenges for example, also knowing that I am a single parent of two daughters without paid sick time really weighs on me. Last month, one of my co workers fell sick. She couldn't take more than a couple of days off and quickly came back to work even though she was still sick. I want the same time both my consumers and her husband also tested positive for COVID-19. Not going to work was not an option. 277 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

My consumer is bed bound and relies on her PCAs. I could not leave her to fend for herself. She can't even go to the bathroom without assistance. I went to work, wore my cloth mask and gloves but had no other PPE provided to care for her. I wasn't so worried about myself being exposed but I was worried about my girls if I get sick I won't be my full self to care for my daughters and on top of that I'll still take a hit by calling out of work because we don't have any paid time off. I know obviously we'll have to worry about my daughter's getting sick as well. I don't blame my co-worker because she had no good choices just like I have no good choices if I get sick. We should not have to choose between a paycheck to support our families and staying home when we're sick to protect ourselves and our consumers. In this case the entire household was put at risk because we do not have paid time off and that's not right.

Please support Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595 that will provide hazard pay and a paid sick leave relief for PCAs like me. I hope that my consumer will be home from the hospital soon so I can continue working for her, but I deserve the reassurance of knowing I shouldn't have to choose between my livelihood and the health of myself or my daughters. Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you so much. That was great you did a great job.

NATASHA CRUZ: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Very impressed. I don't think i would have been able to do that with the kids. You did a good job.

NATASHA CRUZ: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Any questions for Ms. Cruz? Senator Kushner, the floor is yours Ma'am. 278 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I just enjoyed your testimony so much primarily because you know that mothers are always able to continue what they have to do regardless of all the noise around them. You have to work through that so--and being a mother and grandmother now, we're pretty tolerant to that too. So we're very happy that you stayed with us and you testified. Thank you so much

NATASHA CRUZ: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Any other questions or comments for Ms. Cruz? Seeing none. Thank you Ms. Cruz for taking the time. We really appreciate it.

NATASHA CRUZ: Thank you for your time.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good evening.

NATASHA CRUZ: You as well.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Next up is Mr. Jordan Deangelo. Deangelo good evening? I think you're still muted buddy.

JORDAN DEANGELO: Is that better?

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): There you go. Yep.

JORDAN DEANGELO: Okay, perfect. Good evening Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Members of the Committee. I also just want to say I'm glad I see many familiar faces like Representative Vargas here as well. My name is Jordan Deangelo. I'm a Personal Care Attendant or PCA living in Winsted. I care for my mother. Caring for others has always been a part of my life. As a teenager I cared for my grandmother with dementia and so when it became obvious that my mother would benefit from Personal Care Attendant I stepped into that role. I enjoy caring for my mom it makes me happy to know that I'm able to allow her to continue living in her home and 279 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE do so comfortably at that. That being said the fact that I'm caring for my mother doesn't always make things easier in fact it's harder because there's also the emotional task to watching a loved one struggle with her illnesses and though I'm only paid for 40 hours a week, I essentially work 24 seven to take care of her.

Homecare workers in Connecticut are professional caregivers. The work we do allows people to receive the critical care they need while remaining in their own homes. We don't just clean their homes or help them get out of bed. We help them socialize and continue to do the things that they love. We care about our consumers deeply. They are human beings and deserve to live normal lives. It saddens me deeply that we work so hard to provide a dignified life for consumers no matter who they are, that we are treated with utter disregard by the society we live in.

When the pandemic hit in March of last year, PCAs were left without PPE by the state. With our union we had to fight tooth and nail to even get the state to recognize that we even deserved PPE and enough PPE when we needed it. Even then they would not listen to PCAs and instead only allowed consumers to request the PPE and there were still problems with the delivery at that. Consumers were left waiting in the cold for PPE with some packages that came in with one glove and 15 masks, some with one masks and 37 gloves and even some still had two pairs of gloves and five masks to last for two weeks of care for four PCAs at a time in some instances. Does that make sense to you? Because it doesn't make any sense to me. Unlike people in other professions however, we do not receive health insurance or paid sick leave to our jobs. This became incredibly problematic when COVID hit because not only were PCAs living paycheck to paycheck on already low wages and having to buy their own PPE in many cases, but then if their consumers or PCAs got sick, there was no sick leave for us to access so we didn't have 280 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE to go to work if either of us or our consumers got sick.

I have known PCAs personally to have left the profession entirely even if it means a pay cut, just take a job that provides health insurance and this is a very personal story to me as well. This high turnover among PCAs due to low wages and lack of health insurance also means disruption of care for our clients. They're left having to find new PCAs, train them, build trust and repeat all over again from the very beginning. Imagine having that kind of crisis during the COVID pandemic. PCAs are like family to consumers or in cases like mine, we are literally family. Both PCAs and consumers people care for deserve better in our state. Please support Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595 so that PCAs like me can receive sick pay, hazard pay and receive the benefits that we so rightly deserve. I thank you for your time and I hope everyone is staying safe.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you Mr. Deangelo for your testimony. Any questions or comments? Seeing none, thank you very much sir, for taking time to talk to us. Have a good evening. Up next we have Ms. Jean Morningstart. Ms. Morningstart.

JEAN MORNINGSTART: Good evening.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Good evening.

JEAN MORNINGSTART: Good evening Senator Cabrera, Senator Kushner and Representative Porter. My name is Jean Morningstart. I'm currently the chief steward of University Health Professionals AFT Local 3837. UHP has 2800 healthcare and public employees located at UConn health. These members that I represent are essential and have been given life saving care for more than 40 years. No year has been as challenging as this past one and I have been involved at UConn health since 1982. I'm here today to urge you to pass House Bill Number 6595.

281 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

This very important Bill that gives these heroes the care and comfort they crave. I myself am not a mental health professional. I was trained as a microbiologist and chemist but I can tell you our members are suffering. They are exhausted, depressed, demoralized, and quite frankly feel disrespected from their hospital leadership. They work flat out donning and doffing two masks, face shields, gloves and gowns to care for very, very sick and dying patients. These caregivers are real people. They have children, spouses and parents they are worried about their family's health and their own health. What if they bring the virus home? What if they infect their families? On top of this, they're then told that they're not doing enough. You can't help decide that because of their own policies of years of short staffing, they now we're going to require all of these nurses to work one extra shift a week.

They didn't care how this affected their employees. It was what they wanted and if you chose not to do it, they would then choose to discipline you up to and including dismissal. So let me tell you the story of a married couple that are nurses that have six children between them. They are two of our very best critical care nurses. He got COVID after a patient spit on him. The University moved into a hotel. She was left trying to work four 12-hour shifts worried about her husband, trying to find childcare and dealing with dying people. She was having trouble finding daycare because she worked 7pm to 7am and there's a deadly virus in her family. In the meantime, her husband is kicked out of the hotel because he has the virus. The University sent a cab for him and had him transported alone to those very luxurious dorm rooms at CCSU. He was dropped off and may have had to make his way up the stairs with no help to find out that he was set at the far end of the hall totally alone. There were no other people present. Thankfully, he called his union and he had his wife, friends and co-workers to help. The university never came to see him and didn't do 282 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE anything except call once a day to ask him to give them his temperature. Guess what? They never gave him a thermometer.

Once we made it clear that we were going to expose this very disgraceful and disrespectful treatment of a hero, the University managed to move him back to a hotel. That is one example of why we need this Bill. We need our heroes to have safety nets. They need access to Worker Comp benefits, they need hazard pay and they need the personal protective equipment to work safely and smartly. Our members don't want or need fire trucks driving around our campus with signs that say you are heroes. They need help. The parades are nice but these heroes are working not looking out the windows at a parade. The only people viewing the parade are the administrators who are patting themselves on their backs as they watch the parade. As for hazard pay these heroes deserve it. Our new favorite phrase is we are heroes not zero.

