A “no” vote on this bill is a show of support for our federalist system of government and to eliminate an unnecessary state agency. In my book, that is a win-win. Thank you, and I again urge a “no” vote.
Senator Albert asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.
The motion prevailed.
Senator Albert’s statement is as follows:
This amendment would help balance the scales of justice in certain cases where MIOSHA-imposed penalties are appealed and found to be wrongfully assessed. The amendment states that if a court determines that a penalty was wrongfully assessed against an employer, the state will pay the employer’s attorney fees associated with the penalty. This remedy would only be applied in cases where an appeal of MIOSHA penalties winds up in the state court system. It takes several steps for that to even be a possibility, as state law currently is heavily weighted in MIOSHA’s favor during appeals.
The MIOSHA appeals process has two steps before it could even reach the court system. The first appeal is a petition to MIOSHA. The agency itself reviews the appeal and makes a decision on its own ruling. A second appeal can be filed with the Board of Health and Safety Compliance and Appeals. This board is housed within the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity—the same department that houses MIOSHA. If a settlement cannot be reached at that step, a hearing is scheduled before an administrative law judge. And finally, an administrative law judge’s decision may be appealed to a circuit court. An employer may have to spend thousands upon thousands dollars in legal costs just to get their case heard in an actual courtroom. After all that, if the court decides that MIOSHA was wrong in the first place, the least the state should do is repay all those attorney fees.
Thank you, and I ask for support of my amendment.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 5460, entitled
A bill to amend 1950 (Ex Sess) PA 27, entitled “Motor vehicle sales finance act,” by amending sections 2, 12, 13, 22, and 31 (MCL 492.102, 492.112, 492.113, 492.122, and 492.131), section 2 as amended by 2013 PA 16, section 12 as amended by 1994 PA 2, section 13 as amended by 2009 PA 231, and section 31 as amended by 1995 PA 166.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows: