►
From YouTube: 4/23/2021 - Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
A
A
A
A
There
are
various
ways
that
members
of
the
public
can
engage
with
us
and
participate
throughout
the
process,
and
these
include
registering
to
participate
through
nellis,
where
you
have
an
opportunity
to
test,
find
a
bill
request
to
join
a
meeting
in
person
or
provide
public
comment.
You
can
submit
written
comment.
You
can
share
your
opinion
via
the
legislators,
opinion
application
on
nellis
or
viewing
committee
meetings
online
through
nellis
or
in
the
legislature's
youtube
channel.
A
While
we
are
in
the
hybrid
situation
of
meeting
some
in
virtual,
some
virtual
and
some
in
person
just
want
to
say
to
those
who
are
presenting
what
we
we
only
have
nine
seats
in
here,
and
so
we're
going
to
try
to
make
sure
that
we
do
this
as
equal
and
as
equitably
as
possible
and
we'll
try
to
make
sure
that
we
have
it
even
evenly
distributed
between
those
who
are
for
and
those
who
may
be
in
opposition.
A
And
there
will
also
probably
be
a
possibility
that,
if
you
have
more
than
that-
and
it
takes
more
more
than
just
two
or
three
of
your
folks-
and
you
very
well-
may
be
playing
hot
seat,
which
means
that
someone
may
come
to
testify.
But
you'll
have
to
leave
the
room
because
we
cannot
at
any
time
have
more
than
nine
people
in
here.
So
I
hope
that
you
all
will
understand
that
and
we
can
get
busy
with
it.
A
Your
name,
your
telephone
number
and
your
point
of
contact,
and
after
you
do
that,
then
you'll
receive
an
email,
giving
you
the
phone
number
and
the
meeting
id
so
that
you
can
call
in
during
the
meeting.
If
you
request
request
to
participate
in
person,
you
will
receive
an
additional
email
with
instructions
on
how
to
enter
the
building.
A
I
ask
people
if
someone
has
already
made
your
point
or
your
points
may
not
be
the
same
words,
but
if
they've
already
made
the
gist
of
your
points,
if
you
will
come
to
the
mic
and
say
ditto,
that
gives
more
people
an
opportunity
to
put
their
put
voice,
their
opposition,
their
support
or
whatever,
on
the
on
the
record,
when
you're
on
the
phone
line.
Please
please
please
pay
attention
to
which
bill
is
being
considered
and
follow.
A
The
verbal
prompts
provided
by
the
bps
staff,
so
that
you
know
when
and
which
keys
to
press,
to
raise
your
hand
or
to
unmute
yourself
and
staff
will
call
on
you
by
the
last
three
digits
of
your
telephone
number.
If
you
need
assistance
with
any
of
these
processes,
or
you
want
to
receive
electronic
notification,
then
just
send
us
an
email
at
the
email
address
listed
on
the
agenda
any
exist.
A
Any
exhibits
for
the
committee
must
be
submitted
in
electronic
format
no
later
than
8
o'clock
am
the
day
before,
and
this
is
because
we
want
to
make
sure
that
secretaries
and
committee
managers
have
an
opportunity
to
upload
all
of
the
information
if
you
send
it
at
the
last
minute.
That
does
not
allow
them
an
opportunity
to
do
that.
So
no
later
than
8
o'clock
am
the
day
before
the
meeting.
A
In
addition,
any
person
proposing
an
amendment
to
a
bill
must
be
heard
by
this
committee
must
first
talk
to
the
sponsor
and
let
them
know
that
you
intend
to
submit
an
amendment.
I
will
not
entertain
any
amendments
if
the
bill
sponsor
is
not
aware
of
that
amendment,
please
include
the
bill.
Number,
a
statement
of
intent
and
your
contact
information
and
when
you're
testifying,
remember
to
unmute
your
microphone
and
speak
clearly
and
by
all
means.
Please
project
your
voice.
A
There
are
those
who
are
listening
to
us
over
the
internet
and
they
may
not
have
computers
that
have
the
latest
sound
techniques
or
whatever,
and
when
you
whisper
like
this,
they
just
can't
hear
you
when
you
whisper
like
that,
they
can't
hear
you
so
please
project
your
voice
when
you're,
not
speaking,
remember
to
turn
your
microphone
off
so
that
there
is
no
background
noise
and
especially
those
who
are
testifying
or
presenting
remotely
anything
that
is
in
the
place
where
you
are
presenting.
A
The
microphone
will
pick
up
that
noise.
Anyone
that
walks
into
the
frame
behind
you
while
you
are
presenting,
then
everyone
watching,
will
see
that.
So
just
be
aware
of
that
committee
members,
if
you're
virtual,
you
have
a
question,
please
raise
your
hand
through
the
zoom
application
and
members
who
are
not
on
zoom
participating
from
the
committee.
Please
mute
yourself
to
let
me
know
you
have
a
question
and
finally,
please
put
your
electronic
devices,
especially
cell
phones
and
laptops
on
silent
during
the
meeting,
and
with
that
I
want
to
welcome
assemblyman
flores.
A
C
Thank
you,
madam
madam
chair,
madam
vice
chair
and
esteemed
colleagues
of
the
senate,
commerce
and
labor
committee,
I
am
assembly
medical
flores
for
the
record
proudly
representing
assembly
district
28.,
and
I
am
here
to
present
assembly
bill
130
on
behalf
of
my
constituents,
and
if
I,
if
I
could
offer
just
a
very
brief
roadmap,
if
I
intend
to
proceed
for
today,
I
wanted
to
first
explain
medpay,
uninsured
and
underinsured
and
then
explain
what
I
am
trying
to
fix
through
this
bill
and
then,
lastly,
I
will
walk
you
through
the
actual
bill
language
and
explain
exactly
how
this
language
does
exactly
what
I
intend
for
it
to
do.
C
Presently,
right
now
in
the
in
nrs,
there
is
a
reference
to
medpay,
uninsured
and
underinsured,
and
just
for
context.
If
I
could
briefly
explain
what
I
am
talking
about,
if
I
were
to
go
to
company
a
to
request
a
policy
for
the
very
first
time,
there
is
a
requirement
that
they
offer
me
medipay,
uninsured
or
underinsured.
C
These
are
typically
triggered
specifically
medpay
is
triggered
without
the
necessity
of
ever
anyone
being
at
fault.
In
other
words,
I
could
have
ran
into
somebody
and
medpay
would
trigger,
regardless
of
whether
or
not
I
was
at
fault
or
not,
which
is
different
to
other
forms
of
insurance
right
now
that
is
required
that
that
be
offered
to
anybody
who
goes
and
requests
a
policy,
but
specifically
as
written
now
in
the
statute.
It
talks
about
that.
C
That
typically
triggers
when
say,
I'm
involved
in
a
crash,
and
the
other
party
in
that
crash
does
not
have
insurance
and
or
does
not
have
enough
to
cover,
for
whatever
the
medical
expenses
damage
x,
y
and
z
may
have
been
so
underinsured
and
and
uninsured
will
trigger
to
protect
me
to
give
me
a
layer
of
added
protection
just
in
case
the
other
party
who
may
have
injured
me
cannot
make
me
whole
again.
When
we
talk
about
these
policies,
really,
that's
all
you
can
do
it
all
comes
down
to
money.
C
I'm
looking
at
page
two
section,
one
line:
22
we're
adding
the
word
or
motorcycle
to
passenger.
It
says
passenger
car
or
motorcycle
and
that's
referring
to
uninsured
or
underinsured,
and
then,
if
we
go
to
page
three
you'll
see
again
in
subsection
three,
where
it
says
or
motorcycle
and
that's
adding
the
verbiage
of
or
motorcycle
to
medipay.
That
is
all
we
are
doing.
We
are
not
changing
how
policies
work
an
insurance
company
is
not
required
to
you
know.
One
of
the
questions
that
I've
received
in
the
past
is
well.
C
How
would
this
work
very
simply?
The
insurance
company
will
say
you
want
uninsured,
underinsured
or
med
pay.
They
will
tell
you
how
much
that
costs.
They
offer
it
to
you,
you,
as
the
consumer,
decide
whether
or
not
you
want
it
done.
A
Thank
you.
So
assuming
do
you
have
anyone
else
who
is
presenting
with
you
or.
D
Thank
you
manager,
and
it's
good
to
see
you
this
morning,
somebody
in
flores
I
I
know
you
know
that
I've
handled
personal
injury
matters,
and
so
this
is.
It
makes
perfect
sense
to
me
except
the
change
in
section
two,
I'm
not
a
and-
and
it's
probably
simply
the
way,
I'm
reading
it,
but
we're
saying
a
policy
of
insurance
providing
coverage
rising
out
of
ownership,
maintenance
of
you
or
use
of
a
motor
vehicle
other
than
a
motorcycle
which
is
delivered,
and
then
it
goes
on.
D
And
so
I
I
recognize
this
is
talking
about
airbags
and
and
the
like.
But
I've
been
told
in
the
run-up
to
today's
meeting
that
we're
starting
to
see
airbag
type
technology
being
applied
on
motorcycles,
and
I'm
wondering
if
this
exclusion
is
merely
to
try
to
keep
the
language
regarding
passenger
cars
clean
or,
if
we're
deliberately
excluding
motorcycles.
Even
if
those
technologies
are
developed.
C
Thank
you
for
that
question.
Senator
through
you,
madam
chair
assembly,
medical
floors
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
that
question.
So
my
understanding
is
exactly
what
you
just
indicated.
It
is
for
the
sake
of
just
keeping
the
statute
clean
and
as
understandably
because
it
refers
to
airbags-
and
we
are
not
quite
there
yet
with
motorcycles.
C
A
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
should
we
just
discuss
the
concept
of
you
know
looking
online,
you
know
because
we've
had
some
discussions.
I
know
at
the
dmv
talking
to
individuals,
whether
it's
a
car,
whether
it's
a
motorcycle
or
what
is
it?
So
I
wonder,
would
you
want
to
think
about
discussing,
or
do
you
think
this
will
get
all
categories
a
car
in
particular
I
was
like
you
know:
it's
called
a
trigo
ev
and
they
don't
know
whether
it's
a
car,
a
motorcycle
or
it's
both,
and
so
I
was
just
curious.
C
Thank
you
senator
for
that
question
through
you,
madam
chair.
Let's.
C
Thank
you.
Senator
setter
meyer,
summoned
medgar
flores
for
the
record,
so
we
I
had
this
question
in
the
past,
with
legal
specifically
as
to
even
off-road
vehicles.
I
specifically
am
a
I
love
outdoors
and,
and
sometimes
you
know,
some
folk
will
write
it
side
by
side
in
other
forms.
This
specifically
does
not
cover
that,
and
I
know
that
to
be
the
case.
That
was
not
intentional.
C
Passenger
car
and
motorcycle
is
narrowly
tailored
and
does
exclude
some
specific
sections.
I
know
our
legal
could
potentially
jump
in
and
offer
some
additional
verbiage
to
that.
But
my
understanding
is
things
like
off-road
vehicles
and
things
like
that
would
not
be
covered,
so
it
is
narrowly
tailored
just
to
passenger
car
and
motorcycle.
E
I
appreciate
that,
as
someone
mentioned,
if
I'll
send
you
the
email
with
the
article
online
there's
a
category
of
vehicles
that
are
slipping
through
they're,
not
off-road,
but
they're
in
between
they're,
not
really
a
motorcycle
and
they're,
not
really
a
car,
and
that
was
just
my
concern
understood.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you
and
madam
chair
I'll
commit
to
checking
with
legal
on
that
specific
hybrid
of
vehicle.
I
I
specifically
thought
senator
that
you're
referring
to
like
off-road
vehicles
and
things
like
that.
But
if
there
is
a
hybrid
type
of
vehicle
that
falls
between
a
passenger
car
and
motorcycle,
I
will
I
will
speak
with
legal
and
and
make
sure
that
we
encapsulate
that
as
well
through
the
the
nrs.
A
Well,
we
have
your
wish,
is
our
command
and
I'm
going
to
ask
if
our
legal
counsel,
if
he's
ready,
if
he
can
provide
additional
information,
so
you
don't
have
to
go
the
extra
step.
G
Thank
you,
chair
experiment
for
the
record.
Will
keen
committee
council
so
for
the
purposes
of
the
bill,
you
can
see
at
the
bottom
of
that
very
long.
First
section,
it's
on
page
3
lines,
37
and
38
with
regard
to
motorcycles
and
39
to
40.
With
regard
to
passenger
cars,
those
are
defined
terms.
When
you
look
back
to
the
definitions.
G
G
The
definition
of
passenger
car
is
perhaps
a
bit
broader
than
people
might
naturally
think
based
on
the
term
passenger
car,
but
that
what
the
term
reads
in
nrs
is
that
a
passenger
car
means
a
vehicle
designed
to
carry
10
persons
or
less
except
a
motorcycle,
an
electric
bicycle
or
electric
scooter
or
a
moped.
So
a
passenger
car,
I
think,
is
much
more
broad
than
people
might
think,
and
the
motorcycle
includes
three
wheels
or
less.
G
Thank
you.
Manager.
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
that
answered
my
question
and
even
if
we
don't
have
a
law
that
precludes
an
insurance
company
from
offering
a
coverage
as
much
as
this
allows
them
the
opportunity
to
make
sure
they
know
that
it's
available,
so
they
can
access
it
if
they
want
to.
As
I
understand
it,.
C
Thank
you
senator
some
of
the
medical
floors
for
the
record.
That's
absolutely
correct,
and
there
is
a
for
the
lack
of
a
better
phrase.
C
I
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
had
a
question
on
it's
really
in
section
one,
but
it
was
the
discussion
around
the
umbrella
policy,
since
you're
inserting
motorcycles
in
right
umbrella
policies
typically
cover
a
person
who
you
give
permission
to
ride
on
your
motorcycle
or
that
extra
liability
right
and
then
there's
also
negligence
and
damages
attached.
I
C
Thank
you
for
that
senator
neal,
some
of
the
medical
floors
for
the
record.
I
don't
wish
to
minimize
the
question,
but
I
have
no
intent
in
changing
what
the
policy
is
now
how
a
policy
works.
What
the
theories
of
of
personal
injury
law
are
simply
how
you
would
apply
that
to
a
passenger
vehicle.
You
would
apply
that
to
a
motorcycle
now
we're
not
we're
not
playing
with
any
of
those
arguments
or
series
of.
If
I,
if
I
allow
somebody
to
borrow
a
passenger
car,
whatever
theories
apply
to
that
would
apply.
C
If
I
allow
somebody
to
borrow
a
motorcycle
if
the
insurance
policy
is
under
my
name
and
versus
somebody
else's,
none
of
that
is
being
changed
by
this
by
this
inclusion.