CLERK: Thank you Ms. Morningstart. Your three minutes have ended please conclude your--

JEAN MORNINGSTART: Thank you. Because that is what you have offered us zeroes. Oh wait, I misspoke. It doesn't matter that a hospital is run by a team of myriad of workers such as nurses technologists, food service, engineering, housekeeping, et cetera. Our very generous employees did offer our heroes as a bonus. One day between the hours of X and Y, our nurses were invited to a room in the administrative wing so they could grab their bonus. But mind you they needed their badge to prove they were a nurse because heaven forbid a CNA or lab tech would try and collect something. What were they receiving you ask? Two cookies, two cookies. Oh and there was only so many available first come first serve. I look at all of you and I say shame. You the legislature or the ultimate employer of UConn health, pay attention. Make them take care of the employees. These are your employees. Stop taking their words as true. Do the work and find out what 283 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE is really going on. Our heroes are not zeros, they deserve better and you all can do better. Two cookies does not cut it, please pass this very important Bill and take care of the people taking care of you. Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Thank you so much. Ms. Morningstart for that very passionate testimony. Senator Kushner has her hand up. Senator Kushner.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): There isn't too much left to say. I think you sort of hit the nail on the head. You have given us a charge. You've given us an order. I think it's extremely important. Jean, I've known you for so many years. I've known you to advocate for these workers at UConn Health. You have been unfailing in your support for them. We will try and do everything you've ordered us to do. And we accept that responsibility as your legislature. I do want to just say one other thing Jean. I said this to Bill when he testified earlier today, and I know you were very close to Mary Mcquinn. And I was sorry for her passing it.

JEAN MORNINGSTART: Thank you, Julie. She was one of my very best friends. I really appreciate that thought.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I know. I know. She was good to you and to my daughter. And you were good to everyone. So thank you, Jean.

JEAN MORNINGSTART: No, thank you. Thank you for all you do every day.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Any other questions or comments from Ms. Morningstart? Representative Porter, the floor is yours Ma'am.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you Mr. Chair. And Jean, 284 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

I don't know you. I haven't known you for years. But I just came back in from a brief interview I did. Julie I were out for a second and I came back on time. Wow. I take to heart what you said. And I'm with Senator Kushner, the charge is unexpected and gladly. That is what we strive to do every single day that we do this work. And it is about the work as it is about the power of story. I talked about this earlier with someone because he was saying that you all were coming, you were going to testify. Tremendous power and story and what you just delivered was really powerful. Keep doing that and keep encouraging the other folks that that you work with to do the same, because it does matter and it makes a difference. And when we have to go back to deliberate on these things and to decide what we're going to raise out of Committee what we're JFing into the floor. It is testimonies like yours that give us the support, we need to move this legislation. So thank you so much for your passion for people.

JEAN MORNINGSTART: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Thank you Representative Porter. I appreciate you every day.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): I see Representative Vargas has his hand up. The floor is yours sir.

REP. VARGAS (6TH): Yes, I just have to say hello to my colleague from the old Connecticut days, when we used to call it the Connecticut State Federation of Teachers and then CSFT for a while. But I've got to tell you it Jean, you still have that fire in you. Let me tell you this is the best Committee for these kinds of issues to be dealt with because you got our leadership, the Co-Chairs and our leaders here are 285 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE fighters for the little guy. This is not the Bank's Committee or Judiciary Committee, the Bermuda Triangle of pro-people build. This is a Committee that I trust our Co-Chairs Senator Kushner and Representative Porter and, all the Members, our Vice-Chairs--we are a fighting Committee, so your Bills are in good hands.

JEAN MORNINGSTART: Thank you so much. I appreciate you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you, Representative.

REP. VARGAS (6TH): Thank you Mr. Chair.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Any other questions or comments? Seeing none, thank you so much for your passionate testimony this evening. We really appreciate it.

JEAN MORNINGSTART: Thank you have a great night.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a great evening. Up next we have Ms. Rosemary Swanke.

ROSEMARY SWANKE: Swanke. Close enough. Nice to meet you all. My name is Rosemary Swanke of New Hartford, Connecticut. I'm a member of the UHP, health care professionals 3837. I'm the lead critical care nurse practitioner at UConn health. And I'm submitting testimony in support of the omnibus Bill 6595. I've worked in critical care since 1988. Addressing the issue of being prepared with adequate PPE for our healthcare workers, certainly been highlighted over the past year, with the onslaught of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We cannot become complacent and let this happen again, not being ready. At the beginning of the pandemic, the need for PPE was played down. I was even told the only place I really needed a mask was when I was in a room with the patient, and not to wear a mask anywhere else. We were in conservation mode. Most of us working in the critical care areas already knew what was going to 286 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE be happening. And we started wearing masks to make sure that we were protected.

Already knowing how many healthcare workers from other countries had become ill and died, we could not afford to become ill because who would take care of those critically ill patients that we were going to be getting. In 2014, I was assigned to care for potential Ebola patients, we never actually got I think. The US was really lucky then we only had two cases contracted in the United States and both of those were nurses who were treating patients brought to the United States. The amount of PPE that we would need to care for an Ebola patient would be significantly more than what we would need for our SARS-Co-2 patients if we would have a similar outbreak. Even if we think we have enough PPE now it would fall short should where there'll be an outbreak of a disease like Ebola or a completely airborne disease where everybody needs to wear an N 95. mask. I'm asking you to please make sure that we have enough PPE. I never went without PPE. I know an area of hospitals, however, that some of our house staff were sharing gowns to go into rooms to see COVID positive patients.

We were always in conservation mode. I still have masks that I saved in case we ran out, there a year old now. And the masks since have been reprocessed. And we got to wear them over and over again because they clean them so that we still have masks. I'm 59 years old, probably one of the oldest providers that works directly with the COVID patients in our ICU. My risk of severe illness is higher than most people that worked in the ICU. But I've been committed to caring for patients and I would never step away when I was needed. I worked about 12-24 hours a day for 6-7 days a week during the first surge. Our staffing was already short when the pandemic hit. And I was not the only person who worked those hours most of our RN staff as Jean alluded to, were working tirelessly, many hours beyond their scheduled shifts. The anxiety and fear I felt during that time 287 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE was tremendous. I feared for me, but I also feared for my family. What if I brought it home? What if somebody got sick at home. I made my husband sleep in the basement for four months. I didn't get to see or touch my brand new grandson who was born in February last year, for more than six months, until I could quarantine for a long enough that my daughter in law would let me see him. My 13-year-old son is severely handicapped, he lives in a group home. I couldn't see him because I was afraid that I would get him infected. And I know because I've seen several kids die in my ICU who are from group homes- -.

CLERK: Thank you Ms. Swanke. Your three minutes have ended, please conclude your remarks.

ROSEMARY SWANKE: Okay. So, anyway, I just want to make sure that we have enough PPE. Everybody that I work with are essential personnel. And they deserve to have hazard duty pay. It was definitely hazardous duty when we were there, and we still have patients. I still had somebody die last night from COVID. And it's still happening. Hopefully, it continues to decrease and I won't have to see anybody else dying. So thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you. Thank you Ms. Swanke for your testimony. Senator Kushner

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you for testifying tonight. You know, when you came to the end of your three minutes, you went to the end of your remarks and I think we missed something. One of the things you were saying right when that came up is that you had seen children die. And I think that a lot of us are under the impression that this only--that the people who died were mostly old people. And I wondered if you could talk about that a little bit. And I know this is--we don't often have an opportunity to speak to someone who was in the kind of unit and direct care that you're in. So I hope you're able to share some of that with us. 288 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

