The Virginia Labor and Commerce Committee advanced 13 bills covering topics from unemployment benefits for locked-out workers to solar prevailing wage requirements, with the most contested measures — including SB433 (lockout unemployment benefits), SB637 (Virginia Human Rights Act employer definition), and SB758 (solar prevailing wage) — passing 14 to 6 while several unanimous 21-to-0 votes reflected broader consensus on consumer protection and franchise law measures.
+ 11 more actions
Michael J. Webert argued that the costs of unemployment benefits for locked-out workers are borne by every employer in the Commonwealth who pays into the trust fund, asking whether Virginia businesses were being asked to subsidize one side of a private kind of negotiation when it comes to an employer and employee situation. Alfonso H. Lopez responded that he did not characterize it like that, but offered no further elaboration on the record. The bill passed 14 to 6, consistent with the subcommittee's 4 to 2 vote.
+ 2 more controversies
“Those costs of the unemployment benefits are borne by every employer in the commonwealth who pays into the trust fund. So are we asking Virginia businesses to subsidize one side of a private kind of negotiation when it comes to an employer and employee situation?”
+ 4 more quotes
Subscribe to see all key actions, controversies, quotes, and what's next.
Sign in to subscribeI will now call to order the Committee on Labor and Commerce. I'm going to wait for a second until everyone is seated and I'll ask the clerk to open the roll so we can take attendance. We have a quorum. The clerk can close the roll. We're going to begin with subcommittee reports. Sub two, Chair Lopez. Thank you, Madam Chair. Subcommittee two had a few, I think approximately 70 bills that we reported out. The first bill, Madam Chair, was SB240 from Senator Head regarding retail franchise agreements governing law competition restrictions. The bill provides that retail franchise agreements shall be governed by the laws of the Commonwealth, prohibits any person from offering or entering into a franchise agreement that includes competition restrictions that extend beyond termination or expiration of the franchise agreement unless such settlement is approved by a court of competent jurisdiction. The subcommittee mayor commended reporting with the substitute of seven to nothing, and the substitute removed the clause prohibiting franchise agreements where the restriction is part of a settlement unless approved by a court and adds an exception for the sale of a franchise with the sales term restricting the franchise's business for up…
Subscribe to unlock the full transcript, summary, and search across all Virginia committee hearings.
Sign in to subscribe