We're
simply
saying
that
we
want
to
make
sure
that,
when
the
insurance
policy
is
offered,
we
want
to
ensure
that
they're
having
a
conversation
about
uninsured
underinsured
and
med
pay.
If
I
could
expand
a
little
bit
on
medpay,
the
1000
is,
is
the
floor.
C
What
I
mean
by
that
is,
if
individual
a
walks
into
insurance
company
one
and
says
I'd
like
to
have
a
conversation
about
purchasing
a
insurance
policy
for
my
motorcycle
in
this
scenario,
they
would
simply
have
to
offer
them
the
bare
minimum,
which
is
at
least
a
thousand
dollars,
but
you
as
an
individual,
have
the
option
of
purchasing
more
so
a
motorcyclist
might
might
say
you
know
what
I
don't
need
just
a
thousand
dollars.
That's
not
going
to
be
enough,
or
it's
going
to
be
inadequate.
C
Should
I
ever
be
in
a
situation
where
I
need
medicaid
to
trigger
you.
Have
the
option
of
purchasing
it
up
to
x
amount
that
you
want
now,
whether
or
not
that
makes
sense
to
you
as
a
consumer,
and
you
want
to
make
that
expense?
That's
up
to
you,
but
it's
not
we're
not
in
any
way
changing
the
current
standard.
In
other
words,
whatever
is
happening
today
with
an
with
a
consumer
who
owns
an
insurance
policy
and
allows
somebody
to
borrow
their
vehicle.
C
That
exact
rule
is
going
to
trigger
and
work
the
same
exact
way
with
motorcycles.
We
don't
see
it
applying
any
differently.
Whatever
the
standard
is
out
there
now,
whatever
the
case
law,
is
there
now
we
have
no
intent
in
changing
that.
We're
simply
saying
whatever's
out
there
for
passenger
vehicles.
We
want
to
ensure
it's
out
there
for
motorcycles
up
to
a
thousand
is
because
that's
just
what
the
standard
is
now
you
have
to
offer
it
up
to
a
thousand,
but,
like
I
said,
an
individual
may
purchase
more
and
they
are.
C
C
This
is
really
important
because
say
that
I
am
involved
in
an
automobile
accident
or
in
this
scenario,
a
motorcycle
accident
after
this
goes
into
effect,
and
then
I
then
check
my
policy
to
see
if
I
had
medpay,
uninsured
or
underinsured,
and
let's
say
in
that
scenario
I
didn't.
I
don't
have
either
one
of
these
three
options,
but
maybe
I'm
represented
by
council
and
council
checks
and
realizes
wait
a
minute.
It
was
never
even
offered
to
you.
You
never
waved
it
away.
C
It
was
never
even
put
on
the
table
for
you
under
this
statue,
and
the
commissioner
of
insurance
can
can
speak
to
this
as
well
you're
automatically
entitled
to
a
thousand
dollars
of
coverage
because
it
should
have
been
offered
at
a
bare
minimum.
So
this
is
also
another
additional
layer,
so
when
you
don't
offer
it
it
automatically
triggers
and
that
you,
because
you
you
failed
to
do
that,
there's
automatically
a
thousand
dollars
there,
that's
available
to
the
consumer
for
that
as
well.
I
C
No
thank
you
senator
for
that
question
of
some
medical
floors
for
for
the
record
again
that
I
never
engage
in
that
because
I
don't
we
don't
set
the
standard,
none
of
us
do
in
this
building.
We
don't
have
the
right
to
tone
insurance
company
how
much
they
have
to
charge
how
much
they
can't
charge.
That's
not
our
place.
Our
place
is
to
simply
say
just
like
with
passenger
vehicles.
C
When
we,
when
we
created
this
law
and
we
implemented
it
with
passenger
vehicles,
we
said
let
let
the
industry
decide
what
that
price
is
and,
as
you
know,
not
a
single
individual
in
here
plays
pays
the
same
amount
of
insurance,
because
insurance
is
there's
a
calculation
that
risk
factors
versus
x,
y
and
z.
That
is,
it
goes
into
it
and
while
we
may
have
the
same
exact
coverage,
not
all
of
us
are
paying
the
same
amount
vehicle
type
year.
C
C
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
second
opportunity
now
some
of
them
in
flores.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
the
comment
you
just
made
in
response
to
my
colleague's
question,
regarding
your
comment
that
if
medpay
is
not
in
place
at
the
time
of
the
accident,
is
it
your
intent
that
this
bill
take
effect
now
to
alter
the
terms
of
an
existing
policy?
That
may
be?
D
You
know
prior
it
was
issued
prior
to
if
it
was
issued,
say
the
day
before
the
measure
is
adopted
and
signed
by
the
governor
and
because
we
don't
have
at
a
stated
effective
date,
it
would
be
implied
to
be
october
1st
of
this
year.
So
if
someone
renewed
their
policy
on
on,
say
the
governor
signed
it
june
1st
any
the
the
policyholder
obtained
the
policy
without
the
medpay
on
may
31st.
D
It's
not
coming
up
for
renewal
until
december
1st.
So
if
they
were
in
an
accident
between
the
period
of
october
1st
and
december
1st,
is
it
your
intent
that
this
bill
would
ultimately
alter
the
terms
of
that
policy?.
C
So
in
in
reading
that
specific
language,
my
understanding
is,
it
has
to
be
offered
at
least
once
and
if
and
and
that
it
would
not,
and
typically
that's
just
my
understanding
of
the
nrs
and
how
we
typically
legislate
that
it
would
not
retroactively.
Go
back
to
an
old
contract,
an
old
policy,
an
old
agreement,
but
legal
could
specifically
perhaps
correct
me
if
I
am
wrong
in
that
specific
statement.
D
I
appreciate
that
and
and
mr
keane
I
appreciate
I
would
like
to
hear
from
you-
I
just
that
paragraph
deals
with
a
future
renewal
period
and
I'm
talking
about
that
narrow
window
of
opportunity
here
that
actually
nothing
has
happened.
Yet
renewal
hasn't
been
requested,
the
policy
exists
as
it
was
previously
written,
and
so
it's
it's
probably
one
of
those
tiny
little
opportunities,
but
I
want
to
make
sure
we
address
it
on
the
record.
So
thank
you
and
mr
keane.
G
Thank
you,
chair
spearman,
for
the
record
will
keen
community
council.
Yes,
the
bill
is
effective
on
october
1st
because
that's
the
default
date
when
no
other
data
specified
so
it'll
be
effective
on
october
1st
2021..
G
What
the
requirement
is
is
that
this
insurance
be
offered
it's
my
understanding
and
talking
to
some
of
the
people
at
insurance
that
this
kind
of
coverage
is,
is
certainly
available
now
and
is
often
purchased
now.
So
this
kind
of
coverage
is
out
there.
This
this
bill
would
require
to
be
offered.
So
for
the
people
who
are
unaware
that
the
coverage
is
out
there,
they
will
be
made
aware,
as
far
as
what
the
effect
would
be
on
policies
or
in
midterm,
so
generally
bills,
if
they're
not
if
they
don't
otherwise
state
only
operate
proactively.
G
D
Thank
you
and
thank
you
for
that,
and
it
would
be
my
anticipation
that
that
would
be
the
operation
of
law
as
it
exists,
so
I'm
not
sure
that
transitory
language
would
necessarily
be
required,
but
just
given
the
testimony
and
the
intent,
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
record's
clear
that
we're
not
trying
to
change
the
normal
approach
to
application
of
new
law
to
existing
contract,
because
I,
after
that
testimony
I
thought
oh
wait.
D
I
What
I
should
have
asked
you
in
that
moment
was
because
the
the
immediate
thing
that
popped
in
my
mind,
was
subrogation
right
when
someone
stands
in
the
place
of
another,
and
so
if
there
is
an
injury
and
there
is
another
person,
how
then
does
that
trigger
like?
Because
this
is
a
real
life
example
of
like
okay
and
now
I'm
in
now?
I
have
a
claim
I'm
in
court.
Med
pay
should
have
been
offered,
but
there
is
a
subrogation
issue.
I
C
The
reason
I
didn't
do
that
deep
dive
in
in
that
application
of
how
it
would
work
is
because
I
have
no
intention
of
playing
with
how
it
works.
Now
I
have
no
intention
of
changing
it,
modifying
it
in
any
way.
That's
just
what
the
rule
is
now
we're
simply
saying:
whatever
the
rules
are
there
for
passenger
vehicles,
we're
going
to
ensure
that
we're
doing
the
same
thing
for
motor
vehicles.
I
mean
motorcycles.
C
Excuse
me,
so
that's
why
I
didn't
get
into
that
deep
dive
in
that
specific,
a
breakdown
in
the
many
many
many
many
scenarios
that
could
honestly
occur
where,
if
you
own
the
motorcycle,
you
borrow
the
motorcycle.
C
You
live
in
the
household
and
the
motorcycle
was
borrowed
to
a
son,
daughter,
wife,
husband,
all
these
different
hypotheticals
and
there's
many
many
of
them.
I
didn't
wish
to
insert
myself
into
how
that
would
change,
because
I
don't
intend
to
change
that
in
any
way.
I
simply
wanted
to
say
whatever
the
rule
is
for
passenger
vehicles.
Let's
make
sure
we're
offering
the
same
thing
for
motor
motorcycles.
A
So
assemblyman,
I'm
I'm
going
to
come
down
just
a
notch
under
the
third
tongue
of
the
legal
language.
This
bill
is
solving
a
problem.
Tell
me
what
it
solves
in
second
grade
language.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
the
simplest
assembly,
medical
floors
for
the
record,
the
simplest
way
for
me
to
explain
this
is
I
want
to
make
sure
that
when
you
purchase
a
policy
for
a
passenger
vehicle
that
what
you're
being
offered
in
the
front
end
you're
also
being
offered
while
you're
purchasing
an
insurance
policy
for
a
motorcycle,
which
is
that
they're
offering
you
medpay,
uninsured
and
underinsured,
and
you
can
wave
all
three
of
them
away,
just
like
somebody
with
the
passenger
vehicle.
C
But
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
doing
the
same
thing
for
motorcycles
and
legal.
I
know
he
alluded.
Mr
keen
alluded
to
having
a
conversation
with
the
insurance
companies.
Most
insurance
companies
do
this
already,
but
there
are
some
out
there
who
don't
and
that's
really
my
greatest
concern.
C
C
You
may
have
been
at
fault
and
it
doesn't
matter
they
protect
you
anyways,
and
this
is
important
because
some
sometimes
a
lot
of
us
drive
around
our
streets
with
the
bare
minimum
coverage
bare
minimum
without
getting
too
technical,
usually
covers
the
the
injured
party,
not
you
or
the
injured
v
or
the
other
party's
vehicle.
C
Underinsured
uninsured,
would
trigger
and
and
give
those
protections
to
you.
Medpay,
specifically,
is
really
important
because,
again
you
may
have
been
the
party
at
fault
and
meta
pay
will
automatically
trigger
and
cover
those
front
end
costs.
You
know
typically
like
a
an
ambulance,
those
first
checkups
at
the
hospital,
and
so
that's
why
it's
so
important.
C
A
lot
of
folk
who
have
motorcycles
now
were
offered
this
option,
but
you'll
you'll,
learn
and
haven't
had
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
some
constituents
who
are
motorcycle
drivers.
They
told
me
well,
it
was
never
offered
to
me
and
I
you
know-
and
you
know
with
motorcycles,
something
as
simple
as
losing
control.
You
can
injure
yourself,
you
know
without
having
had
any
other
party
involved
and
med
pay
would
be
incredibly
important
and
again
we're
not
changing
what
that
cost
would
be.
C
The
the
industry
will
dictate
that
they'll
offer
it
to
you,
whatever
cost
they
think
is
reasonable,
based
on
whatever
assessments
they
make,
but
this
is
just
to
make
sure
that
it's
there
available.
I
I'm
not.
I
am
not
suggesting
that
all
insurance
companies
are
out
there
somehow
trying
to
dissuade
consumers
from
purchasing
these
policies.
C
And
again,
I
don't
see
it
as
as
a
as
in
any
way
impacting
the
industry,
because
you're
going
to
offer
it
at
whatever
rate
you
think
you,
the
the
industry,
thinks
is
reasonable,
you're
going
to
charge
for
this
and
you,
the
consumer,
will
decide
whether
or
not
you
want
to
pay
for
it.
A
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Some
of
the
medical
floors
for
the
record.
That's
correct.
None
of
these
and
most
folk,
don't
even
know
what
they
have
in
their
policy,
and
I
don't
mean
to
minimize
anybody.
That's
just
a
reality.
You
purchase
it
once
you
don't
see
it
and
you
know.
Hopefully
you
never
have
to
look
through
your
policy,
but
the
reality
is.
Most
of
us
will
be
involved,
at
least
in
one
car
accident
or
motorcycle
accident,
and
then,
when
you're,
when
you're
truly
in
need
of
it
is
when
you
realize
wait
a
minute.
A
I
think
this
will
be
my
last
question.
I
think
I
saw
senator
pickert's
hand,
so
the
problem
that
this
is
attempting
to
solve
is
to
make
sure
that
people
who
have
the
right
to
have
that
information
are
mandated
by
law
to
get
that
information,
and
this
is
a
commentary.
It
would
seem
to
me
that
there
would
be
people
for
whom
are
not
as
sophisticated
in
the
law
as
attorneys.
That
may
not
know
it's
not
just
that.
A
They
don't
see
it
in
the
policy,
but
they
just
don't
know
so
it
would
cover
essentially
people
who
did
not
have
this
kind
of
knowledge.
Like
me,
I
don't
have
that
kind
of
knowledge.
I
don't
want
a
motorcycle,
but
if
I
did
I'd
want
to
know
the
know
about
it,
so
is
that
correct.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
some
of
the
american
explorers
for
the
record.
Absolutely
this
that
that's
why
we
want
to
put
it
up
in
the
front
end
because
most
people,
when
they
purchase
an
insurance
policy,
they
would
assume
that
if
I
am
involved
in
a
motor
vehicle
accident
and
or
if
I'm
involved
in
a
motorcycle
accident
they're
going
to
cover
my
my
medical
expenses-
and
they
don't
realize
that
that's
not
necessarily
always
the
case,
there's
always
a
question
of
who
is
at
fault,
there's
a
question
of
how
much
coverage
you
have
so
doing.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
somebody
with
flores
didn't
ask
me
to
help
present
the
bill,
but
it
answered
your
question.