ROSEMARY SWAKNE: So we had a 20-year-old, he had Down syndrome die, his father died just before he did. His dad was only 45 years old. There, most of the people that were in our ICU were probably my age 50s and 60s. The elderly people, most of them decided they didn't want to go through all of the things that you would have to go through to survive this on a respirator for weeks at a time and with little hope of surviving, because most of those patients, especially during the first surge, they were very, very sick. Once they came to the Intensive Care Unit there's a lot of fear that they wouldn't leave. I think it's just been very difficult. They couldn't have a priest of the bedside, they couldn't have their family, they couldn't have anybody hold their hand, except for the nurses and the staff, the residents, the interns would stay with them. They would have the iPad so families could see if they had the technology. A lot of families don't have the technology to even use an iPad so they couldn't be with them. I brought in holy water from the church so those priests wouldn't come in to the unit. We were bio- contained, which means that you put on your PPE and you stay in that PPE all day long. Same mask, same gowns, to conserve. It was a precious resource. We did everything. I mean, everybody worked really hard. They all did what they had to do to make sure that things worked well. But they worked really hard. And so a lot of sadness.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I know that one of the aspects of our Bill there we tried in this omnibus Bill to capture as much as we could of the sort of most important issues that have been brought to us over the last year from working families, from workers most of whom were essential workers like yourself. And one of the Bills, I know I spent some time talking to nurses in Danbury that worked at the Danbury hospital and And we're also members of your union. I found that there-- there were times when they got very distraught talking about the -- what 289 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE they had witnessed and what they had experienced. And some folks did feel that the combination of so much death being there with family members couldn't be there. Having to work extra shifts. The shifts the concern about possibly contaminating your own family, bringing home with you, all of that led to some people experiencing what are classic signs of post-traumatic stress injuries. And I wondered if, if you've seen any of that amongst your coworkers, we know that -- we know that different people react to different to stressors in a different way. And we also know that it doesn't always hit you, at the time that you're actually experiencing the crisis, that it can come back later in life. Sometime -- sometime later off. And I wonder if any of that has been in your experience in, in your hospital work?

ROSEMARY SWANKE: I absolutely think that there's a lot of the nursing staff that have experienced it, some of our younger House staff that, you know, we're very new and hadn't seen a lot of people die. They definitely have felt it and worked through it or trying to work through it. I don't know that they know how to work through it. You know, a lot of us for a long time I'd written in my statement, though, you know, you'd go home from work, you can even get a hug from your family, and you can’t touch them. You can have any kind of support for you. You know, everybody was alone and by themselves because everybody's afraid. I mean, we were not just working really hard. But the general public were afraid of us because we worked with COVID patients, and nobody knew what was going to happen. So you've gone through a very stressful time, and you have no support. Because you know, there's just nobody there that can help you as much as you want. And you just keep going back every day. It was easier probably just to work every day, 16 hours a day, then have to think about it. You just went home and tried to go to sleep and get back up and do it again.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I -- you know, I know. We've been talking a lot here today about Thank you 290 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE isn't enough? And that's why we're doing these Bills. But it also is just so hard to hear from folks like you and not say thank you, because we just -- we were so sheltered from it. I mean, we were all scared. And I know there was time in the beginning when we didn't know yet whether we were going to get sick if we touched an item at the grocery store that somebody who had COVID had touched and, you know, fortunately, we are also fortunate that it was not as contagious in that way. And we did not or we would have been in much worse shape I believe. But as it was many, many of us did not experience this. I know a woman that I work with at the Capitol, [Dale] you know, she had 17 members of her family pass, from COVID. And I didn't have a single member [inaudible]. And so you know, the -- it's -- the extremes are here, where some of us had no experience -- direct experience with it and others had so much. And so for those of us who didn't have that. I know we were scared. And I know we were careful. But you had to live it every day. And so I -- you know, I think the least we can do is try and find a way to pass legislation that will help others and will protect against these kinds of problems in the future. Thank you for being here and testifying.

ROSEMARY SWANKE: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you, Senator Kushner. Any other questions or comments for Ms. Swanke? Okay, Ms. Swanke, thank you so much for taking the time to testify today. Thank you doesn't even begin to cover it. Nor does it suffice. But thank you. Have a good evening. Up next is Miss Karen Droz. I see Ms. Droz here.

KAREN DROZ: Good evening, Members of the Labor Committee. Thank you for hearing my testimony in support of Bill, House Bill 6595 and Senate Bill1002, about Labor issues related to COVID-19. My name is Karen Droz, and I would like to speak to you as a home visitor with team A Waterbury. As a union 291 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE member of 32BJ SEIU about my experiences during this epidemic as a home visitor when we were called back to work. In March of last year, we were given a list of families to reach out to on a weekly basis. We were gathered information on their basic needs. As time pass, I began to deliver diapers, breakfast, lunch to those families that were unable to pick up the material, due to transportation or being in quarantine. I had four families contract COVID throughout last year, I had other families that have other needs, such as applying for state benefits, and other resources available to them. Many of the families I work with are also non-English speaking, which increases the need for my involvement.

I also have gone grocery shopping for families in quarantine, who had no support and no support system. In late October of 2020, I was exposed to COVID during a home visit with a family I had to quarantine for 14 days. Team paid me I didn't have to use my PTO. But I know that other people who have had to quarantine more than once have had to use some of their personal PTO. That is one of the things that we think companies shouldn't do when we are put up when we put ourselves on the line like we do. In one of our meetings, one of our teachers who is 69 years old, who cares for elderly husband, her sickly husband told us she had apply for unemployment and human resources denied her application. They also told her to cease any application for unemployment. We are asking you please help us, give us the same respect and care that we show our families and children in Connecticut community by passing the bill so we can have both essential pay for all the risks we take and guarantee that we have -- if we have to quarantine or fall sick, our employers will continue to support us. Thank you for hearing my testimony. Have a good evening.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you, Ms. Droz. Any questions or comments for Ms. Droz? Representative Porter. 292 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Mr. Chair, I just wanted to say thank you, Karen, for being here tonight and for sharing your story. We've been fighting since March. It's been a year we've been at this. So hopefully now that we're back in session [audio glitch] Let's not deflate things, we will be able to get this done. But your story matters and you matter, and I just want you to know that.

KAREN DROZ: Miss Porter, my husband, Harry Jones wanted me to say hi to you. Have a good evening, everyone. And thank you for your support.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you so much. Have a good evening.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You too, Oh my god. Thank you, Mr. Chair . SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you, Representative Porter. Up next we have Mr. Mark Leighton. Mr. Leighton in the room?

MARK LEIGHTON: Yes, I am. Thank you. Thank you very much for allowing us to come aboard. Senator Cabrera, Senator Kushner and the rest of the Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to come before you. I come before you obviously in support of these Bills, but in particular in support of House Bill 6478. Specifically, and we've heard a number of -- a lot of testimony regarding the various areas of this, but I will narrow my comments to that of Connecticut General Statutes. 31 308A. I won't reiterate what that statute says in detail, as I believe that Representative Quinn many hours ago, gave a pretty good analysis of what that statute is. But in short, a person who has exhausted their temporary disability benefits and permanent disability benefits. If they are unable to return back to their old job, then they can apply for a wage differential between what they would have earned had they not been injured, and what they are 293 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE now capable of earning. That is what we call a wage differential.

That, however, under our current statute, as it was changed in 1993, I believe it was, limits that to the same number of weeks as the permanency benefits. Again, while Representative Quinn outline that, I believe that as Dr. Abad had done a few hours ago, put a face to the reality. In this case, I have a client and I have many clients who face this scenario. But I have a client. His name is Mike, who is a veteran. He served tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Fortunately came back, while not mentally completely free, physically he suffered no injuries. However, when he came back, he was working. And during the job he was working below, and a worker from another company dropped a large construction brick three stories onto his head. He was severely injured, suffered significant traumatic brain injury, even though he was wearing a hardhat.

He has now gone through the process, he has received his benefits, while he was out of work temporarily, he has received his permanency disability benefits, and he is now receiving discretionary benefits under 31 308 A. The reality is, though, the most he can get is the same number of weeks as his permanency. In this case, he was given a 15% permanent partial disability to the brain. Keep in mind, a 15% is a very significant disability to the brain. His cognitive functions have been affected significantly, his memory, all of these things, make it so that he is unable to return back to his old job. Now, he -- here's a man who has -- he's married, four children served his country, and now is in his mid-30s, facing the prospect that he is unable to earn nearly as much as he had before. Through his hard efforts, he did get retrained as a veterinarian technician, but his income is less than half of what it was--

CLERK: Mr. Leighton, your three minutes are gone, if you can conclude your remarks. 294 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

MARK LEIGHTON: Thank you. So this is a man who served his country is unable for now for the next 30 years of his life, to support his family. This, I believe should be changed and should be changed now to what we used to have where the Commissioner did have discretion to allow further benefits. Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you, Mr. Leighton, for your testimony. Any questions or comments for Mr. Leighton? Senator Kushner?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I switched computers so I could be heard well. But now I can't move around as well to get to my new buttons. But I do want to ask you, and you just mentioned this at the end of your testimony that -- and we heard this earlier today. When Representative Quinn first testified that the Bill -- that there used to be a longer period that people were reimbursed? And can you -- were you practicing them? And can you talk a little bit about the history of the change?

MARK LEIGHTON: Yes, I have the grey hairs even though the lighting doesn't show it, to indicate that I have been practicing. I've been practicing over 30 years, I was the Chair of the Workers Comp section of the Connecticut Bar Association. And yes, I was practicing back then. Back -- prior to 1993, there technically was no limitation on the number of weeks that an individual could be given. However, because it is discretionary on the part of the commissioner, the reality is that commissioners would limit the number of weeks that they would award and there was kind of an unwritten rule that it would be typically about twice the number of weeks that a person could get. I had a client, for example, was a truck driver. And he ended up having a -- I believe it was a 10 or 15% disability to the cervical spine. And he could do most anything but as a truck driver in his -- again, mid 30s.

295 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

He couldn't pass the driving test because he wasn't able to turn his head sufficiently. So here's again, a man that was unable to do that. In that case, the Commissioner had the discretion and used that discretion to give benefits to him for a longer period of time. In this case, I believe he probably awarded him probably two or three times the number of weeks of his permanency. So you know, yes, it did. And keep in mind, you know, a lot of the testimony today that we've listened to, and I give you folks credit, we're now what? We're going on 11 hours into this thing. A lot of testimonies talked about the COVID victims. Keep in mind there are going to be a lot of people who are injured with COVID that will be unable to go back to their old job. Nurses, other workers who will never be able to go back to that job that they will never be able to recoup that income. And this draconian limitation that virtually anybody in the Worker's Comp system agrees that this is a horrendous thing. And I can give you the history of why that happened, if you want to hear.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24th): I am interested in why? That's important.

MARK LEIGHTON: And again, for those who were sitting in the legislature at the time, and I remember, my state Representative commented, and he was a kind of bleeding heart liberal like I am. And he commented that at that time, the economic conditions were so poor, that the combination of the pressure that the CBIA and UTC poured on it, and they basically said, listen, unless you change this statute, this statute along with others, we're going to pick up our bags and move out of state. Okay. And as he said, it was a runaway freight train. And any state legislator, legislature, who wanted to stand in front would be one over. So it was done very hastily in an effort to try to maintain jobs. And then, of course, like so often, you throw away the baby with the bathwater.

296 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, you know, that was the same time at which the change was made with the PTSI with the PTSD, that's now known as PTSI, the post-traumatic stress that the patients were -- that it was eliminated, basically, and that, you know, we've just started to address. But I think that your testimony, it raises the question. You know, the -- who takes care of people when they get hurt at work? Who -- I mean, that's what Workers Comp system is supposed to be for. But obviously, it's failing these young people who get an entry like you described, and are never going to be able to earn and support their family going forward. And, -- and, you know, we are, as a society, I think we fail people in those circumstances.

MARK LEIGHTON: We do, and I think it's important to recognize that what happens in those situations, quite often, they have to end up turning, hopefully, to family, but quite often to other social agencies, for support. And so now all of a sudden, the -- the financial responsibility is shifted from the employers and the premiums that they pay to, frankly, taxpayers, who are now having to pick up the tab, whether it's social security disability, whether it's food stamps, whether it's general assistance. These are all things that these people, really -- I mean, not only are they suffering, but frankly, we're shifting the burden from where it should be to -- to another source.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Now, thank you, thank You so much. And thank you, Mr. Chair for allowing me the opportunity to ask these questions. Thank you, Mr. Leighton.

MARK LEIGHTON: Thank you, thank you for hearing me out.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): How do you pronounce your name?

297 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

MARK LEIGHTON: It is Leighton, but that's okay. As long as you don't call me late for dinner. I'm good. Okay? Thank you folks for spending -- as I said 11 hours into this.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Yeah, thank you. Representative Winkler, I think has a question for you.

MARK LEIGHTON: Okay.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you to the chair. Okay, so I'm a bit -- I'm identifying with this. So I get a brain injury on the job. I retrained myself. Let's say I had a $60,000 job when I got the brain injury. I now retrain myself as a veterinarian assistant, and I now makes a $35,000. And so it's a $25,000 differential between the two. How many weeks can they pay me the differential?

MARK LEIGHTON: Well, in this case, and specifically in this case where he had a 15% permanency hit that was that was 78 weeks of benefits that he would be able to get. So basically, a year and a half of that wage differential where he's got another 30 years of earning capacity. And after that, it's -- now keep in mind, sure the -- the workers compensation claim can remain open, but only -- he would only be able to get additional benefits if his condition worsened. Okay. And keep in mind and that -- you know, as we all know, those are the issues that you face. So, yes, you know--

REP. WINKLER (56TH): So is there -- how do I put this? Is there a disincentive to try to find any job because -- I mean you'd be better off going for total disability?

MARK LEIGHTON: Well that -- that's a good question and that's part of the problem that we often face is that if a person is going to be limited to that number of weeks of this differential, three away day benefits then at that point then they say listen we 298 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE have to try for a total disability. We have to show that we are unemployable. Keep in mind in Workers Compensation that's a very difficult standard. It’s -- it's frankly much easier to be found totally disabled under the social security disability Act than it is the Workers Compensation.

And whether that should or shouldn't be true is another open for debate but that is the reality that we face in Workers Compensation. So yes that does for somebody to say no, I want to go forward and that involves significant litigation, significant costs and it could end up actually costing the employer or the carrier more money and so that way you know there's always let's face it one of the issues you're going to face is what kind of fiscal note might this have and the reality is that if you limit three away day you are also going to push people more towards trying to establish that they're permanently and totally disabled. And if you're able to do that theoretically they can get those full Workers Comp benefits for the rest of their life. But again that is a very difficult standard but when it comes to the issue of a fiscal note and I that we all know that is a big issue and that that is a reality that it's not -- it's not -- you're not comparing apples to oranges you're not going to say okay if we increase this then we're going to have this increased cost because if you do that you also may have a decreased cost in total disability benefits

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Back when I used to be involved in these kinds of things, getting social security disability really didn't help very much towards the total disability for Workers Compensation. Has that changed at all?

MARK LEIGHTON: No it is not, and in fact most of the time if I have a client who is established as totally disabled under the social security administration standard if I'm trying to establish that they are totally disabled and I’ve done these 299 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE and I’ve had these trials the reality is, is that testimony that evidence quite often is not going to be even introduced. It won't be allowed because they say it is a different tribunal, it's a different standard and therefore we cannot, or should not be persuaded by another system that's there. If they do allow it and sometimes they will they'll say it goes to the weight. But the reality is they placed no weight on that.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Do I have time to ask another question? Pardon?

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Sure, please proceed, Representative Winkler.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Okay so I get the feeling that Worker's Comp is a black box that has unpredictable outcomes for the people outside it. It makes perfect sense to the people inside it but outside they can't -- I guess the people inside can't hear the screams. So you said that everybody and almost everybody in this system understands that what you described tonight was a terrible resolve. But every time I ask the Workers Comp Commissioner a question I can't get him to ever say it's a terrible resolve or a terrible problem. It's always just try the system and see what happens so my question to you is, do you think that the Commissioner himself would say that this is a terrible resolve?

MARK LEIGHTON: I guess that depends upon whether you're asking that on the record or off the record. Okay the reality is, is that they are going to say as we heard Chairman Morelli earlier comment that, well listen I don't want to be -- have this used as persuasive, but -- so I think they would say, well yes I think it is but they don't -- but that is not going to be something that they -- I suspect would put on the record. I could be wrong in that because I will tell you that there probably is most everybody in -- in the Worker's Comp system that agrees that if there's one area that really is 300 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE horrendous, this is it. But again it's easy to say it's another thing to do.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): And last question. Partial disability the differential was never permanent for life. It was only at the discretion of the Commissioner?

