At the Labor & Workplace Standards Committee hearing Friday, March 14, senators and industry representatives discussed substitute Senate Bill 5191, which would modify the Paid Family & Medical Leave (PFML) program’s definition of “employer” to cover representatives that report and remit premiums for dock workers who typically work for multiple employers interchangeably under collective bargaining arrangements.

Staff described the change as limited in scope: employer representatives would be required to fulfill PFML obligations for dock workers covered by a collectively bargained agreement; representatives would not be required to report workers who are not covered by that collective bargaining agreement. The change mirrors how the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) currently functions as a payrolling and administrative agent for its member companies, proponents said.

Senator Steve Conway, sponsor of the bill, said the measure addresses administrative barriers for longshore workers who have multiple employers in a week and that using a single labor‑management committee for reporting would simplify PFML claims. Testimony from the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and PMA emphasized the practical payroll and tax reasons for the change: PMA’s representative role allows dock workers to receive a single paycheck and avoids excessive tax withholding across multiple employers.

Douglas Deetz of ILWU Local 21 described workers who may load logs one day and grain the next, arguing the single‑reporting approach would reduce tax over‑withholding and ease PFML administration. Cameron Williams of the ILWU Coast Longshore Division said the bill “would allow our dock workers to continue to receive their payroll in the manner that they've historically received it and create efficiencies for the parties to administer…paid family medical leave contributions.” Kristen Oliveira of the Pacific Maritime Association said PMA is not the employer of longshore workers and that the amendment would not change employment status but would permit premium calculations to be based on combined annual wages.

Committee members had no recorded questions in the hearing transcript; the committee later closed testimony on the measure and continued with other items.