I
think
it
might
be
helpful
to
understand
the
genesis
of
medpay
in
the
first
place,
the
the
whole
idea
behind
it
was
to
be
able
to
get
the
injured
party
the
ability
to
get
some
of
their
medical
payments
made
early,
and
so
with
some
legislative
prodding.
D
There
was
this
offering
that
insurance
companies
would
offer
this
in
order
to
protect
whomever
was
involved
in
the
accident,
get
them
the
initial
medical
payments
that
they
needed
in
order
to
get
them
on
the
road
to
recovery.
And,
frankly,
I
didn't
realize
this
wasn't
required
of
motorcycles.
D
A
A
There's
some
questions.
Okay,
you
don't
see
any
additional
questions
broadcast,
let's
go
to
public
comment
and
we
will
go
with
15
minutes
per
two
minutes
per
individual
and
remember
if
someone
has
already
said
what
you
want
to
say
whether
it
is
the
exact
language
of
that
wording.
If
they've
gotten
the
thought
across,
please
come
to
or
open
up
your
phone
and
say
ditto
to
whoever
covered
your
thought.
That
gives
more
people
an
opportunity
to
get
get
a
word
in
so
broadcast.
J
J
J
L
As
in
boy
o-e-h-r-e-r,
I'm
with
the
nevada
justice
association.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
your
time.
I
just
want
you
all
to
know
that
we
support
this
wholeheartedly.
We
think
it's
very
important
that
motorcycles
get
the
same
coverage
as
automobiles
do,
and
we
appreciate
you
bringing
this
forward
and
we
support
it
all
the
way
through.
Thank
you.
J
A
Thank
you
just
no
questions,
many
members
yeah
assemblyman
far
as
I
I
was
using
satire
to
get
a
point
across.
So
please
don't.
I
hope
I
didn't
offend
you
by
making
it
too
simplistic.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Madam
vice
chair,
somebody
magnus
flores
for
the
record.
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
for
indulging
me
this
morning
and
allow
me
to
present
before
you.
I
look
forward
to
working
alongside
of
you
to
move
along
this
legislation
and
madam
chair,
I
very
much
appreciate
that
tone
and
sentiment
of
just
trying
to
simplify
it
as
basic
as
we
can.
It's
the
easiest
way
to
convey
a
point,
so
I
I
I'm
very
much
there
with
you.
Thank
you.
L
M
L
A
M
Again,
thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee.
For
the
record.
My
name
is
jason
fryerson.
I
represent
assembly
district
8
in
clark
county
and
I'm
also
the
speaker
of
the
united
states
assembly.
I
am
pleased
to
present
to
you
this
morning
assembly
bill
308,
which
attempts
to
further
balance
the
interests
of
tenants
and
landlords
a
little
bit
of
background
information.
M
Certainly,
the
members
of
this
committee
are
no
strangers
to
the
flight
of
tenants
and
property
owners
today,
even
before
coveted
19,
the
influx
of
new
residents
and
resulting
increase
in
property
value
cost
a
shortage
of
affordable
housing
throughout
the
state,
the
aspen,
the
aspen
institute,
estimated
in
2020
that
nevada
had
the
greatest
mismatch
in
demand
and
supply
of
affordable
housing
with
19,
affordable
and
available
units
for
every
100,
extremely
low
income,
renter
households.
M
Additionally,
for
a
national
survey,
63
percent
of
americans
have
been
living
paycheck
to
paycheck
since
this
pandemic
started.
However,
even
before
the
pandemic,
44
of
americans
were
living
beyond
their
means.
This
harsh
reality
is
before
this
public
health
crisis
40
of
americans
were
unable
to
cover
an
unexpected
400
expense.
M
It's
against
this
backdrop
that
I
requested
assembly
bill
308,
which
seeks
to
provide
tenants
with
additional
time
before
a
landlord
may
increase
rental
payments.
Institute's
a
grace
period
also
of
three
days
before
a
landlord,
can
charge
late
fees
and
makes
a
technical
change
to
the
definition
of
a
security
deposit
per
the
national
landlord
association.
Currently,
23
states
and
district
of
columbia
have
noticed
requirements
for
rent
increases
of
anywhere
from
15
days
to
90
days.
M
Additionally,
seven
states
and
the
district
of
columbia
offer
a
grace
period
before
late
fees
are
charged
of
anywhere
from
four
days
to
30
days.
Housing
continues
to
be
a
large
percentage
of
a
family's
monthly
expenses,
as
nevada
continues
to
see
a
slower
economic
recovery
compared
to
other
states
across
the
country.
I
believe
it's
critical
that
we
find
ways
to
help
tenants
adequately
prepare
for
the
unexpected,
while
not
placing
an
excessive
burden
on
landlords.
M
With
that
a
summary
of
the
bill,
madam
chair
sections,
one
three
through
six
and
eight
through
fourteen
deal
with
the
technical
change
I
discussed
regarding
the
definition
of
security
deposit
section
two
prescribes
that
a
landlord
may
not
charge
a
late
fee
as
long
as
the
rent
is
paid
within
three
calendar
days
of
the
due
date.
Finally,
section
seven
extends
from
45
to
60
the
number
of
days
notice.
The
landlord
must
provide
of
a
rent
increase
for
periodic
tendencies
of
less
than
one
month.
M
M
I
believe
this
is
a
reasonable
effort
to
give
tenants
ample
time
to
prepare
for
large
expenses
such
as
housing
and
and
with
that
you
know
going
through
the
measures
and
looking
at
other
states.
It
just
seemed
to
be
a
reasonable
approach.
We
originally
talked
about
two
days
for
late
fees,
but
again
in
a
practical
reality.
If
rent
is
due
on
a
friday
and
the
office
is
closed
on
sunday,
that
three
days
would
allow
them,
at
least
until
that
monday,
before
late
fee
would
would
hit
and
again.
M
This
also
reflects
a
compromise
and
significant
amount
of
work
with
the
realtors
who
provided
a
lot
of
meaningful
discussion
and
and
dialogue
with
their
membership
to
find
some
some
some
areas
where
we
thought
we
really
could
ease
the
burden
on
tenants,
but
not
overburden
landlords.
So
with
that,
I
am
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
Thank
you
speakers
and
you
have
anyone
else.
That's
presenting
with.
M
You
I
I
don't.
I
do
have
theresa
mckee
from
the
realtors
association,
who
has
requested
that
she'd
be
allowed
to
provide
supportive
testimony
via
zoom,
and
so,
if
madam
chair
would
would
accommodate
her
being
able
to
to
provide
that
testimony.
That
would
be
great.
N
Proceed.
Thank
you
good
afternoon,
good
afternoon,
chair
spearman
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
theresa
mckee
and
I
am
ceo
of
nevada
realtors
today,
I'm
speaking
in
support
of
ab308
on
behalf
of
the
more
more
than
18
000
members
of
nevada
realtors,
the
realtors
advocate
on
behalf
of
both
landlords
and
tenants,
as
both
parties
constitute
the
clientele
of
our
realtor
membership.
N
I'd
like
to
thank
speaker
fryerson
for
bringing
forward
this
important
piece
of
legislation.
This
bill
does
create
a
more
balanced
and
transparent
approach
to
landlord-tenant
issues
than
we
have
been
facing
both
last
session
and
in
this
one
briefly,
existing
law
does
provide
that
the
landlord
can
charge
a
late
fee
that
does
not
exceed
five
percent
of
the
periodic
rent.
N
Most
landlords,
as
you
know,
work
with
their
tenants
in
the
case
that
they're
late,
but
this
law
does
provide
that
three
days
is
allowed
after
that,
the
date
that
the
rent
is
due
before
a
late
fee
can
be
issued.
It
also
provides
the
time
that
a
landlord
must
give
the
tenant
of
the
increase
of
rent
from
45
days
to
60
days.
That
will
allow
additional
time,
especially
in
these
hard
times,
for
tenants
to
adjust
or
find
a
new
place
to
live.
N
As
you
know,
most
of
our
property
managers
and
landlords
are
very
transparent,
very
fair
in
their
communications
and
their
dealings
with
tenants,
but
we
know
just
like
in
any
other
profession.
There
are
those
that
are
not
fair,
not
transparent
and
take
advantage
of
people,
but
both
of
the
time
periods
proposed
here
would
require
transparency
from
all
landlords
in
a
way
that's
fair
and
equitable
to
both
the
landlord
and
the
tenant.
The
realtors
are
in
full
support
of
this
piece
of
legislation,
and
we
appreciate
your
time
today.
Thank
you.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Not
a
question
just
a
comment.
I
want
to
commend
the
speaker
for
including
the
stakeholders
before
making
the
decisions
and
allowing
them
a
seat
at
the
table
and
developing
the
plan.
D
That
hasn't
been
the
case
in
many
of
the
landlord
legislation
pieces
that
we've
experienced,
and
I
actually
agree
that,
while
anytime
we
push
off
payments,
it
will
have
an
upward
pressure
on
price.
The
reality
is,
the
vast
majority
of
landlords
are
already
doing
this,
and
so
I
don't
think
it
will
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
market.
D
A
Many
members,
okay,
just
to
comment
we're
getting
ready
to
go
to
the
phones
broadcast.
I
appreciate
you
speaker
fryerson,
for
for
bringing
this
forward
and,
as
I
listened
to
you
talk,
I
thought
about
the
change
in
semantics
and
the
way
we
refer
to
workers
before
the
pandemic.
They
were
referred
to
as
minimum
wage
workers.
A
J
J
N
Banks
t-I-f-f-a-n-y
b-a-n-k-s
good
morning,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
tiffany
banks
and
I'm
general
counsel
for
the
nevada
realtors.
Today,
I'm
speaking
in
support
of
ab308,
we
would
like
to
thank
speaker
fryerson
for
bringing
forward
this
important
bill
with
such
reasonable
language.
N
Mom
and
pop
landlords
have
been
hammered
through
no
fault
of
their
own
from
this
pandemic
and
the
governmental
moratoriums
that
have
been
put
in
place,
they
still
need
to
make
their
mortgage
payments
hoa
payments
and
pay
their
taxes.
These
small
landlords
are
stressing
that
properties
have
become
too
difficult
to
manage
in
this
environment.
L
J
L
Good
morning,
chairman
spearman
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record
dan
morgan
d-a-n-m-o-r-g-a-n,
ceo
of
the
builders
association,
the
builders
association,
represents
more
than
100
builders
and
developers
of
single-family
and
multi-family
homes
and
residential
communities
in
northern
nevada.
L
Today
we
are
in
support
of
ab-308
and
very
much
appreciate
speaker,
fryerson's
tireless
work
on
behalf
of
nevadans,
as
as
ab-308
clarifies
and
further
defines
the
language
of
certain
important
aspects
of
the
financial
relationship
between
landlords
and
their
tenants.
I
thank
you
for
your
time
today
and
your
service
to
our
great
state.
Thank
you
very
much.
J
L
We
really
want
to
thank
speaker
fryerson
for
bringing
forward
a
landlord-tenant
bill
that
it
exemplifies
a
fair
and
balanced
approach
to
the
issues
that
we're
facing
in
our
industry.
This
type
of
legislation
will
codify
what
many
landlords
and
property
managers
already
implement
when
working
with
tenants.
Again,
sir.
We
thank
you
for
your
support
and
thanks
for
your
time
today.
Madam
chair.
J
N
Good
morning
again,
speaker
firestone,
as
well
as
chair,
spearman
and
the
remainder
of
the
committee.
We
echo
all
of
the
comments
of
the
speakers
before
and
would
like
to
provide
support
for.
L
Ab-308
again
really
great
bill
very
reasonable
and
we
appreciate
speaker
firestone,
reaching.
J
B
L
O-P-S-E-R-M-A-N
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
women's
lobby,
we
want
to
thank
speaker,
fryerson
and
stakeholders
for
working
so
hard
on
this
legislation
to
bring
this
bill
forward.
One
of
the
top
priorities
of
the
nevada
women's
lobby
is
housing
security.
We
want
to
ensure
that
women
and
families
are
able
to
maintain
affordable
and
stable
housing.
This
self
bill
helps
ensure
transparency
between
tenant.
J
J
L
Thank
you
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
david
dazlich
d-a-z-l-I-c-h,
director
of
government
affairs
for
the
vegas
chamber,
we'd
like
to
echo
the
thanks
to
the
previous
callers
we'd,
like
to
thank
the
speaker
for
his
engagement
and
all
the
hard
work
on
behalf
of
the
stakeholders.
Here
we
feel
this
bill
strikes
a
very
good
compromise.
This
protects
the
good
actors
on
both
the
landlord
and
the
tenant
side
of
the
relationship,
and
we
would
urge
your
support.
Thank
you.
J
A
Thank
you
committee
members,
additional
questions,
mr
speaker,
fryerson
back
to
you
for
any
closing
comments.
M
Thank
you
again,
madam
chair,
I
will
will
be
conscious
of
you
all's
time
on
a
friday
in
particular,
and
I
thank
you
for
your
attention
and
we'll
be
more
than
happy
to
answer
questions
that
can
develop
after
today's
hearing.
But
but
I
echo
the
sentiments
of
many
of
the
stakeholders
that
I
believe
this
is
progress
in
a
common
sense
way.
That
provides
some
balance
both
for
tenants,
of
course,
and
in
a
way
that
doesn't
unduly
burden
landlords.
A
Q
We
have
worked
with
stakeholders
here
in
nevada
for
the
better
part
of
the
interim
between
the
last
legislative
session
and
this
one,
including
the
nevada
contractors
board
associated
general
contractors
in
northern
nevada,
the
nevada
contractors
association
in
southern
nevada,
the
southern
about
home
builders,
association
of
builders
and
contractors
and
others
seeking
a
passage
of
ab227
to
ensure
the
following
that
only
a
contractor
or
the
contractor's
employees
can
perform
work.
That
requires
a
contractor's
license.
Q
Q
Homeowners
and
builders
and
building
owners
must
have
the
protection
of
the
contractors
board
to
ensure
that
those
responsible
for
construction
constructing
projects,
including
construction
defects,
employer
employee
relations,
can
be
held
accountable
by
the
nevada
state
contractor's
board.
A
public
policy
that
has
was
first
codified
in
the
nevada
statute
in
1941
and
has
continued
to
be
a
public
policy
of
this
state.
Q
Secondly,
misclassifications
of
employees
in
the
construction
industry
cost
nevadans
millions
of
dollars
in
lost
construction,
economic
activity
when
a
contractor
misclassifies
an
employee
as
either
an
independent
contractor,
a
cash
employee
or
a
leased
employee.
The
employee
is
often
left
made
responsible
for
the
state
and
federal
taxes
and
other
issues
regarding
wages.