MARK LEIGHON: That is correct. Always discretionary on the commissioner, both as to the amount and as to the duration. Okay. And again, now it's absolute. You cannot go beyond that. And to take that discretion away from the Commissioner is extremely unfortunate. And harsh, extremely harsh.

REP. WINKLER (56TH): Thank you. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chair.

MARK LEIGHTON: No, I thank you for taking the time.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): No problem.

MARK LEIGHTON: Have a nice evening, folks.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Have a good evening. Take care.

MARK LEIGHTON: You too.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Up next, we have Ms. Denise Falzone. Ms. Falzone are there?

DENISE FALZONE: Hello.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Hi Ms. Falzone.

DENISE FALZON: Hello.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): The floor is yours.

DENISE FALZONE: Thank you. Thank you to the Committee for hearing my testimony today in support of the COVID relief and essential Workers pay Bill. 301 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

My name is Denise Falzone, and I have worked for over 12 years at Team Early Education Program, where I am also the union steward with 32 BJ SEIU for the program's lower Naugatuck Valley division. When the pandemic first hit, we shut our doors last March. Team reached out to the teaching staff to ask if we could provide childcare for essential workers from Griffin hospital. I volunteered as I did not have young children to care for and I wanted to support the hospital in our community and this assignment. I did childcare for preschool and school-aged children four days a week, five hours per day. I was paid time and a half for these hours and paid my regular hourly rates for my additional hours for which we were shut down. On April 20, I was diagnosed with COVID-19 as were my husband and my adult son. We were able to manage our systems at home. But we were all out of work for one month. While I was out sick, Team did pay me without using my PTO due to the shutdown. And I believe this was a fair and responsible thing for them to do for my family. When team reopened the program in July for young children ages zero to five all of the teachers returned. And there were precautions taken including mask wearing, temperature checks, health screenings, class size reductions and more. As expected, however, we did have staff and children get COVID-19.

Teachers were forced to quarantine if there was a child in their care with -- who was COVID positive. And if it happened was we were able to use the special two-week time off established for COVID. Unfortunately, there have been cases of staff being quarantine several times straining their own PTO. In certain cases teachers have been required to quarantine past the 10 or 14 days the CDC recommended. Quarantining precautions to make sense but teachers going without pay does not. All of the teachers are essential. We care for children so others can work. We help our community in a time of crisis. None -- nevertheless, the hazard pay and COVID compensation I received from my work for caring for the hospital's children turned out to be 302 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the rare exception. It is unfair that teachers should have to sacrifice their own PTO when their employer is requiring them to be out of work. And when the very nature of our work puts us at an increased risk of catching COVID. It is demoralizing that our sacrifice isn't supported with regular hours of pay. That is why I hope the committee will vote to support both of these Bills. Thank you for your opportunity to express the concerns of my fellow union members, and myself.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Thank you Miss Falzone. Any questions or comments? Seeing none, thank you Ms. Falzone for your testimony this evening.

DENISE FALZONE: Thank you.

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Good evening. Up next, Mr. James Case.

JAMES CASE: Hey, Senator Cabrera, how are you tonight?

SENATOR CABRERA (17TH): Good buddy. How are you?

JAMES CASE: doing okay. I am here, James Case I'm with CWA Local 1298. We represent more than 2500 telecommunications workers in America -- not in America in Connecticut. Predominantly, AT&T and Frontier. I'm here in support of House Bill 6478 an Act concerning workers compensation. I would urge you all -- I'm sorry, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter, Senator Sampson, Representative Arora, Vice-Chairs and Members. I would urge you to read my testimony online, because I'm going to go a little off script. Some of the -- there's been such great testimony today that -- been kind of inspired to tell some of my own story. A quick shout out to Rick Hart, who had fantastic testimony. But particularly Michael Baldwin had talked about how his -- his children had to stay -- stay with his sister-in-law for months, because he didn't want to put them at risk. And that spoke to 303 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE me because I did the same thing. I worked for Frontier.

And we've been essential employees throughout the pandemic. No hazard pay, particularly in the beginning, no PPE. In fact, when -- when we finally got masks in, I had to sign one out, because they didn't have enough and I had to tell them why I needed to be protected from a deadly virus. Meanwhile, they didn't have to explain why they didn't have the PPE. But on Easter, I got a fever and I got sick. Luckily, my wife and I had sent our children to their other parents because I'm re- married to stay and I was then quarantined and had symptoms for over five weeks. I didn't get to see my kids for easy eight to nine weeks, including my son's 11th birthday. That being said, I got off lucky. I never had to be hospitalized. I'm along Hauler, I’ve had problems with exhaustion almost every day, in the last 11 months.

My taste and sense of smell has finally started to come back after all this time. And, you know, the essential workers, they don't have a choice to stay home. They are required to go to do their job to keep our country running. For me, as a telecom worker, I'm the one that goes and make sure that your data is running, and your phone systems keep working. And that's all necessary. In the weeks before I got sick, I worked in Hartford Hospital, I worked in the Convention Center, I worked in a headquarters of an insurance -- a world headquarters of an insurance company grocery stores. I mean, if I had a choice of staying home, I would have absolutely stayed home and kept myself safe. I did not have that choice. So because I was required to go out. I was made susceptible to this virus and consequently got it. The Workers Comp presumption is absolutely necessary. There's no reason that the burden of proof should be on the employee that has no other recourse but to put themselves in danger, versus the employer who is requiring them to do so. And I appreciate everyone that spoke before me 304 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE because it's all been heartfelt and fascinating. And I thank you for your time. I urge you guys all to vote for House Bill 6478. And I'm open for any questions you guys have.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Jim. And it's good to see you here. And I'm so sorry you went through that struggle with COVID. It's hard for all of us, especially when it's folks we know like you from your time up at the legislature. So I do see a hand. Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. And you know, I don't have any questions for you. Glad to see you. Glad you're well. I had no idea you had gone through all that. And you look great. I mean, you really do and I hope you're feeling better. But I'm glad I really am sincerely I mean that I'm glad that you're doing better. You're doing well and the family as well. And I thank you for sharing that story with us all.

JAMES CASE: Thank you,

I've said it all the time, and I'll say it again. There's so much power in that. So thank you for coming before us and just letting the world know was really going on. This is really necessary. Not an option. It's an obligation and we need to get it done now. So thank you.

JAMES CASE: Thank you.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You're welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Representative Porter. I don't see any other hand. So thanks so much. And we will look at your written testimony as well.

JAMES CASE: Great. Thank you for the time. I appreciate it. Take care, everybody. 305 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Have a good evening. Next up, we have 119 Darion young.

DARION YOUNG: Hey, how's it going? Everybody hear me fine?

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yes. Hi, Darion.

DARION YOUNG: Oh, It's been a long day. Good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Porter and Members of the community that I just said, my name is Darion young. And I've worked in state service for about seven and a half years. And Currently I work in Whiting as a forensic treatment specialist. I'm here today to testify in support of the hero pay in Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595. Before the pandemic -- demons have plenty of time to get organized and figure out exactly what they needed to do. But when the pandemic hit, as you've been hearing all day, from several other agencies, management's first reaction was to come on the units and take all of our PPE. They took all of our gloves, all of our sanitation wipes, you know, damn near everything. They took them off the unit completely.

We thought we're going to get, you know, they're going to replace the supplies but they didn't. They pretty much were winging it. They had employees coming in -- we had some employees coming into work wearing their own masks. However, the directors of nursing will tell people that they weren't allowed to wear masks. Now, the first patient we had on one of our units, he was symptomatic he was an older man was having trouble breathing and coughing. We had no PPE to protect ourselves and our patients. Nurses were swabbing patients without wearing masks or gloves because management took the gloves away at some point. The administration started allowing people to wear masks but we had to sign a waiver in order to wear one which I never really understood. However a few days later it was mandatory now, 306 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE everyone had to wear a mask the rules changed so many times I can’t even count. COVID came into the building because patients were admitted with COVID. We establish a COVID unit it kind of was on the spot because they were making this up as it went along and no one was wearing masks at this point. We didn't have PPEs on the units everyone on this unit got exposed and pretty much everyone on that unit got sick. Other people who floated from other units to cover our unit would then go back to their original unit and bring COVID with them so it kept spreading. Staffing levels were so low prior to the pandemic that flow and staff were needed everywhere. It spread like wildfire.

