Retro bill: Opposition testimony

Steven Seeger, safety and health manager: “As a longtime member as the agency retro committee … I see the benefits and help shape the direction of how this program is run. We quite frankly don’t need the protection from our organizations that this bill provides.” He said the safety training benefits the workers, employers and the state. He said the bill could lead to decreased refunds for businesses “and quite frankly, 2009 is not the time to pass this bill.”

Bill Zimmerman, farmer from Vancouver: “(Membership has) been a win-win situation: A win for us, a win for the state and win for the worker, too. We joined the program for opportunities for a refund but we’ve stayed enrolled…” He said the Farm Bureau, which he is a member of, puts out numerous safety manuals that help his family business run safely.

Nancy Deikus, regional manager for a management services company: “We’ve had a Retro program for 25 years … (The bill is) premature and you need to let the process continue.” The process she’s referring to is a study commissioned by the Legislature last year to study the program. That’s what resulted in the finding that possibly tens of millions of dollars were mistakenly refunded to Retro groups. That was due to a coding error not caught by the internal auditor. The report is due in July. “I think it would be irresponsible for a bill to be introduced when a study is being done on the current status of Retro.”

Don Stoltz, owner of four grocery stores in the Puget Sound area: “It’s important to note, though, that when I look through this bill … the essence of what brought this to your attention was the error by Labor & Industries. I don’t see anything in this bill that would have changed that.”

The hearing is adjourned because they’ve run out of time. They’ll continue the public hearing on Thursday.

Tags: retro