Q
Additionally,
as
determined
in
the
2011
lcb
employee
misclassification
study
bulletin
number
1107
on
page
five
misclassification
employees
in
the
state
of
nevada
cost
nevada's
unemployment,
trust
fund,
8.2
million
dollars
in
annual
loss
revenue
that
was
in
2011.
lost
revenues
to
nevada's
workers,
compensation
fund
and
payments
for
the
modified
business
tax
are
also
being
under-reported.
Q
So
at
this
time,
madam
chair
I'll
go
through
the
bill
quickly
and
then
I
have
on
the
phone,
dr
wadaps,
who
who
did
the
study
for
any
questions
that
the
committee
may
have?
He
may
have
some
short
comments
and,
and
we'll
conclude
our
testimony
this
morning,
so
here
in
ab227
in
section
one
of
the
bill
section
one
one.
This
is
the
language
that
a
group
of
attorneys
or
them
from
different
law
firms
came
together.
Q
Q
The
changes
in
section
6
are
simply
the
language
to
address
the
misclassifications
of
employees
only
in
the
construction
industry
that
those
employees
in
the
construction
industry
must
either
be
must
be
a
w-4
w-2
employee
of
the
contractor.
That's
the
balance
of
this
bill
chairwoman,
and
I
will
at
this
point
I
will
stand
for
any
questions.
Q
Q
This
proposed
language
simply
determines
who
is
the
employer
of
record
at
the
site
of
the
construction
work?
You
say
that
again,
nothing
predicates,
nothing
predicts
the
loss
of
a
single
construction
job
in
the
state
of
nevada.
So
with
that,
madam
chair
I'll
stand
for
any
questions
you
may
have,
and
if
anybody
has
any
questions
about
this
study,
dr
waddups
is
available
on
video,
okay,.
A
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and,
and
thank
you,
mr
stanley,
for
your
presentation,
and
I
appreciate
you
reaching
out
through
your
lobbyist
in
discussing
this
with
me
and
and
as
mr
musgrove
suggested,
I
think
that's
because
I'm
the
one
person
one
of
the
people
in
the
room,
and
probably
the
one
on
the
bench
here
that
has
had
professional
experience
in
every
single
aspect
of
this
bill.
I've
been
a
small
contractor
that
has
hired
temporary
label
labor.
I
have
been
a
large
contractor
that
has
not
needed
to
hire
temporary
labor.
D
I've
been
an
attorney
advising
contractors
on
how
to
deal
with
disciplinary
questions,
and
I've
also
been
now
a
legislature
legislator.
Looking
at
these
things,
so
I
bring
that
perspective
and-
and
I
and
and
as
you
know
what
I've
been
involved
in
the
conversations
with
the
various
stakeholders
and
have
suggested
language
that
might
tend
to
ameliorate
it.
D
Let
me
just
getting
into
the
the
bill
first,
what
the
bill
does
not
do
is
clarify
what
well
it's
in
nrs6240202,
where
we
go
through
the
details
of
what
is
work
that
requires
a
contractor's
license
and
instead
it
just
refers
to,
or
it
just
states
that
work
that
does
or
does
not
require
a
contractor's
license.
D
And
then,
when
we
look
at
the
legacy
opinion
which
I've
studied
at
some
length,
the
court
actually
makes
reference
to
the
lack
of
language
that
really
clarifies
and
and
and
focuses
the
attention
on
those
specific
issues.
And
thus
I've
suggested
that
we
add
that
language
to
make
sure
that
that's
clear,
but
when
you
say
that
this
does
not
have
an
effect
on
jobs.
D
The
one
thing
that
concerns
me
is
that,
particularly
given
the
ephemeral
approach
that
the
contractor's
board
has
taken
to
this
and
and
the
case
even
mentions
that
just
a
short
period
before
in
a
different
case,
they
took
the
opposite
interpretation
and
didn't
require.
In
that
case,
it
was
a
concrete
truck
provider
that
they
didn't
require
a
license
and
did
not
have
to
be
the
employee
of
the
the
contractor
where
they
were
helping
and
so.
D
My
question
is
this:
how
do
we
not
put
the
employment
agency
in
a
bind
by
saying
look,
we
don't
have
language
that
clarifies
that
this
is
even
legal
to
provide
these
people,
given
the
the
ephemeral
nature
of
the
contractor's
board
or,
frankly,
the
capriciousness
of
their
interpretations
to
suit
their
needs
in
in
the
case.
Wouldn't
this
actually
disincentivize
them
from
participating
in
any
construction,
related
leasing
of
employees.
Q
I'm
sorry
senator
through
you
and
madame
chair.
Q
Senator
pickard
there
were
some,
I
think,
requires
some
legal
interpretations
there
and
I
don't
think
I'm
qualified
to
make
that,
but
I
do
have
lewis
lane
on
an
attorney
that
was
part
of
this
process.
He
is
online,
madam
chair,
if
you
think
that's
more
appropriate
to
have
him
answer
the
legal
piece
of
that,
then
I
can
deal
with
the
employment
piece
at
the
end.
Senator
pickard,
if
that's
fair
to
you,.
Q
A
Q
K
I
am
an
attorney
who
has
represented
a
number
of
the
licensing
boards
in
the
state
of
nevada
I
presently
represent
on
contract.
I
represent
the
contractor's
board
and
I
am
the
attorney
who
lost
the
legacy
specialties
case.
I
hate
losing
okay
and
but
it
has
brought
forth
now
this
bill,
which
I
think
is
actually
a
good
that
came
from
that
loss.
K
To
answer.
Mr
pickard's
senator
pickard's
question
about
the
board
and
the
board's
opinion
regarding
the
concrete
supplier.
That
is
the
distinction
here.
Okay,
the
person
in
that
particular
case
and
the
reason
the
board
found
that
that
was
not
contracting
is
because
that
was
simply
a
material
map.
He
was
driving
to
the
job
site.
K
Dumping
concrete.
He
was
not,
in
other
words,
performing
contractor
work.
He
was
putting
materials
on
the
job
site
so
that
those
materials
could
be
incorporated
into
the
project.
So
it's
a
very
big
difference
between
that
scenario
and
the
scenario
that
played
out
in
the
legacy
specialties
case
that
scenario
in
legacy
specialties
involved
a
sheetrocking
subcontractor
on
a
big
project
who,
rather
than
hiring
additional
nevadans
to
come
in
and
staff
up
for
this
project,
took
a
cold
call
from
a
texas
contractor
and
keep
in
mind
in
texas
contractors
are
not
licensed.
K
The
cold
call
said.
I
got
some
guys
for
you
I'll,
send
them
out
to
your
job.
The
nevada
guy
said
sure
he
knew
nothing
about.
The
contractor
knew
nothing
about
the
men
that
he
put
on
the
job.
He
simply
said,
yep
I'll
put
him
on
the
job.
K
They
had
to
file
a
complaint
with
the
labor
commissioner's
office,
and
then
we
got
that
a
referral
over
from
the
labor
commissioner's
office,
because
the
labor
commissioner's
office
realized
that
this
was
an
unlicensed
contractor,
putting
people
on
a
job
site
in
nevada.
So
we
took
our
action
judge.
Hardy
did
in
fact
instruct
us,
through
his
decision,
to
do
what
we're
doing
right
now
come
up
with
a
bill
fix
this
using
the
bill
and
clarify
the
state's
language.
K
K
We've
been
working
on
just
making
it
crystal
clear
what
the
expectations
should
be
in
terms
of
who
gets
put
on
a
job
site
working
for
a
nevada
contractor.
You
have
long
said
the
legislature
has
long
said.
Is
it
the
language
you
used
throughout
624
is
employee
of
the
contractor.
We
have
always
interpreted
that
to
mean
a
w2w
4
employee.
D
Well,
I
appreciate
that
mr
lingan,
it's
good
to
see
you
again.
I
I
guess
the
the
thing
that
I'm
not
sure
I
understand
I.
I
guess
I
would
interpret
or
or
characterize
the
interpretation
a
little
differently
and
and
certainly
the
judge
did
when
the
judge
said.
The
board's
interpretation
of
law
must
be
grounded
in
an
objective
knowledge,
knowable
standard
that
allows
a
contractor
to
choose
compliance
or
non-compliance.
D
A
contractor
should
not
learn
of
the
board's
legal
interpretation
only
after
being
charged
with
disciplinary
misconduct
and
a
new
ad
hoc
rule
of
enforcement
should
not
be
created
through
a
retrospective
process,
and
then
he
goes
on
to
say.
While
the
ortega
concrete
decision
has
no
presidential
influence
in
this
dispute,
it
is
relevant
to
note
the
position
of
the
board
takes
now
is
different
than
the
position
it
took
in
ortega
concrete
when
it
asserted
the
pumping
company
was
not
required
to
be
licensed
as
a
contractor.
D
So
we
end
up
in
a
situation
where
the
judge
has
said
that
the
the
board's
position
has
materially
changed.
In
fact,
he
said
elsewhere
that
hit
it
was
the
opposite
of
the
position
the
board
took
and
in
fact
the
contractor,
the
the
concrete
pumping
contractor
was
delivering
goods
and
helping
to
place
that
on
the
project
which
is
affecting
the
work,
the
structure
looking
back
at
nrs
6240202,
where
there
was
no
evidence
that
the
and
he
just
he
distinguished
between
the
the
agency,
they
were
not
a
contractor.
D
They
did
not
contract
for
this
work,
they
provided
laborers
and
there
was
actually
no
evidence
that
those
particular
laborers
were
ever
on
the
job
site.
Although
there
were,
I
think
at
the
end,
it
came
out
that,
yes,
they
were,
they
didn't
get
paid,
but
I
would
take
exception
to
your
characterization
that
they
didn't
get
paid.
They
did
get
paid
legacy
paid
them,
they
made
them
whole,
and
so
I
I
think
that,
while
I
agree
that
the
court
is
saying
yeah,
we
need
some
clarity
in
the
law.
D
The
court
is
also
saying
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
the
the
language
is
clear
to
avoid
the
board's
ability
to
make
as
these,
as
he
said,
ad
hoc
rule-making.
In
other
words,
they
made
it
up
as
they
went,
and
so
I
think
that
the
the
language
that
we're
talking
about
is
important
to
change.
I
think
it
is
important
that
we
make
it
clear,
but
I
think
that
also
extends
to
making
sure
that
the
law
is
clear
as
to
what
the
expectations
are.
D
Thus,
in
my
conversations
with
all
of
the
stakeholders
up
to
this
point,
I
suggested
those
changes
and
madam
chair
just
so
you're
aware
I
didn't
present
it
to
the
committee
as
a
proposed
change
and
because
I
wasn't
involved
in
this
and
and
I
didn't
get
the
the
sponsor's
permission
to
do
so
yet,
but
that
that's
coming
at
the
end
of
the
day.
I
think
it's
important
to
note
that
a
a
pea,
the
employment
agency
is
not
a
contractor.
D
They
are
providing
labor
to
a
contractor
unless
they
step
in
and
they
contract,
they
bid
a
job
and
they
contract
on
the
job.
That's
an
important
distinction,
and
thus
this
bill
has
an
opportunity
to
clarify
that
and
make
sure
that
the-
and
I
I
guess,
I'm
speaking
from
the
position
of
the
small
contractor-
I
have
used
these
agencies.
A
On
just
a
minute,
just
a
minute,
senator
pickard,
you
mentioned
something
about
an
amendment
and
you
know
my
rule.
Unless
you
have
talked
to
the
sponsor
of
the
bill,
we
don't.
D
Even
entertain
it
now
exactly,
and
so
I
reference
that
simply
because
mr
stanley
is
aware
of
it
and
and
the
other
stakeholders
are
aware
of
it
and
and
it's
offered
as
a
suggestion
to
clarify
language,
and
so
I
agree,
madam
chair,
that
is
the
intent,
I'm
not
bringing
it
as
an
amendment
until
I've
had
a
chance
to
talk
to
assemblywoman
carlton
about
that.
So
I
am
trying
to
follow
the
rule
of
this
committee.
D
A
Q
Senator
pickard,
let
me
put
it
on
the
record,
because
I
want
to
be
crystal
clear.
You
and
I
have
very
little
difference
in
our
opinion
here.
It's
how
we're
going
to
get
there.
Okay,
you
and
I
have
had
this
conversation.
I
think
we
are
100
in
agreement
on.
We
believe
that
we're
not
trying
to
expand
the
scope
of
the
contractor's
board
as
it
currently
exists
that
those
individuals
who
are
licensed
contractors
perform
the
work
and
the
scope
that
is
defined.
Q
Q
If
there
is
language
that
clarifies
this
further,
then
the
four
attorneys
that
got
together
during
the
interim,
I'm
sure
assemblywoman
carlton,
would
love
to
have
that
conversation.
I'm
smart
enough
and
been
in
this
building
long
enough
to
know
I'm
not
bending
a
legislator's
bill
or
agreeing
to
it.
Okay,
I'm
simply
here
presenting
the
bill.
I
think
we
understand
each
other
and
we
have
that.
Conversation
is
that
appreciable
now
I'll
answer,
your
question.
D
Yes,
you're,
where
you're
spot
on
that
was
our
conversation
and
and
so
just
to
satisfy
the
chairwoman's
concerns.
We
are
not
proposing
anything.
We've
just
had
a
conversation.
Thank
you
so
about.
Q
Where
we
are
here
today
and-
and
I
sincerely
appreciate
the
conversation
as
I
had
with
each
one
of
you-
senator
hardy-
senator
senator
lange,
senator
neil
and
senator
scheiber-
I
appreciate
the
time
you've
given
us
on
this
bill.
I
think
it
is
a
brave
concern,
we're
talking
about
millions
and
millions
of
dollars
that
are
being
left
on
the
table
that
otherwise
should
be
collected
by
this
state,
and
we
need
to
figure
that
out
and
we
got
to
figure
out
the
piece.
Q
That's
the
legacy,
because
I
think
everybody
understand
that
having
good
contractor
policy-
and
I
agree
with
you-
it
should
be
clear
and
set
forth.
Contractors
should
not
be
guessing,
but
we've
stated
in
this
state
for
a
long
time,
and
this
body
has
codified
it
in
statute
for
a
very
long
time
that
it
is
good
public
policy
to
regulate
contractors.
Q
For
for
all
those
reasons,
right,
so
to
answer
your
question,
all
this
bill
does
for
the
temporary
employment
agencies
they
still
can
recruit,
they
still
can
train.
They
still
can
do
the
payroll.
They
can
do
all
of
those
things.
The
only
thing
we're
asking
them
to
do
is
to
allow
the
contractor
to
be
the
contractor
and
the
payer
to
actually
be
the
individual
who
pays
the
employee
at
the
side
of
work.