And it took its turn on every unit the whole thing was a mess. Now me personally I got COVID and it almost killed me my wife works from home and my kids at the time they were distant learning my family was safe from exposure except me because I was essential. I caught COVID from work and I bought it home. I got my wife sick and my oldest daughter as well. I really got sick pretty much on Mother's day is when it hit me and I was symptomatic for about eight or nine days once I started feeling better I started having complications because I started coughing up blood which resulted in multiple pulmonary embolisms and that could have really taken me out. They are very serious class and I 'm stuck taking blood thinners still because of COVID. I still have bouts of fatigue where I don’t even feel like getting out of bed.

However I have to come into work still and we're still short- staffed each day. So I 'm guaranteed to get mandated so I 'm working 16 hours every day I work. The amount of stress is incredible now I 'm almost a year removed from this COVID infection but I still have lingering effects and I hope they go away but they still don't understand exactly what this does long term. Now workers like me have to continuously keep working. Continuously keep sweeping up and continuously keep going into this 307 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE fire every day. We deserve hero pay. There are signs and people ya'll say we're heroes, they say in commercials on TV and yet no one wants to compensate us for these risks. We survived but there's no telling what the long term effects on someone's health and I know for a fact if I had the ability to work from home during this time I would have never gotten this. I got it at work and I'm putting my family's life in danger it's real and the fact that we have to go through these hoops is a slap in the face. There are two different Connecticut's the rich make their money because of the essential workers the middle class, coming to work every day we're the ones at risk. We're the ones taking care of our patient’s day in and day out. When I signed up to work in hazardous duty I knew I had to be at work rain, sleet, hail, snow. However--

CLERK: Mr. Young, your three minutes are up, please conclude your remarks.

DARION YOUNG: Thank you. No one anticipated this life-threatening virus I just urge you please pass Senate Bill 1002 and House Bill 6595.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you Darion, you look very young I hope you don't mind if I impose and ask you your age.

DARION YOUNG: I'm 41.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah. You know, I think some of us believe that young people wouldn't get this or wouldn't get as sick and you know hearing that from you is very important. Also my other question is, did you apply for Workers Compensation?

DARION YOUNG: I did, it was a few months after because during the time -- I remember before the pandemic started there was talks that yeah this should be covered and so on and so forth but when everything hit it was just chaos so that conversation kind of got pushed to the back so after 308 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

I came down with COVID my concern was you know I want to be covered because if I have any complications you know I want to be covered. I did fill out paperwork I really should follow up on it to make sure that they went through but I followed up -- did the paperwork -- gosh I want to say probably around September and I came down with this in May.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And do you remember the day that you came down with it?

DARION YOUNG: I came down with it on Mother's Day it was May 10 when it hit me.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): So I would encourage you to follow up on your claim, you are one of those that would -- because you got it prior to the 20th of May, which was the Executive Order from the Governor, you should have a presumption of having gotten COVID at work. And so I would encourage you to follow up on that claim. Because I think you're correct in being concerned about the long term impact of COVID on you, and you need to make sure that if you, they, I t's good that you file the claim, but you need to make sure that you follow up on it to make sure that it's moving through the process. I can't tell you how important it is to hear stories. I know -- I see that my Co-Chair, Representative Porter, her hand -- has her hand up. And you know, I just -- before I call her I know we were hearing what was going on in your -- you know, in corrections and it was -- it was very frustrating to us that there weren't more precautions taken. So, you know, I’m very sorry that this happened to you and your family. And hopefully we can fix things so it doesn't happen again. Representative Porter

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you so much for your testimony this evening, Darion. My first question your family, everyone is well?

309 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DARION YOUNG As of right now everyone is good.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay, great. That's what I wanna hear. I'm glad you're doing better. And I was gonna ask the same thing that the senator asked, because, you know, we had folks come through from the insurance company, you know, their Workers Comp works good, people understand, there's posters in bus stands and folks know what to do. Right, and here you are, that was September, you know, you took the first step, but you didn't follow up. Really not clear. Right? On what next steps and what are your options. So this is why story is so important. Because it really does bring home the validity of the anecdote, right? This is your lived experience, this is what you're going through. And this is why we have this legislation before us. Because you're right, we can't keep calling you a hero if we don't treat you like one. And we can't say you're essential. And they'll provide you with essential pay and essential healthcare to satisfy your essential needs. So just -- just trust that -- we're at the back, and we're doing everything we can to make sure that we get this through. And I would encourage you, I mean, your colleagues, the folks that you work with family members, people you see on the road, talk about this stuff, and tell them to reach out to their legislators. Because that is what moves legislation in the building. It's what I call outside interference. We need to hear from you all that's why these Public Hearings are so important. We understand everybody, you know, doesn't participate don't have access. They aren't civically engaged, whatever it is. But you are so you take this power that you have, and empower other people so that we can get done what we need to get done. All right?

DARION YOUNG: I appreciate that. Thank you.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Yes. Thank you. And you have a good night.

310 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

DARION YOUNG: You too.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): I don't -- I don’t see any other hands. So thank you. Mr. Young. Thank you for being with us tonight.

DARION YOUNG: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Next up, we have 120, Sean Howard. Sean, are you there? Yes I see you go ahead.

SEAN HOWARD: Yeah, I'm here Senator. Good evening, Senator Kushner, Representative Robin Porter, and the rest of the Labor Committee. My name is Sean Howard, I’m a state Correctional Officer and President of Local 387. Representing Frontline Prison staff in the Cheshire Correctional Complex. I 'm here to speak in favor of the House Bill 6478. And submitting this testimony on behalf of AFSCME Local 387 AFCSCME Local 1565 and AFSCME Local 391. Together our three unions represent more than 4500 dedicated state prison employees. As you know, state -- state prisons were Petri Dish for the spread of COVID-19. At the beginning of our pandemic, the three correctional units had to buy over 10,000 masks just to make sure we had some protection during this. Since March 2020, more than 1000 correctional staff and more than 4100 offenders have tested positive for the Coronavirus and 17 offenders have died from this virus.

I contracted COVID-19 while on the job and more than a year later, I 'm still living with the damage from this disease. COVID-19 left me with a heart condition. It left me everyday fatigued and short of breath. And the worst part is, sometimes I can’t even play with my son. I see a cardiologist now regularly now and seven medications due to this heart condition that I got from COVID-19. My cardiologist has confirmed that this is something I’ll probably always deal with for the rest of my life, and my life will never be the same. I filed for Workman's Compensation, but my claim like so 311 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE many others remains in a holding pattern. I have ever -- I haven’t been denied, but I haven’t received my rightful benefits.

My colleagues and corrections use their own sick personal and vacation time to recover from this disease. This I s not right. When it's clear, we got COVID-19 while on the job. Throughout the pandemic, my fellow correctional employees and I have gotten the job done for the people of Connecticut, we kept our facilities running despite the risks because our communities depend on us. When the pandemic hit, my job became essential and dangerous at the same time. But the system is saying we don't matter by ignoring our workman's Comp claim and the long term health impact. The system is saying it's my problem and my fault, that's just not right. COVID-19 has caused financial health problems for thousands of workers who can't, -- who contracted the virus on the job. We need to fix the Workman's Compensation system to protect our workers in our time of need. Governor Lamont's Executive Order was a start, but it covered a limited time period and my -- to my knowledge, no one has even been appropriately compensated for their claims. We can and must do a better job for frontline, public, and private sector workers who got the virus on the job and whose lives have been harmed as a result. Therefore, I 'm asking you to support House Bill 6478. I 'm also asking that you support the heroes pay, because like -- like my fellow colleagues have said, you say we're heroes, show us. Thank you all for your time.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you, Sean, and thank you for representing all those workers and corrections. You know, we -- we know that by having representation people have a shot at these things. And without it's so hard for workers. But I do -- I do wanna say one of the things that concerns me and me t good. You know, I t's good that you've testified about your own Worker's Comp case, because one of the things we've heard throughout the day 312 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE from various experts is that we haven't seen very many of these cases resolved.

