COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. NO.: 2455-01
BILL NO.: SB 571
SUBJECT: Unemployment Benefits
TYPE: Original
DATE: January 10, 2000
FISCAL SUMMARY
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2001 | FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
| None | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All State Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2001 | FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
| None | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Total Estimated
Net Effect on All Federal Funds |
$0 | $0 | $0 |
| FUND AFFECTED | FY 2001 | FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
| Local Government | $0 | $0 | $0 |
Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses.
This fiscal note contains 3 pages.
ASSUMPTION
Officials of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations (DOLIR) assume the proposal would require misconduct to be found when an individual is discharged or suspended for testing positive for a controlled substance providing the nature of the individual's work involves heavy equipment or could place the safety of others at risk. DOLIR officials note that generally the department currently finds misconduct when an individual is discharged or suspended for failing a drug test when the policy to test is part of a collective bargaining or hiring agreement, and the individual has prior knowledge of such an agreement; or, in the case of a random drug test, there is reasonable suspicion that the person is under the influence on the job; or, there is conduct that shows impairment to the extent that it impacts on the workplace; or, the individual is in a safety-sensitive job. These factors are providing the testing procedures are reliable, and the employer has documentation to support this. Claims under the current guidelines cannot be identified, and the claims that could be affected under the new proposal cannot be predicted. Although the proposal may increase the denial of benefits, officials note that it is not possible to estimate the amount of potential savings to the unemployment compensation trust fund. However, they expect the amount would be minimal.
Officials of the Department of Economic Development - Division of Workforce Development assume the proposal would have no fiscal impact on their agency.
Officials of the Department of Public Safety - Director's Office assume the proposal could indirectly impact the department if an employee applied for unemployment compensation. They note that the Office of Administration handles all such claims for the department, with the cost charged to OA. The Divisions of Highway Safety and Fire Safety and the Capitol Police assume they would incur no fiscal impact from the proposal.
The Office of Administration did not respond to a request for fiscal impact prior to issuance of this fiscal note.
Oversight assumes that there would not be a significant impact on claims filed against the state or local governments as a result of the proposal, and therefore no fiscal impact is reflected.
| FISCAL IMPACT - State Government | FY 2001
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
| $0 | $0 | $0 |
| FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government | FY 2001
(10 Mo.) |
FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
| $0 | $0 | $0 |
FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business
No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal.
DESCRIPTION
The proposal would require misconduct to be found when a claimant for unemployment benefits is discharged or suspended for testing positive for a controlled substance providing the nature of the individual's work involves heavy equipment or could place the safety of others at risk.
This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other program and would not require additional capital improvements or rental space.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Department of Labor and Industrial Relations
Department of Economic Development - Division of Workforce Development
Department of Public Safety
NOT RESPONDING: Office of Administration
Jeanne Jarrett, CPA
Director
January 10, 2000