Q
Nothing
else
in
that
relationship
changes
zero,
we're
not
asking
we're
not
trying
to
get
involved
in
those
commercial
agreements
between
parties,
we're
just
simply
saying
for
all
the
reasons
you
know
better
than
I
do
construction
defect,
all
those
things
that
you
know
much
better
than
I
do
senator
picker,
we're
simply
saying
for
all
of
those
things.
It
is
better
that
the
folks
performing
the
scopes
of
work
that
requires
a
contractor's
license,
be
in
the
employment
of
the
contractor.
Q
There
are
other
ways
to
get
there
and
we
could
go
change,
10
different
pieces
of
other
statues
to
get
there
and
other
people
have
proposed
that
to
this
group
we
just
thought
it
was
too
difficult
to
go
change,
10
different
pieces
of
legislation
when
we
can
simply
just
require
everyone
to
be
an
employee
of
the
contractor
to
decide
to
work.
I
hope
I
hope
that
answers
the
question
chairwoman,
yeah.
A
It
does
and
and
before
before
we
get
we're
headed
to
chicago,
and
I
think
we
just
made
a
u-turn
to
florida,
so
I'd
like
for
mr
king
tell
us
what
the
bill
says,
what
it
is
and
what
it
is
not.
Okay.
I
just
I
want
to
make
sure
we
get
that
clear
so
that
we
know
questions
pertain
to
the
bill
and
if
the
questions
don't
pertain
to
the
bill,
then
the
answers
are
spoilers
too.
So.
G
Thank
you,
chair
experiment
for
the
record
council.
What
the
bill
is
not
about
is
about
what
construction
project
required.
G
A
H
Thank
you,
madam
chairs.
As
as
I
look
at
this,
and
I
appreciate
the
clarification
so
when
I
walk
out
of
here
when
I
say
here
I
mean
this
legislative
session,
I
want
to
know
who
pays
the
payroll
tax,
who
pays
the
workman's
comp
who
pays
the
allowance
for
the
temporary
agency,
who
pays
the
skilled
worker?
Who
pays
the
unskilled
worker?
H
Who
I
still
want
a
temporary
agency
to
be
able
to
perform
the
task
that
they're
doing
and
know
what
their
responsibilities
are
and
make
sure
that
every
single
person
in
the
line
pays
everything
that
they're
supposed
to
to
the
state
that
mr
stanley
has
alluded
to,
that
we
don't
have
anybody
skirting
their
responsibility,
but
everybody
being
able
to
do
what
they're
trying
to
do
with
meeting
their
obligations
with
payroll
tax,
workmancom
medical
insurance.
So
the
state
doesn't
get
hung
with
something
that
someone's
not.
And
I
firmly
believe
you
know.
H
E
I
think
she
wants
to
be
the
final
hitter
in
that
respect.
I
appreciate
being
an
opportunity
to
ask
a
question
on
this
one.
My
question
is
a
little
bit
different,
I
think,
than
most
dealing
with
private
employment
agencies.
I've
worked
with
them
through
conservation
districts
and
I'm
more
worried
about
the
smaller
employers.
I
think
the
larger
employers
are
very
well
versed
and
be
able
to
navigate
these
systems,
but
I'm
very
concerned
when
it
comes
to
the
smaller
ones.
E
You
know
I've
talked
to
some
of
these
guys
that
we're
doing
jobs
like
this
doing
weeds
or
conservation
jobs,
installing
wattles
on
river
banks,
pounding
in
rebar
or
forming
concrete,
and
they
use
some
of
these
crews
because
their
guys
got
sick
or
their
family
members
got
sick
and
then
the
spouse
had
to
take
off
from
the
construction
job
to
take
care
of
their
loved
one.
Who
was
in
the
hospital
and
I'm
worried
about
that
or
somebody
gets
injured.
E
So
you
call
an
attempt-
and
it's
very
common
on
these
smaller
contractors
and
I'm
a
little
concerned
that
your
focus
and
your
understanding
is
very
much
on
the
larger
contractors,
because
that's
your
world,
but
I
see
this
bill
as
being
very
adverse
to
the
smaller
contractors.
The
ones
that
I
deal
with
in
the
agricultural
setting
that
have
licenses
business
licenses
contractors
license
and
they
do
use
some
of
these
temp
firms
from
time
to
time,
especially
up
in
the
north.
E
Where
you
can't
find
people
to
work,
I
mean
you
can
be
sitting
here,
paying
people
twenty
thirty
dollars
an
hour,
and
you
can't
find
anyone
who
wants
to
not
that
actually
just
wants
to
work
show
up
on
a
continual
basis
day
to
day,
and
then
that's
my
concern,
because
these
firms
are
at
least
required
by
the
labor
commissioner
to
require
that
the
employees
get
paid.
So
I
was
just
wondering
if
you've
done
much
research
into
the
small
business,
especially
in
the
agricultural
aspects
that
are
a
little
bit
more
common
in
the
rural
counties.
Q
Q
Large
contractors
are
the
rare
they're,
the
rarity
remember.
The
average
contractor
in
america
has
10
or
fewer
employees.
I'm
concerned
about
the
same
folks.
You
are,
I
have
not
done
the
research
in
the
agriculture
community.
I'm
not
sure
that
your
first
example
of
spraying
weeds
requires
a
contractor's
license.
Q
Q
Getting
temporary
employees
happenings
every
day
in
the
construction
industry.
The
difference
is
when
they're
on
the
job
site,
they're
paid
by
the
contractor,
instead
of
paid
by
the
employment
agency.
I
don't
understand
that
being
a
tremendous
burden,
in
fact
it's
probably
less
costly,
because
now
I'm
not
paying
the
markup
of
the
temporary
employment
agency
or
whatever.
Q
Q
E
I
appreciate
that
and
thank
you
for
answering.
Let
me
ask
a
question,
madam
chair:
it's
just
a
situation
when
you're
dealing
with
agriculture
you're
dealing
with
seasonal,
so
these
operations,
such
as
spring
weeds
and
things
of
that
nature,
they'll
have
five
ten
people,
but
only
for
a
month
or
two
month
period
and
to
state
that
they
would
have
that
person
on
their
continual
payroll
is
problematic
and
at
first
when
the
conservation,
district
and
others
talked
about
going
to
these
type
of
firms
said.
Why
do
we
do
that?
E
I
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
I
have
a
couple
of
questions
and
I'm
kind
of
coming
at
this
from
a
different
perspective,
because
when
I
was
reading
section
two,
which
is
six
two
four
point:
zero
two
zero.
I
I
I
So
if
the
extraction
right,
if
others
then
changes
a
whole
business
landscape
from
1975
to
2021,
you
could
see
if
you
were
on
the
other
side
of
this,
why
you
would
be
like
holy
smokes.
What
does
this
do
with
for
my
business
model?
And
how
does
this
then
change
my
business
opportunities
right
and
so
what
I
was
wondering
in
the
context
of
striking
out
others?
I
I
Q
Excellent.
Thank
you.
I
think
that
requires
another
once
again
the
beginning
as
a
legal
response,
because
this
was
drafted
by
the
attorneys
in
in
response
to
the
legacy
case.
So
I
think
it's
best
to
have
lewis
answer
that.
K
Question:
okay,
thank
you.
The
I
think
the
intent
of
the
language.
K
I'm
sorry,
yes,
this
is
lewis
lang
again
with
the
contractor's
board.
The
the
intent
of
this
language
was
to
make
this
statute
speak
the
way
it
has
been
enforced
by
the
contractor's
board.
Historically,
the
word
others
that
has
come
up
through
senator
neal's
question
was
the
loophole
through
which
we
were
seeing:
leased
employees,
1099s
cash
employees
showing
up
on
job
sites,
and
since
we
have
always
interpreted
the
larger
chapter
624
to
require
employees
because
that's
the
language
we
were
given
by
the
legislature.
K
We
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
was
as
clear
as
possible,
so
we
no
longer
have
these
cases
that
we're
having
to
litigate
where
we're
getting
accused
of
ad
hoc
rule
making.
We
want
to
just
say
what
we
mean,
and
so
what
we
mean
is
employee
means
employee,
w-2,
w-4,
employee.
K
If
there
were
businesses
that
have
sprung
up
that
have
been
providing
1099s
or
you
know,
private
employment
agencies
or
labor
leasing
companies.
They
were
putting
people
on
the
job
who
weren't
the
employee
of
the
contractor,
and
it
was
our
responsibility
to
enforce
the
laws
you
gave
it
to
us.
So
that's
what
we
were
trying
to
do,
and
this
just
clarifies
that
once
and
for
all
as
clear
as
it
can
possibly
be
stated
what
is
meant
by
employee
of
a
contractor.
It's
a
w-2
w-4
employee.
I
So,
mr
ling,
can
I
ask
you
a
second
question,
and
this
is
going
to
come
from
page
19
in
the
case
right,
and
so
he
the
the
judge,
he
said
a
couple
of
things
right.
There
was
a
lot
of
conversation
in
this
opinion,
and
this
was
this.
This
is
the
section
where
he
started
the
analysis
of
the
requirement
that
adsb
license
as
a
contractor
is
uncertain,
but
the
sentence
that
that
stuck
out
to
me
was
yes,
he
did
say
ads
can
be
considered
a
contractor
only
if
he
performed
any
acts
delineated
by
the
statute.
I
Are
we
now
saying
that
a
company
like
ads
can
now
no
longer
be
in
a
position
to
supply
labor,
not
the
act
of
contracting
but
the
actual
act
of
labor,
because
he
seems
to
delineate
that
there
is
an
act
of
contracting
and
that
there
is
an
act
of
providing
labor?
And
I
do
want
to
distinguish
that
in
this
hearing
and
make
that
super
clear
about?
I
I
K
K
That
was
our
very
intent
in
this
language,
which
was
to
say
that
there
would
be
work
that
could
be
performed
under
the
direction
of
and
control
of,
a
contractor,
either
by
himself
or
as
people
are
provided
to
the
contractor,
and
they
are
employed
by
the
private
employment
agency
that
is
licensed
under
61104,
but
this
is
the
only
for
work
that
does
not
require
a
contractor's
license,
and
this
was
an
attempt
to
try
to
balance
what
we
were
hearing
in
the
interim.
As
we
were
negotiating
this
that
con
it
is.
K
It
is
a
routine
thing
for
contractors,
big
and
small,
to
need
to
have
laborers
on
the
job
who
are
performing
functions
that
do
not
require
a
contractor's
license.
Those
might
be
job
site
cleanup,
for
example.
K
We
also
had
concerns
raised
with
us.
Well
what?
If
my
front
office
secretary
goes
out
on
maternity
leave?
Can
I
use
a
private
employment
agency
to
replace
her,
and
the
answer
is
obviously
yes,
she's
not
performing
work
that
requires
a
contractor's
license,
so
that
was
what
we
were
trying
to
balance
in
a
section.
One
subsection,
two
is
to
say:
yes,
labor
can
be
provided
to
a
contractor
as
long
as
that,
labor
is
not
skilled.
K
If
you
are
looking
for
somebody
who
needs
to
be
a
journeyman
needs
to
be
performing
work
that
is
within
the
scope
of
a
contractor's
license.
That
person
needs
to
be
employed
by
the
contractor.
That
was
the
balance
we
struck.
I
So
I
asked
the
second
one:
okay
yeah
all
right,
so
so
what
I'm
trying
to
get
at
is-
and
thank
you
for
that
explanation,
on
on
how
how
you
were
trying
to
be
inclusive
of
them
being
able
to
work
as
laborers.
I
I
Are
there
opportunities
to
switch
and
go
to
the
other
side
and
then
be
considered
an
employee,
or
will
there
be
an
issue
where
they're
saying
the
we
don't
have
room
to
take
you
on,
because
we
already
have
filled
our
need
as
a
contractor
because
they
have
contracted
for
the
work
they've
already
set
out
who
their
employees
are?
Whether
or
not
it's
100
people
working
on
a
job
and
then
these
additional
folks
that
were
able
to
kind
of
be
substitutes
or
come
in
and
out
now
are
like.
I
Q
Bill
stanley
for
the
record
that
happens
every
single
day
where
an
employer
needs
two
or
three
guys
or
two
or
three
individuals
for
a
day,
they're
sent
to
the
employer.
Q
The
employer
simply
puts
them
on
his
payroll
does
the
work
and
it
sends
them
on
their
way.
Construction
is
by
its
nature.
Temporary
every
day
you
spend
on
a
construction
site
is
one
day
less
you're
going
to
spend
there
because
they
have
a
beginning
and
an
end,
and
so
that
is
the
nature
of
the
work.
It
is
permanent
in
that
you
have
a
skill
that
you
can
apply
from
contractor
to
employer
to
employer,
but
it
is
temporary
in
nature,
and
so
we
throughout
the
industry.
Q
We
have
what
we
call
short
calls.
They
happen
every
single
day.
I
go
to
a
job
site.
I
will
be
there
less
than
a
than
a
full
week
and
I
fill
in.
I
do
what
what
happened,
because
the
contractor
needs
that
ebb
and
flow
of
his
workforce
and
able
to
do
projects
that
are
bigger
and
smaller,
and
so
he
constricts
or
expands
his
workforce
through
the
employment
of
temporary
labor.
That
is,
by
definition,
the
construction
industry,
and
so
individuals
find
their
way
in
that
and
out
of
it
every
single
day,
both
union
and
non-union.
I
I
But
now
you
have
to
now
be
under
the
contractor
or
become
under
this
other
umbrella
in
order
to
continue
to
exist,
and
I
think
that
I
think
it
is
proper
to
have
the
conversation
and
to
get
all
of
it
on
the
record
and
to
hear
all
sides.
So
we
can
properly
understand
the
business
impact
of
what
is
going
on
in
the
space,
because
there
is
a
business
impact.
I
If
it's
voted
out
and
how
do
they
then
continue
to
exist,
and
they
probably
are
saying
themselves,
I
don't
want
to
do
just
clean
up
like
I.
I
used
to
be
able
to
do
more
and
now
and
now,
I'm
and
now
my
category
and
my
scope
is
way.
Small
and
I
need
to
determine
if
it's
even
profitable
for
me
to
continue
to
be
a
leasing
company
of
skilled
labor
right
and
I
think
that's
a
proper
question.
Q
I'll
take
it.
Thank
you,
okay,
I'm
going
to
answer
it
because
you
deserve
an
answer.
Their
business
model
is
going
to
change
under
this
scenario.
They
can
do
skilled
labor
like
a
lot
of
folks,
do
it.
They
just
can't
be
the
employer
of
record
for
the
time
they're
performing
the
scope
that
requires
a
contractor's
license
if
this
bill
passes
straight
up.