And I think what people mean there is we don't expect them to be finalized, because so many people are still don't know yet the full extent to which they'll need to support the Worker's Comp system. But what I understand is that the responsibility for the injury has not been accepted by the employer. So these cases have not been deemed accepted, therefore, you're still in Nowhere Land in terms of knowing whether or not you're ever going to get compensated. And I think that's got to be tough on you, when you've been through what you've been through. And so I wish there was a way for us to move that part of the process along. So even if - - you know, all of the determinations having been made as to how much you would get or, you know -- and some of those won't be able to be determined until, you know, sometime down the road. But at least you would know that you were -- that there was responsibility that the employer was taking that responsibility for that claim. And, -- and I think that must be so frustrating to you. So I can appreciate you being here. And, and I appreciate your testifying and letting us know about that.

SEAN HOWARD: I appreciate everything you guys are doing, Senator, I really do.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Yeah, that's a tough fight. And I feel like, people don't realize it, this is -- you know, we -- I think everybody realizes that what we're experiencing globally, is something that is, you know, a once in a lifetime, hopefully a once I n a lifetime occurrence. And it hasn't happened to this world since the epidemic or the pandemic of 1918. And so we're talking about more than a century ago. But at the same time, it just doesn't feel like we've really come up with the solutions. They're very piecemeal. And here we are trying to do something now that's very, very forward thinking and not piecemeal, trying to really look at 313 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE the -- as much as we can with this omnibus Bill, of everything we need to do to help workers get through this.

SEAN HOWARD: We appreciate because we do deserve better. We put our lives on the line and lives have been lost to this terrible pandemic. And a lot of lives will never be the same due to this pandemic. And I wouldn’t wish this on anybody. I know my life will never be the same and there's people that are even worse than me. So I appreciate everything that you guys are doing.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you and thank you for being with us tonight. And take care yourself and stay in touch.

SEAN HOWARD: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Representative Porter. Yes.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Thank you, Madam Chair. Just really quick, I 'm just going to echo the Senator's sentiments and just thank you. You know, thank you and all your colleagues what you do, and for the sacrifices you make, and I 'm glad that you're better. I know you're not 100%. All of these, all these stories that I 've heard tonight, I haven't said it, but I 'm saying it to you, and I 'm hoping the folks before you hear it as well, but you've definitely in my thoughts and prayers. And I believe in the power of prayer. And I just wanted to leave that with you tonight, because you've been through a lot. You know, and it's not over, It's not over there is this long formless thing. I have a constituent and I 'm going through this for her. And it breaks my heart. It really does. And -- and, it's just not right. And we are -- we're doing our due diligence to do right for you all. So hang in there just a little while longer. A little while longer, while we convince the rest our crew that this is what we need to do. All right. 314 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SEAN HOWARD: I appreciate the kind words Representative, you have a great night.

REP. PORTER (94TH): You as well. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Next up we have number 123. Brittany Manley. Brittany, are you with us? I 'm gonna give Brittany a minute to get on. I know that -- I know that. Oh, here you are. I know you -- I know you're working tonight. So -- and -- I really appreciate you taking a break to join us. So thank you.

BRITTANY MANLEY: I apologize. I am on the clock, so if any of you been -- there's a phone call, I apologize. I also wanted to thank all of you. I know you've had a very long day. The fact that you've made it almost 12 hours is -- we appreciate it, and taking the time to listen to us on both sides is very important. But I would like to say good evening to all of you. And I -- my name is Brittany Manley, I am -- I live in Danbury. I wrote this out because I 'm a little nervous. I 'm not gonna lie. I am a medical surgical certified nurse here in the float pool at Danbury hospital. But I primarily worked on the COVID unit at Danbury hospital throughout the pandemic. I 'm here to show my support in favor of House Bill 6569. I believe in this legislation because throughout the pandemic, I watched my colleagues and I give absolutely everything we had to our neighbors and communities.

Prior to COVID, I would have a patient pass away probably once a month, usually expected usually peaceful and usually surrounded by loved ones. But on Friday, March 13, almost to the day, everything changed. I usually work three night shifts a week, sometimes picking up extra. And I started to see patients dying every single shift. Oftentimes more than one. Their deaths were brutal. And I could do nothing to stop it. Nothing to help. And if you ask 315 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE any nurse what the worst possible patient outcome is, we will never say death because sometimes death can be a blessing. It is irrevocably being unable to give someone dignity at the end of their life. If they die in pain, or die alone. I watched patient's oxygen needs, climb and climb until we could do no more and the intermission that followed that was most often a death sentence. Watching an otherwise healthy man as he's well down to the I CU FaceTime his wife, who had not seen him since he went into the hospital. He was asking her to tell their children he loved them, not knowing if he would ever see them again. We ran out of equipment to monitor our patients, sometimes reduced iPads, we'd zoom calls to watch for when they stopped breathing, alone. We ran out of staff to take care of them. Nurses going into six and seven critically ill patients while we were promised a 4:1 ratio. We were told to conserve PPE, even when we knew it'd put us at risk and it'd put our families at risk. I had one night where so many patients had died both on the evening shift and on night shift that -- their death certificates were laid out on the nurse's station and they're waiting doctor's signature because they were too busy to come sign them. We needed to get room on the floor. So they went down to the morgue without the death certificates initially with other paperwork, but we noticed that one of the death certificates had, had the sticker mixed up. So I had to go down to the morgue ensure she had been labeled correctly.

Upon arrival, I was horrified to be taken to a refrigerator truck full of dead bodies stuffed on top of each other, like grotesque bunk beds. To this moment, I remember that exact feeling, the despair that I -- we weren't winning, and we weren't going to win. And I can -- to this moment, I feel that pain. I have never felt that -- as powerless as I have in that moment. And it changed me, it really did. But I 'm lucky enough to recognize the joy, I get to see the world around me, the hope that -- that is everywhere, that I find in my coworkers that 316 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

I find him people, like you lovely folks who are fighting for us. And the vaccine, getting to see people have their lives back a little bit. But in the back of my head, I never forget those people that we couldn't save. I would be lying if I didn't know the effects that the last year has brought. I always took for granted my ability to have compassion and all things. It is who I was, it is who I am. And I noticed myself having to struggle to care in a way that's never happened in my life. That once never ending wealth of understanding, had run dry. And I did not know where to go from there. How do I be a nurse I can't care, when I 'm trying to survive.

When I 'm watching my coworkers feel the same way and we try to talk to each other, but the trauma just keeps coming. People are still dealing with COVID every day I work with nurses who face it still. And sometimes you don't win. You know that all our wonderful options we have now. This trauma, this heartbreak, this compassion fatigue is only compounded by a healthcare system that only takes and gives nothing back. We received no hazard pay during the pandemic. We received no bonuses. Unless we work extra shifts over our full eight hours over our controlled hours, actually. We receive no mental health services, no encouragement to seek them out if we needed them. And we were continual and still are, understaffed and overworked. I have a hundred stories of death and horror and of hope. But my fellow healthcare workers and first responders and essential workers have a thousand more. I ask that you take a moment. I mean -- I know you've had the whole day hearing this, but to understand what has been given and what has been taken from us. I ask that you decide to be leaders, I in showing care and compassion for the caretakers. We are so incredibly tired, but we will keep fighting for you guys. We will keep fighting for your friends and your loved ones, because that's who we are. I ask that you consider fighting for us. Thank you for your time.

317 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, Brittany, you and I’ve met before.