You
know
that,
and
I
know
that
so
there's
no
reason
dancing
around
it
any
longer
right
that
business
model
that
piece
of
their
business
model
will
change.
Q
O
Q
Thank
you,
senator
scheibel
with
that
question.
That
is
an
option.
If
the,
if
the
employment
leasing
agency
themselves
became
a
contractor,
the
bill
provides
for
them
through
itself
itself
or
through
others.
The
contractors
so
contractors
regularly
perform
work
for
other
contractors.
That's
the
kind,
that's
what
we
call
the
subcontracting
business
of
the
construction
world.
Thank
you
for
that
question.
So.
O
O
And
if
I
could
ask
one
more
set
of
questions
and-
and
I
tru
I
do
not
want
to
get
off
topic,
so
you
can
stop
me
if
this
is
outside
the
scope.
But
I
have
been
reading
the
decision
as
we've
been
sitting
here,
and
it
only
very
briefly
touches
on
workers,
compensation
and
I'm
curious
about
the
current
structure
of
workers.
Compensation
claims
for
these
leased
employees
and
how
that
would
change
with
ab227.
Q
Thank
you
for
that
question
because
we've
been
focusing
a
lot
on
the
legacy
decision,
but
this
really
our
focus
here
is
on
the
broader
sense.
I
mean
we
have
a
lot
of
things
going
on
the
modified
business
tax
not
being
paid
that's
addressed
in
the
build,
so
all
of
those
collectibles
right,
one
of
them
is
workers
comp.
I
serve
on
the
dir
advisory
board
and
I
uploaded
as
one
of
the
exhibits
here
was
the
write-off
for
the
last
quarter
of
un
debt
under
workers.
Comp
was
22
million
dollars
in
the
last
quarter.
Q
It's
been
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
over
the
last
few
years.
That's
a
problem
because
remember
every
legitimate
employer
who
employs
folks
who
pay
into
the
workers
comp
system
pays
for
those
employees
who
get
hurt
on
the
job
where
there
is
not
an
employer
of
record
to
cover
their
workers
comp.
We
all
know
that
we
pay
for
it
it's
expensive.
Q
So
that's
an
aspect
of
this
we're
trying
to
get
at
the
1099s,
the
you
know
the
independent
contractors
in
the
construction
world
who
are
they
liable?
You
know
who's
liable
on
the
job
site
for
their
work
and
I
think
senator
picker.
I
think
you
and
I
agree
on
that.
We've
got
to
make
sure
we
understand
who's
liable
for
the
work
that's
performed
under
the
scope
of
whatever
it
was
at
the
site
of
the
construction.
So
there's
that
aspect
there's
the
cash
world,
that's
going
on
that.
Q
We
all
knows
out
there
and
I
think
everyone
in
the
room,
even
the
opponents
on
the
other
side,
that
I've
had
conversation
with
all
agree.
We've
got
to
do
something
about
the
cash
world
that
goes
on
right
and
the
coyotes
that
are
running
undocumented
workers
to
the
job
site
and
and
really
exploiting
a
whole
host
of
human
beings.
Okay,
this
bill
goes
beyond
the
and
I
know
the
most
controversial
piece
is
the
is
this
legacy
piece
and
and
what
we're
going
to
do
with
the
temporary
employment?
Q
Q
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
next
opportunity.
I
want
to
try
to
connect
some
dots
here.
I
was
listening
to
senator
neil's
questions
and
your
responses,
and
I
want
to
make
sure
I'm
clear,
because
under
the
current
state
of
affairs
prior
to
legacy
anyway,
it
and
and
for
30
years
prior,
we
had
a
situation
where
the
temporary
agency
could
provide
skilled,
labor
and
provided
it
was
under
the
supervision
and
direction
of
the
contractor.
They
were
allowed
to
provide
skilled
work.
D
And
under
this
rule
now
they
would
have
to
transfer
the
employment
to
the
contractor.
Now
they
lose
their
source
of
income
because
they're
not
allowed
the
markup
that
they
would
be
given
on
each
hour
of
work
by
that
employee.
So
either
they
have
to
charge
the
contractor
up
front
for
the
money
that
they're
now
losing
because
they're
no
longer
marking
up
the
the
the
the
wage.
D
Q
Senator
picker
there's
an
assumption
made
there
that
I'm
not
that
I
don't
know,
which
is
how,
whether
the
temporary
employment
agency
or
the
leasing
agency
charges.
You
know
whether
the
markups
on
an
hourly
basis
or
the
fees
are
up
front
or
the
fees
are
monthly,
are
based
on
how
many
employees
you
have
for
a
day.
I
don't
know
what
that
is.
I
mean
I'm
sure
others
can
hear
today
can
answer
that
question.
Q
D
Right
I
appreciate
that,
and-
and
you
know
I
I
have
lots
of
experience
in
this,
and
so
I
can
tell
you
that
I
pay
more
paid
more
to
the
agency
than
I
would
to
the
employer
if
they
were
or
employee.
D
I
correct,
though,
that
this
would
change
the
rule
so
that
now
the
employment
agency
could
no
longer
provide
skilled
labor,
even
though
they're
doing
the
work
under
the
direct
supervision
and
and
direction
of
the
contractor,
that
that
is
no
longer
going
to
be
afforded
them.
They
either
hire
recruit
and
give
away
the
employee,
or
they
don't
offer
it
at
all
under
the
current
rule.
D
Q
Picker,
under
the
current
rule,
I
think
folks
are
doing
what
you've
explained
right.
What
this
bill
proposes
is
is
that
we
can
hold
contractors
responsible
for
the
work
at
the
side
of
work
and
which
they
themselves
are
performing
through
their
employees
and
that
they
can't
then
say
which
I'm
not
a
lawyer
but
part
of
the
legacy
cases.
Q
D
I
mean
the
legacy
case
is
kind
of
an
anomaly
here,
because
in
that
case
they
didn't
pay
the
the
workers,
but
legacy
did
they
covered
all
those
things
for
them,
because
that
was
ultimately
their
responsibility
as
the
contractor
they
just
hired
temporary
labor.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
distinction
is
clear
on
the
record.
In
any
event,
I
I
I
think,
madam
chair
I'll,
ask
the
employment
agency
representatives
how
this
changes
their
business
model
when
they
come
up.
But
thank
you,
mr
stanley.
I
appreciate
that,
if
I
could
I'm
sure.
A
Okay,
so
what
I
want
to
do
in
a
basis
if
I
say
you
have
another
question
on
that's
the
question-
that
pressure,
neal
and
senator
scheibel
brought
up
I'm
going
to
go
out
of
order
here
and
I'm
going
to
ask
for
he
had
two
people
for
me:
two
people
in
opposition
to
state
their
case,
and
this
is
not
people
that
are
on
the
phone
just
so
we
can
get
some
type
of.
A
J
F
Thank
you,
senator
josh
hicks,
with
mcdonald
chrono
for
the
american
staffing
association.
Just
to
be
clear,
were
you
asking
for
us
to
respond
to
some
of
the
questions
or
actually
put
on
the
opposition
presentation
just
so
we
make
sure
we
know
we
have
who
we
have
up
at
the
table.
A
What
why
don't
we
respond
to
the
questions?
I
don't
want
people
who
are
listening
to
forget
what
we're
talking
about.
So
we
can
respond
to
the
questions
and
we'll
get
to
the
other
part
of
the
opposition
a
little
bit
later.
Just.
F
Okay,
thank
you
senator
for
that,
because
we
do
have.
We
do
have
some
more
global
remarks,
so
I
will
just
do
my
best
to
respond
to
a
few
of
the
things
that
came
up
and
then
we'll
we'll
hold
back
for
our
full
presentation
a
little
bit
later.
F
I
think
there
was
a
one.
An
initial
comment,
I'd
like
to
make
on
the
legacy
case
has
to
do
with
what
it
was
and
what
it
was
not.
That
was
a
case
that
did
not
involve
a
licensed
private
employment
agency.
That's
who
we
represent.
These
are
companies,
mr
thompson
who's.
Next
to
me,
works
with
one
of
them
who
provide
temporary
construction
labor
to
nevada
contractors.
F
They
these
these
labor.
These
workers
are
employees
of
the
pea
they
get
w-2s,
they
have
unemployment
insurance
paid,
they
have
workers
comp
paid,
they
have
wages
and
benefits,
taken
care
of
and
all
their
state
and
federal
tax
withholdings.
So
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear,
because
there
are
there's
issues
in
this
case
about
1099
employees.
F
Those
aren't
our
concern
if
we
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
not
happening
and
contractors
aren't
using
those.
We
have
no
quarrel
with
that.
Our
issue
is
really
the
impact
on
private
employment
agencies
and
the
restrictions
in
this
bill
that
prevent
that
would
prevent
those
private
employment
agencies
from
providing
skilled
or
semi-skilled
workers
to
nevada
contractors.
F
F
F
So
I
just
want
to
make
that
clear
and
if
I'll
also
note
on
that
case,
that
it
was
not
appealed
either
by
the
contractor's
board.
So
if
there
was
a
dispute
with
that
position,
that
would
have
been
the
time
to
bring
that
up.
F
I
think
going
down
my
notes.
We
had
another.
There
was
a
there
was
an
assertion.
I
think
mr
stanley
made
it
that
there
would
be
no
impact
on
existing
business
relationships.
That
is
not
the
case.
These
private
employment
agencies
for
years
for
decades
have
been
providing
workers
to
nevada
contractors.
F
F
F
F
This
takes
care
of
the
workers
comp,
it
takes
care
of
the
unemployment
insurance
and,
on
top
of
all
that,
as
I
said
earlier,
these
private
employment
agencies
are
licensed
and
regulated
by
the
nevada
labor
commissioner.
So
if
there's
a
problem,
they're
not
paying
somebody
that
there's
a
remedy
for
those
workers
to
do
that
and
if
there's
anything
else
chair
I'd
be
happy
to
to
reiterate.
Those
were
just
kind
of
my
notes
on
a
few
major
points
that
I
wanted
to
address.
D
D
And
can
you
speak
to
how
those
laborers
are
used
by
the
by
the
construction
contractors.
F
Thank
you,
senator
picker
for
that
question,
josh
hicks
again
for
the
record,
yes,
and
that
is
just
before
I
answer
that
that
is
the
nut
of
our
opposition
to
this
bill.
Again,
it
is,
it
really
is
in
section
one
sub
two
of
the
bill
and
what
that
does
is
it
restricts
the
ability
of
a
private
employment
agency
providing
workers
to
providing
only
unskilled
the
most
medial
of
labor.
So
the
question
being,
how
does
that
impact
jobs?
F
Well,
we
we
surveyed
our
membership,
american
staffing
associations,
membership,
there's
nine
different
private
employment
agencies
who
are
licensed
and
operating
in
the
state
of
nevada.
We
asked
them
to
go
back
and
take
a
look
at
how
many
of
their
employees
were
providing
skilled
or
semi-skilled
work
in
the
last
year,
and
we
came
up
with
around
4
300
people,
so
we
put
that
in
into
nellis
as
well.
So
you
can
see
that
in
there,
but
that's
about
what
it
is.
It's
a
that's,
a
significant
amount
of
of
labor,
that's
provided
by
these
businesses.
F
D
F
Thank
you,
senator
josh
hicks
for
the
record.
That's
that's
a
very
good
question.
Some
of
them
may
just
go
into
other
industries.
Their
people
are
in
people.
Take
these
jobs
for
a
variety
of
reasons.
Many
of
them
are
just
getting
interested
in
the
industry
and
they're
coming
in.
If
their
job
goes
away,
maybe
they
look
into
another
industry.
F
Others
take
these
jobs
because
it's
seasonal
for
them.
Like
senator
settlemeyer
mentioned
we've
had
we've
had
clients
or
our
members
who
have
told
us
they
have.
They
have
employees
who
are
teachers,
and
this
is
a
summer
job
and
how
they
supplement
their
income,
those
kind
of
people.
It's
a
good
question.
What
they're
going
to
do
because
they're
not
looking
some
of
those
people
are
not
looking
for
full-time
employment.
D
If
I
can't
keep
that
person
busy,
I
lose
them,
and
so
it
sounds
like
if
I
understand
correctly,
that
the
agencies
would
not
be
able
to
keep
if
we're
talking
about,
and
I'm
only
talking
about
skilled
labor
here,
if
they're
not
able
to
provide
these
services,
they
lose
those
employees
and
since
the
small
contractors
can't
take
them
on,
they
lose
their
employees
and
these
jobs
just
disappear
and
those
small
contractors
end
up
not
being
able
to
perform
their
work.
F
R
I
When
I
was
reading
the
nrs
provisions
and
the
bill
616
b
is
not,
it
doesn't
seem
like
it
is
being
touched
in
this
bill,
but
in
the
case
616
b
was
elaborated,
and
this
is
where
the
judge
got
into
the
boards
written
arguments
about
the
labor
provided
by
an
employee
leasing.
Company
who
is
not
licensed
contractor
may
work
on
a
job
site
without
being
a
licensed
contractor
himself
or
herself.
I
If
the
employee
leasing
company
is
licensed
pursuant
to
nrs
chapter
616
b-
and
I
think
I
need
to
understand
since
616b
is
not
being
affected
by
this
bill.
What
does
that
mean
right?
I
mean
because
if
that
statutory
provision
is
still
standing
and
I
need
to
understand
the
conflict
there
or
if
there's
a
conflict
right-
and
I
don't
know
if
you
wanted-
will
keen
to
answer
that,
but
I
I
need
to
understand
616b
in
this
conversation.
G
G
It
requires
all
of
those
workers
either
to
be
the
contractor
him
or
herself
an
employee
of
that
contractor
or
an
employee
of
another
contractor,
and
so
the
effect
on
employee
leasing
companies
under
616
616
b
is
that,
if
that
employee
leasing
company
is
not
a
contractor
and
is
set
up
with
a
business
model
where
the
employees
are
employees
of
the
employee
leasing
company,
then,
under
the
terms
of
ab-227,
those
employees
of
the
employee
leasing
company
could
not
show
up
on
the
job
site
and
do
the
work
because
they
would
not
actually
be
employees
of
the
contractor
or
another
contractor
now,
if
instead
those
employees
for
the
purpose
of
that
work
on
that
project
became
the
employees
of
the
contractor
and
fulfilled
the
requirements
of
the
statute.
G
Then
everything
would
be
fine,
but,
depending
on
the
business
model
of
the
employee
leasing
company,
the
employee
leasing
company
might
not
be
able
to
provide
workers
if
those
workers
were
not
employees
of
the
contractor
or
employees
of
another
contractor,
as
described
in
the
bill.
F
Senator
matt
to
supplement
that
josh
hicks
for
the
record.
Just
on
a
tactical
note,
I
had
the
same
thought
you
did
when
I
read
that.
I
actually
think
that
the
judge
may
have
mistakenly
cited
the
616b
instead
of
611,
because
private
employment
agencies
are
licensed
under
611
and
that's
who
our
client
represents.
R
Chris
thompson,
for
the
record
I
I
came
to,
I
grew
up
in
an
area
of
the
country
where
kind
of
military
service
is
kind
of
a
normal
thing.
I
come
from
a
military
background
and
I
joined
the
military
right
out
of
high
school
and
my
intent
then
was
kind
of
to
be
a
lifelong
server
in
the
military.
But
at
some
point
in
time
I
got
injured,
I
got
hurt,
and
so
it
it
came
to
a
point
where
I
was
no
longer
able
to
do
my
job
effectively.
R
So
I
was
getting
medically
transitioned
out
of
the
military,
and
because
of
that
I
was
not
prepared
to
kind
of
enter
re-enter
the
workforce,
and
I
didn't
really
have
the
skills
to
kind
of
find
you
know
meaningful
employment,
and
so
what
happened
was
I
kind
of
bounced
around
from
job
to
job?
For
a
time
until
one
of
my
friends
who
was
at
the
time
working
for
a
staffing
agency
suggested
to
me
hey?
Why
don't
you
give
this
a
try?
R
So
I
took
a
chance.
You
know
started
working
with
the
staffing
agency,
got
my
foot
in
the
door
and
started
working
around
the
country.
Doing
solo
forms
for
this
country
for
different,
you
know
customers
around
the
country
eventually
over
time,
because
of
my
my
work
ethic
and
the
job
that
I
was
doing
at
the
field,
I
eventually
was
giving
job
offers
with
these
companies
also
from
getting
these
job
offers.
With
these
companies,
I
got
a
job
offer
from
peopleready
the
staffing
agency.
R
The
staffing
agency
offered
me
a
position
with
them
to
travel
around
the
country
and
kind
of
recruit
for
these
jobs
and
stuff,
and
these
projects
across
the
country-
and
I
kind
of
jumped
on
that
opportunity-
and
this
is
kind
of
a
reoccurring
thing-
that
we
see
a
lot
of
times
for
a
lot
of
people
where
staffing
has
basically,
as
as
a
bridge
for
people
who
not
necessarily
you
know,
made
it
to
college
or
college,
wasn't
an
option,
and
there
no
longer
is
any
kind
of
trade
schools
or
any
of
that.
R
That
kind
of
exists
right
now
in
a
meaningful
way.
So
staffing
has
kind
of
stepped
in
and
took
in
that
place
to
where
it
now
is
the
place
where
you
can
kind
of
come
through,
get
experience,
get
opportunity
and
then,
eventually,
you
know,
get
hired
on
by
these
different
companies,
and
this
bill
will
effectively
kind
of
close
that
out.
R
It's
not
easy
to
just
walk
into
a
company
like
mccarthy,
for
instance,
and
be
able
to
get
your
foot
in
the
door
with
them
because
they're
looking
for
experienced
people-
and
you
know
staffing
agencies
kind
of
exist
because
they
take
on
that
risk.
In
the
beginning,
we
are
w2,
we
do
have
workman's
compensation
like
we
are
protected.
R
There
isn't
ever
a
case
since
I've
ever
been
working
where
I've
ever
seen
where
a
worker
was
not
paid
for
our
group.
I
can
speak
personally
because
we
actually
build
our
customers
two
weeks
behind,
so
even
if
there
would
never
be
a
situation
where
a
worker,
you
know
whether
it
was
a
customer
not
paying
their
bills
and
the
worker
would
not
get
paid
because
we
would
pay
them.
R
I
Thanks,
madam
chair,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
so
and
so
the
way
it's
been
working
all
these
years
did
the
employee
leasing
company
get
into
a
contract
with
the
contractor
on
the
site
and
then
define
the
scope
of
liability
and
what
what
their
each
entity's
responsibilities
were
in
terms
like
operating
kind
of
like
an
umbrella
approach
where
you're
in,
but
you
have
a
contract
right,
you're
like
okay,
we're
gonna
do
this
job,
and
now
we
have
a
written
contract
between
the
leasing
company
and
the
contractor,
which
then
allows
the
work
to
happen.
I
But
we
understand
liability
protection,
safety
all
falls
under
who
right.
You
know
like
you're
here,
I'm
there
and
if
something
happens
with
your
temporary
leasing,
not
temporary
leasing.
I
don't
know
why.
I'm
calling
it
yeah
yeah.
I
am
calling
it
that
your
temporary
worker
liability
for
x
falls
under
you,
leasing,
company
and
my
liability
are
for
my
direct
employees.
Has
that?
Has
that
been
the
structure
in
these
in
these
years,
because
I'm
trying
you
just
don't
show
up
on
the
site
right.
R
Chris
thompson
for
the
record:
yes
ma'am.
Actually
there
is
always
an
msa,
a
master
service
agreement,
that's
in
place
with
all
of
our
customers,
as
well
as
for
each
particular
job
site.
There's
a
cla,
there's
a
you
know:
construction,
labor
agreement
that
we
have
with
all
of
our
customers
and
in
those
this
actually
is
defined.
You
know
what
is
our
responsibility,
what
is
their
responsibility
and
is
kind
of
clearly
defined
and
signed
by
both
parties.
A
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
mr
hicks,
since
you
have
been
involved
both
with
contractors
and
with
peas,
can
you
tell
me
if
you
know
whether
or
not
a
pea
or
I'm
sorry,
the
employment
agency
can
obtain
a
contractor's
license.
F
Thank
you,
senator
picker,
josh
hicks,
for
the
record.
I
I
don't.
I
know
it's
very
difficult
to
obtain
a
contractor's
license.
I
don't
believe
any
peas
actually
have
one,
and
I
think
it's
it's
just
inconsistent
with
what
their
business
model
has
been.
It's
important
to
remember
that
peas
are
not
only
providing
labor
to
construction
industry;
they
provide
labor
in
all
kinds
of
ways,
office,
office,
workers,
retail,
seasonal
work,
so
to
say
that
they
that
it
would
be
easy
for
them
or
practical
for
them
to
get
a
contractor's
license.
I
think,
is
just
it's.
D
All
right,
I
appreciate
that
my
concern,
as
I
was
just
trying
to
digest
all
the
testimony
was
that
you
know
we're
looking
for
alternate
paths
if
necessary,
and
it
occurred
to
me
that
my
understanding
is-
and
maybe
the
contractor's
board
rep
can
speak
to
this.
But
my
understanding
is
that
you
have
to
be
an
entity
or
a
person
who's
engaging
in
the
work
in
order
to,
and
then
you
have
to
show
your
financial
responsibility,
your
competence
in
the
area.
D
F
A
Okay,
so
you
know
for
the
questions
from
the
committee:
here's
what
I'm
going
to
do.
First,
the
people
that
are
on
the
phones
have
probably
been
on
through
all
three.
So
I'm
going
to
go
to
the
phones
first
and
broadcast.
We
will
go
support
in
opposition
20
minutes
each
and
two
minutes
per
individual,
so
it'll
be
20
minutes
for
all
three
support,
opposition
and
neutral
okay,
so
so
broadcast.
Do
your
thing.
J
J
P
P
One
term,
that's
being
tossed
about
these
days,
is
about
a
high
road
contractor
and
that's
no
designation
between
a
union
and
non-union
contractor.
That's
a
contractor
that
pays
his
employees
properly
and
plays
by
the
rules.
In
my
experience
as
an
organizer,
I
came
across
a
bid
for
a
painting
job
that
had
several
high
road
painting
contractors
and
the
bid
was
let
to
in
a
substantially
less
amount.
So
upon
investigation
of
that
project,
I
found
that
there
were
very
few
people
performing
work
on
the
job
and
they
didn't
seem
to
be
in
any
hurry.
P
Yet
the
work
that
they
were
doing
was
incredible
from
day
to
day.
What
I
found
out
was
that
the
con,
the
general
contractor,
had
led
a
contract
to
the
same
entity
who
owned
a
painting,
business
and
a
janitorial
business,
both
of
which
were
licensed
by
the
state,
but
only
the
contractor.
The
painting
contractor's
license
did
cover
the
painting
work
on
the
job.
So
what
I
found
was
that
they
were
running
janitors
in
at
night
and
doing
this
painting
work.
P
So
when
mr
stanley
said
that
contractors
can
be
creative
and
resourceful,
this
doesn't
only
apply
to
high
road
contractors,
but
a
lot
of
these
schemes
to
defraud
the
state
out
of
tax
dollars.
Now,
with
reference
to
the
bill
in
in
section
3,
subsection,
4
lines,
22
and
23
knowingly
entering
into
a
contract
with
a
contractor.
While
that
contractor
is
not
licensed,
wouldn't
have
covered
this
scenario
because
they
did
in
fact
have
a
contract
with
the
painting
contractor
to
do
painting
work.
But
now
the
caller.
P
Has
been
entered,
thank
you
for
the
the
time
chairman
spearman
for
the,
and
that
concludes
my
testimony.
A
Thank
you
and
for
those
of
you
who,
those
of
you
who
have
more
to
say
other
it
goes
beyond
two
minutes.
You
can
submit
your
testimony
in
first,
I'm
sorry
in
via
a
fax
or
a
letter,
email
and
just
remember
if
someone
has
already
covered
what
you
wanted
to
say
if
you
say
ditto
that
gets
more.
That
allows
more
people
to
make
their
comments
on
the
record.
So
so
two
minutes
each.
J
B
B
Contractor
are
also
not
observed
as
employees
of
the
contractor.
The
board
has
had
several
cases
during
my
tenure
where
a
contractor
has
used
leased,
labor
to
compete
unfairly
and
where
the
least
labor
released
employees
were
ultimately
left
stranded
in
nevada
without
being
paid
by
their
labor
leasing.
Company
the
quality
of
an
employee
and
the
protection
of
the
public
is
best
assured
when
the
contractor
has
an
abiding
investment
in
the
people
it
hires.
The
contractor's
board
appreciates
the
efforts
of
assemblywoman
carlton
to
provide
a
viable
solution
to
this
issue.
B
A
J
L
Thank
you.
My
name
is
richard
daley,
last
name
d-a-l-y
with
the
laborers
union,
local
169
in
northern
nevada,
and
thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
letting
us
get
on.
We
have
been
waiting
a
while.
So
I
appreciate
that
I
won't
take
the
two
minutes,
but
I
have
been
listening
and
I
think
the
bill
will
address
what
I
believe
the
bottom
line
issue
is
is
that
under
the
current
situation,
which
has
not
existed
since
1975,
the
language
may
have
been
there,
but
it
hasn't
existed.
L
So
this
is
a
newer
phenomenon
with
these
type
of
employers
employing
workers
on
construction
sites
to
perform
construction
work.
That
requires
a
contractor's
license,
but
they
are
not
licensed
contractors
and,
as
was
stated
earlier,
our
state
supports
licensed
contractors
performing
that
work
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
not
to
mention
the
least
of
which
is
the
safety
of
the
public
and
the
consumers
out
there.
L
So
this
bill
will
address
that
problem
and
there
are
places
and
types
of
work
that
are
routinely
performed
on
construction
jobs
that
would
not
be
covered
required
by
our
contractor's
license
and
wouldn't
be
affected
by
this
bill.
But
if
bottom
line
is,
if
you're
performing
work
required
by
a
license,
this
bill
simply
says
you
either
have
to
be
an
actual
contractor
yourself
or
employed
by
a
contractor.
That's
licensed
to
perform
that
work.
L
J
P
Good
morning,
chairman
spearman
and
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
james
halsey
j-a-m-e-s-h-a-l-s-e-y
and
I'm
the
business
manager
of
ibw
local
357.
Today
I
speak
in
favor
of
ab227
on
behalf
of
our
4
000
members
that
work
every
day
as
employees
and
receive
a
w-2
every
year.
We
support
this
bill
to
ensure
that
all
workers
in
construction
have
the
same
employment
protections
that
w-2
employees
of
a
contractor
are
afforded.
Those
protections
include
unemployment,
insurance,
future
social
security
benefits,
health
benefits
and
workers
compensation.
J
L
S-H-A-W-N-K-I-N-S-E-Y
I
represent
operating
engineers,
local
12
and
I
rise
today
in
favor
of
ab227,
and
I
know
we
have
a
lot
of
callers
on
the
line,
so
I
will
just
state
that
and
you
can
move
on.
Thank
you.
J
L
Wendy
newman
w-e-n-d-I-n-e-w-m-a-n
executive
director
for
unified
construction
industry
council,
the
ucic
is
a
labor
management
cooperative
committee
composed
of
14
affiliated
skilled
craft
trade
unions
and
over
200
contractors
who
employ
the
over
20
000
skilled
trade
workers.
We
absolutely
support
ab227.
Thank
you.
J
L
Today,
I'm
representing
ibew
396
and
ibw
1245
and
the
operating
engineers,
local
12
and
operating
engineers,
local
three-
I
don't
have
anything
to
add
to
the
to
the
discussion
other
than
to
express
our
support.
Thank
you.
J
L
J
J
J
A
Thank
you.
So,
let's
move
to
opposition.
A
A
So
broadcast
hold
on
I'm
going
to
take
support
here
in
the
room.
A
Anyone
coming
in
in
support,
if
you
are
in
support,
come
to
the
table
and
20
minutes
for
support
two
minutes
each
and
I've
asked
everyone.
If
someone
has
already
said
what
you
wanted
to
say,
ditto
is
a
very
good
response
and
that
allows
more
people
to
get
on
the
record
verbally.
T
Greg
esposito
representing
the
nevada
state,
pipe
trades,
local
525
in
the
south,
350
in
the
north
and
669
around
the
state.
First,
I
want
to
put
on
record
thank
you
very
much
to
the
to
the
committee
staff.
They've
done
a
great
job,
trying
to
corral
everybody
and
get
you
know,
keep
social
justice
going.
So
thank
you
very
much
to
what
they've
done
for
this
hearing
ditto.
T
I
have
a
lot
of
personal
anecdotes
of
when
I,
as
a
worker,
went
hungry
one
night,
because
the
guy
didn't
want
to
pay
me
that
day
I've
got
scars
that
didn't
get
treated
because
I
wasn't
an
employee
and
there
was
no
medical
insurance,
but
other
than
that,
I
would
just
say
right
now.
There
are
workers
under
the
same
circumstances,
getting
cheated
getting
hurt
with
no
medical
care
because
they're,
not
employees
and
they're,
not
covered.
D
D
L
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
rusty
mcallister,
representing
nevada,
state
afl-cio,
we're
in
support
of
this
legislation.