BRRITANY MANLEY: Yes, we have.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): And you are -- you said a lot more tonight than you said that night. But even that night, via zoom, I understood that there was an issue we had to address in terms of the Post Traumatic Stress Injury that our healthcare workers are experiencing. And you have a -- you're a big part of why we're doing this blow with the PTSI coverage for healthcare workers. You know, we always intended to do it all these years, that expand PTSI to EMTs, and Dispatchers and DOC workers, but we did not intend to include healthcare workers. Because we didn't know what was going to happen. We had no idea this pandemic was coming. But it hit us and it hit you all, so hard. And I just knew that there was no way we could do it at this time and not recognize the healthcare workers, for what you've experienced. And I appreciate the way you shared with us tonight, because I t's very meaningful for you to express how hard it will be for you to feel that compassion because of what you've been through, and the nightmare you've been through. So, you know, it's -- it’s very important that you tell your story. I 'm glad that others got to hear it, because I know, when I heard it, I was with some of my colleague legislators from the Danbury delegation, we were all very much moved by what you had to say. Okay, it's been a long day, but I think you really brought it together here. And I see representative Porter would like to say a few words.

REP. PORTER (94TH): Very few because all has been said by Senator Kushner. We think a lot of like -- and I 'm just -- I 'm really sorry that you've had the experience and so many others, like you have had to have this experience, but I thank God for you, and that you're there. And that you are the one providing that service. And as you're fighting, you know, you still really keep fighting for us. We're 318 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE fighting for you. And we've been fighting since this pandemic started. And we're gonna keep fighting until we get done what needs to be done. And we're going to do right, and I just -- I just want you to know that. I 've said I t several other people before you but it's late, you've been with us for almost 12 hours now, waiting to have your three minutes. And I just -- you're appreciated you matter, what you do -- what you do day in and day out matters. And don't you think that it's going unnoticed, unappreciated. But talk is cheap. And it's time for us to walk the walk. And it's time for us to do right, so, yeah. We're with you. In more ways than you know. In more ways than you know. So keep doing what you're doing and know that we're fighting and that you're in my prayers. And I wish you all the best. If there's anything that we can do, I mean [Inaudible] a rock star you know. But I 'm here as well and several other legislators she has a team of us. So call on one of us. Call on us if you need us. I'm tired, but I had to address you, Brittany, after that. I really did. So thank you so much. Thank you, Madam Chair.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. And Brittany, I 'm very - you know, you work at my hospital. I call it my hospital because if I get sick, that's the hospital I end up in. And when my husband had surgery a number of years ago, one of the nurses who came was somebody I knew. It is a small town here in Danbury. When I went to get my COVID vaccine at the hospital, I said who I was and the nurse who was administering was friends was another legislator, Allie-Brennan who you know as well. So you know, it is a small town and hearing from our nurses at the hospital means a great deal to us and we're going to continue to work on this and try and get it right for you. So thank you so much for being with us tonight.

BRITTANY MANLEY: Thank you all for your hard work. It is much appreciated.

319 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Take care. And so come to I think the last person on the list. I see number 124 is here. Cameron, Champlin. And Cameron, are you can you hear us? Are you hear? Cam?

CAMERON CHAMPLIN: I can hear you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Okay, yeah, go ahead and finish off the night for us.

CAMERON CHAMPLIN: All right. I know you were waiting for me.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Well, I’ve heard you testify before, so I was looking forward to it.

CAMERON CHAMPLIN: Well, I just meant I 'm the last one. Anyway, I just -- I just wanna say I 've got a few bills I want to speak on but for the sake of time, I 'm just gonna speak on one. But, Chairwoman Porter, Chairwoman Kushner, Ranking Member Sampson and Arora. And members of this Committee, my name is Cameron Champlin, I represent plumbers and pipefitters Local Union 777. Local 777 is comprised of approximately 3500 men and women that live and work in the state of Connecticut this testimony is strong support on the following Bills. Senate Bill 999, 1002. House Bill 6478 and House Bill 6595. I really wanna speak about 999, but for the sake -- I just want to say a couple of things about the Workers Comp Bills.

It's about time that the contractor or the employer has to prove that the employee is wrong. Because so many times employees are held up from getting the proper compensation and at times they have to take a lesser amount than they really want because it goes on and on. They may get a little bit of money but not enough to keep them going they settled for much less. I had when -- I was a business manager I had one of my members that took a lot less money they deserved. And I said, “Why did you do that?” He said Camey, “I was gonna lose my house.” He says, 320 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

“I couldn’t live and support my family on what they were giving me.” So I just think this is a good thing not only for COVID, but for everything else.

And I know you've heard a lot of testimonial a lot of [Inaudible] the last girl, it’s hard to follow her actually. A lot of these things much more personal than what I 'm talking about on 999. But 999 requires any entity that is approved to construct a renewable energy project and just subsidized by the state payers -- state taxpayers of the state of Connecticut compensate their employees with wages and benefits that are adequate enough for that employee to be a productive part of society. But that didn't mean that they can enjoy some expendable income which is spent on small businesses in their communities. It includes a requirement that the employer has a certified state of Connecticut apprenticeship program which ensures a -- ensures a good positive career for that person's future. With the requirements that are included in this Bill and ensures that these projects will be constructed with employees that are well trained, competent craftsmen that are fairly compensated with wages and benefits that will allow them to live comfortably in the state.

We cannot forget that these projects that are constructed with a project labor agreement in place is in agreement with the contractor union and the community to ensure that residents of the community are included in the project along with the residents of the distressed communities. This will have a positive effect on helping our economic downturn to recover more quickly. I just wanna -- I could send in written testimony I just wanted to add -- you know we have subsidized companies to come in here and start a business and they pay low wages and a lot of times they're employees and they're on state subsistence. So what are we doing? This is something that I think is long overdue and hopefully you will all see it fit to pass this through and with that I 321 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

'm going to end so that you can ask any questions or just end this and you go home and go to bed.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): thank you Cam, the one thing though one of the few advantages of doing this stuff by zoom is that when we finish we are home. And so it’s easier to -- to get relaxed afterward. But you know, I have an hour drive from the capitol so I can't tell you how much I prefer ending at this hour and being I n my home. You know we've had a lot of people testify about this Bill today I think I t's very helpful to hear from you because it does give us that perspective about how important it is to have good jobs with good benefits for Connecticut workers I n the trades and particularly, it makes me very proud of my friends in the labor movement who embrace these renewable energy sources and see that this is an opportunity for us to move forward in a way that protects the planet and the environment for all of us but also takes care of the workers here in the state so we really appreciate your testimony and your advocacy on this issue ,it's really it's really great effort and I 'm hopeful that we can get this done and in the legislature so thanks for being with us tonight I don't see any other hands I know my Representative porter I s going to want to say something at the end of the night here. Representative she's waving to you. I don’t see any other hands. So we will close out the evening with you. And I also want to thank you for acknowledging Brittany's testimony when you spoke I -- you know, I think I t must be very hard to speak after, after someone who has experienced what she has seen and what she shared with us tonight.

CAMERON CHAMPLIN: Thank you very much for everything you do in all the committee. Appreciate it.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Thank you. Yeah, I think we have come to the end of the evening, or the day of testimony. We -- you are the last speaker and 322 March 11, 2021 ma/km LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 10:00 A.M. COMMITTEE

I would like to thank all the Members of the Committee. I know that there are other committee Public Hearings. In fact, I think there might even be another one that's still going on tonight. We might not be -- have finished last, I think. But I do believe that. We had a good day of testimony. We learned a lot. And we will take up these issues as we move through the legislative session. So I appreciate everyone who was on today, all of our committee members for being with us today. And a closing remarks. Representative Porter.

REP. PORTER (94TH): No, I just wish everyone a good night. A good restful night and a good day tomorrow. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, everyone. Thanks, Cam.

CAMERON CHAMPLIN: Thank you.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): Representative Arora, any closing remarks?

REP. ARORA (151ST): No, thank you and everybody have a good night.

SENATOR KUSHNER (24TH): All right. Thank you all and thank you to our Clerk who has been with us all day. Getting us through the list and to my legislative aide. Mike Fallon, thank you and Mike-- I'm sorry, I don't know how to pronounce your last name. I 'm sorry, Mike, who is a Sessional working with us today too. So and -- and give our regards to Stephanie, who did such a great job stepping up and, and translating when we needed her to do so. So thank you all and we'll see you soon at the next Committee Meeting of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. Take care and have a good night.

CAMERON CHAMPLIN: Good night.