We
believe
it's
a
good
step
in
the
right
direction,
to
leveling
the
playing
field,
to
make
sure
that
all
employers
play
by
the
same
rules
so
that
the
state
of
nevada
receives
the
revenue
that
they
need
with
unemployment,
employee
taxes,
all
those
things
which
will
even
the
playing
field
for
all
contractors
moving
forward.
T
F
Stoffer
I
work
for
the
southwest
regional
council
of
carpenters.
I
specifically.
F
L
F
Affects
bids
with
legitimate
contractors,
when
they
do
that,
there's
up
to
a
30
percent
difference
in
bids
and
for
a
legitimate
contractor
to
follow
all
the
rules
and
and
then
have
to
compete
against
that
and
that
kind
of
that
kind
of
illegitimate
contractors
that
that's
why
we
support
this
bill.
This.
I
think
it's
very
important
that
that
we
kind
of
stop
that
under
the
table
cash
pipeline.
A
J
N
N
N
Oh,
madam
chair,
I'm
sorry
I
was
on
on
opposition
and
I
think
they
just
hit
me
too
early.
Okay,.
A
All
right,
yeah
we're
we're
in
opposition.
I'm
sorry
we're
in
support
right
now.
So
anyone
if
you
just
just
you,
know,
pull
the
phone
we'll
be
we'll
be
in
opposition,
soon
support.
I
will
do
that.
Madam
chair
okay,
thank
you
and
we'll
kick
in
two
minutes
for
support,
because
we
took
that
caller
so
support
anyone
else
on
zoom
in
support.
J
G
A
Okay,
so
let's
go
to
the
phones
now
for
opposition
and
then
I'll
come
back
here
to
folks
who
are
in
the
room
so
we're
in
opposition
20
minutes
two
minutes
per
individual.
J
J
N
Well,
hello,
again,
chair
spearman
senators
for
the
record
randy
thompson
representing
the
national
federation
of
independent
business
on
behalf
of
many
small
and
mid-sized
construction
companies.
We
are
in
opposition
to
this
bill,
I'll
skim
quickly
over
what
I
already
said,
I
can
provide
it
for
the
record
later,
but
again,
I'm
just
concerned
about
the
4300
nevadans,
who
received
w-2s
last
year
for
skilled
workers
for
skilled
work
through
a
private
employment
agency.
This
bill
will
take
away
those
jobs,
hurting
them
and
the
many
small
and
mid-sized
contractors
who
hire
them.
N
J
J
P
V-I-C-T-O-R-A-L-D-A-N-A-
and
I
am
speaking
on
behalf
of
eastwood
workforce
solutions
and
speaking
in
opposition
to
ab227
a
bill
that
would
rob
nevadans
of
opportunities
to
work.
In
the
last
three
years,
we've
put
1990
local
nevadans,
all
of
whom
receive
a
w-2
to
work
in
the
construction
industry.
Many
of
these
people
are
veterans.
Many
of
them
have
also
earned
high
paying
permanent
positions
at
the
companies
we
place
them
out
to
due
to
the
collaboration
between
licensed
contractors
and
peas,
like
eastwood
workforce
solutions
and
as
an
employee-owned
pea
or
an
esop.
P
As
an
example,
we
have
veterans,
we
place
at
years-long
training
assignments
who
earn
18
per
hour
when
they
are
working
with
us
once
they
go
to
work
directly
with
their
companies.
They
are
earning
26
an
hour.
So
again,
these
are
high
paying
permanent
and
all
these
jobs
would
be
impossible
for
people
to
get
in
a
world
with
ab227
nevada
has
suffered
from
a
skilled
workforce
shortage
for
many
years,
and
this
would
only
exacerbate
that
issue.
P
J
L
The
supply
of
construction
labor
in
northern
nevada
is
already
unbelievably
critical
and
unbelievably
tight
contractors
are
struggling
to
find
work
and
workers
and
workforce
on
a
full-time
or
part-time
basis.
This
bill
would
make
that
challenge.
Even
greater
ab-227
is
an
impediment
to
a
rebounding
and
thriving
a
rebounding
and
thriving
construction
market
throughout
nevada,
and
particularly
in
northern
nevada.
L
J
J
L
While
we
agree
with
a
lot
of
the
sediment
that
was
presented
today
about
protecting
employees,
we
believe
that
eliminating
an
entire
opportunity
for
part-time
employment
through
peas
is
an
overreach,
as
has
been
brought
up
during
the
hearing,
as
it
relates
to
the
the
legacy
case
and
the
judge's
findings.
L
N
Sorry,
I
can't
see
with
my
glasses
in
nevada.
Asa
members
include
licensed
and
regulated
private
employee
agencies
or
peas.
Every
year,
thousands
of
pea
employees
work
in
construction
under
the
direct
and
control
of
nevada
of
licensed
nevada
contractors
providing
much
needed.
Labor
supply
asa
stands
opposed
to
ab-227,
because
the
bill
would
unnecessarily
restrict
the
long-standing
and
accepted
usage
of
temporary
construction.
N
Labor
through
licensed
peas,
peas
are
licensed
and
regulated
by
the
nevada
labor
commissioner
pea
employees
receive
w-2s,
are
provided
workers,
compensation,
unemployment
insurance
and
have
their
payroll
taxes
withheld
for
federal
and
state
authorities
and
receive
market
rate
wages
and
benefits.
Pa
employees
work
on
construction
sites
under
the
direct
and
control
license.
Contractors
and
those
licensed
contractors
are
legally
responsible
for
the
quality
of
work
performed
by
pea
employees.
N
Pa
employees
in
the
construction
context
are
critically
important
for
several
reasons.
First,
as
nevada
emerges
from
emerges
from
the
covet
pandemic,
all
jobs
are
critical
and
jobs
in
tight
construction
markets
are
needed
to
avoid
construction
delays,
we
should
be
doing
everything
we
can
to
make
sure
nevadans
keep
their
jobs.
N
Second,
peas
are
extremely
important
to
small
contractors,
who
may
not
have
a
large
labor
force
at
their
disposal.
Work
for
these
contractors
can
ebb
and
flow
depending
on
what
jobs
they
take
on
and
they
are
particularly
vulnerable
to
staffing
shortages.
If
employees
and
their
families
suffer
from
a
covet
outbreak.
These
contractors
utilize
peas.
For
a
simple
reason.
They
cannot
afford
in-house
hr
departments
to
recruit
labor.
These
contractors
need
to
spend
their
time
doing
what
they
do
best
and
that
is
building
nevada.
N
T
T
They
don't
have
an
in-house
recruiter,
we're
able
to
provide
those
services
and
be
able
to
let
them
be
nimble
and
able
to
augment
their
workforce
as
needed.
This
also
allows
these
individuals
who
cannot
work
a
full-time
job,
the
opportunity
to
be
able
to
use
their
skills
without
committing
to
permanent
employment.
T
It
also
allows
a
trial
period
for
the
contractor
and
the
employee
as
the
as
the
pea.
We
assume
all
the
risk.
We
carry
workers
compensation
for
the
employees.
We
also
pay
modified
business
tax.
We
issue
w-2s
to
our
employees.
We
carry
all
workers
compensation,
we
pay
unemployment
insurance.
We
are
completely
legitimate
and
licensed
by
the
labor.
Commissioner.
We
hire
nevadans,
we
don't
leave
anybody
marooned
in
the
state,
we
pay
all
their
wages
and
we
offer
flexible
employment
opportunities
for
our
clients
and
for
the
contractors,
and
that
will
conclude
my
testimony.
Thank
you.
S
Thank
you
for
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
speak
about
this
bill.
My
name
is
matthew
nguyen.
I
am
the
manager
of
people
ready
in
las
vegas
people
ready,
provides
general
and
skilled
trade
people
to
companies
in
a
wide
variety
of
industries,
including
approximately
100
workers
per
day
to
construction
contractors
in
the
state
we
recruit
our
associates
through
word
of
mouth
and
by
working
with
the
state,
unemployment
agencies,
schools
and
colleges
and
nonprofit
organizations,
including
those
that
find
jobs
for
veterans
and
people
undeserved
communities.
S
If
this
bill
passes
the
way
it
was
originally
written,
those
workers
will
lose
their
jobs.
The
people
who
work
with
people
are
w-2
employees.
When
we
assign
people
to
work
for
a
construction
contractor
regardless
of
skill
level,
they
work
under
the
direction
and
control
of
a
licensed
contractor,
and
the
work
is
with
the
scope
of
the
contractor's
license.
The
only
difference
is
that
we
find
hire
and
assign
the
employees
for
businesses
who
core
competency
is
building.
S
Our
workers
are
protected
by
all
state
and
federal
wage
and
hour
and
employment
laws
which
the
state
department
of
labor
enforces
some
of
our
clients,
especially
smaller
construction
firms
and
those
in
small
and
rural
communities.
Don't
have
the
full
hr
of
recruiting
departments.
Our
core
competency
is
to
finding
the
right
worker
for
the
right
job
at
the
right
time.
Our
associates
choose
to
work
for
us
because
we
do
work
on
finding
the
jobs
that
match
their
skills,
otherwise
they
would
always
be
looking
for
their
next
gig,
while
they're
working
for
the
current
jobs.
S
Many
of
our
employees
have
worked
for
us
for
years
because
they
prefer
the
flexibility,
variety
and
dependability
and
they
get
to
pick
the
jobs
they
want,
based
on
schedule
the
opportunity
to
learn
new
skills
or
pay.
We
do
not
understand.
Why
would
you
want
these
workers
to
lose
their
jobs?
Please
preserve
these
jobs
for
the
people
who
most
need
help
finding
jobs
and
reject
this
bill
or
amend
it
to
allow
employees
assigned
by
private,
employee
employment
agencies
to
work
under
direction
and
supervision
of
property
licensed
contractors.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
mack
bybee
m-a-c-b-y-b-e-e,
I'm
the
president
and
ceo
of
the
associated
builders
and
contractors
of
nevada.
F
F
F
It
is
in
624.
I
believe,
however,
when
you
have
a
bad
actor,
we
have
another
system
in
place,
and
that
goes
to
the
labor
commissioner,
and
the
labor
commissioner,
is
where
you
seek
remedies
when
labor
law
is
violated,
wages
aren't
paid
a
whole
slew
of
other
items,
including
the
licensing
of
peas
or
private
employment
agencies.
F
I
would
say
that
this
bill
kind
of
leap
frogs
our
system
a
little
bit.
It
takes
a
little
bit
of
what
the
labor
commissioner's
jurisdiction
does
and
tries
to
place
it
with
the
contractor's
board,
when
the
contractor's
board
ultimately
is
responsible
to
ensure
that
those
contractors
are
living
up
to
their
license,
to
their
bid
limit
to
everything
that
makes
them
gives
them
the
ability
to
be
a
contractor
in
our
state.
In
good
standing,
I
submitted
for
the
record
the
18
page
license
application
to
become
a
contractor.
F
For
one
reason:
does
it
make
sense
for
an
employment
agency
to
fill
out
that
application,
and
would
they
even
be
qualified
to
get
a
license
under
our
structure?
227
doesn't
change
that
structure.
It
just
says
that
these
individuals
need
to
do
that
and
that's
patently
unfair
we're
asking
them
to
do
something
that
they
can't
achieve.
A
A
A
Okay,
let's,
let's
move
to
neutral
20
minutes
two
minutes
per
individual.
Q
Q
Q
It
simply
is
going
to
require
some
folks
to
change
the
way
they
do
business
and-
and
I
openly
have
admitted
that
that
there's
there's
nothing,
there's
not
a
hidden
agenda
there,
okay
and
and
lastly,
I
would
like
to
just
say
this:
the
study
that
you
all
have
shows
that
in
2018
there
was
90
million
dollars
and
lost
construction
activity
with
31
million
dollars
of
that
identified.
Q
That
did
not
go
to
the
workers
compensation
fund.
This
is
not
a
few
bad
actors.
This
is
an
industry
with
some
rogue
players
and
it
needs
to
something
needs
to
be
done.
The
legacy
case
simply
identified
the
problem
for
all
of
us,
we're
here
doing
what
the
judge
has
asked
us
to
do
the
direction
that
he
gave
us
we're
coming
back
to
you,
the
legislature
and
and
lectures
like
doors
and
asking
you
to
help
us
remedy
this
problem.
So
thank
you
very
much,
senator
and
chairman
spearman
for
your
time
today.
A
A
Is
there
any
flexibility
in
what
you
do
for
the
child
care
piece
and
the
other
piece
in?
I
want
to
ask
this
to
of
opposition
interested
in
how
you
track
diversity,
how
you
track
diversity?
A
A
All
those:
how
do
we,
how
do
we
track?
How
do
we
check
diversity,
mr
stanley,.
Q
So,
madam
chairman,
child
care
remains
a
tough
issue
for
our
society.
I
can
tell
you,
as
a
member
of
the
nevada's
workforce
development
board
and
an
individual
who
recruits
and
underserved
communities.
Every
day
we
have
used
wioa
fundings
when
it
is
appropriate
to
augment
the
apprenticeship
program.
So
when
folks
come
into
apprenticeship
who
are
otherwise
qualified
for
title
1
funding
under
wioa,
we
can
do
things
like
supply
tools.
We
can
supply
child
care,
we
can
supply
transportation.
We
can
supply
all
those
things.
Q
Q
Q
So
when
we
bring
people
from
those
communities
who
suffer
those
into
our
apprenticeship
programs,
we
immediately
try
to
connect
them
with
those
types
of
resources
to
support
them
through
the
apprenticeship,
because
we
spend
a
lot
of
money
on
them
in
apprenticeship
and
the
last
thing
we
want
them
to
do
is
to
fail
or
to
check
out,
because
they
have
to
make
a
choice
between
taking
care
of
their
kids
or
going
to
work
and
that's
a
false
choice
that
we're
trying
to
eliminate
the
diversity
piece.
We
check
diversity,
we
we're
required
to
do
it.
Q
I
read
dina
neal's
book
and
I
am
very
familiar
with
her,
her
father
and
and
the
foley
decision
that
he
talked
so
eloquently
about
in
his
book.
Yes,
we
were
pretty
lousy
at
it
at
one
time
we
do
a
much
better
job.
Today,
65
percent
of
the
membership
of
our
trade
unions
are
minority.
We
do
a
much
better
job.
We
have
to
track
that
legally
and
we
have
to
refer
those
numbers
to
the
department
of
labor
on
an
annual
basis,
and
so
that's
what
we
do
so.
Thank
you.
A
A
This
is
not
casting
aspersions
on
anyone,
but
I
generally
say
this
in
most
of
the
bills
that
I
hear,
or
in
most
of
the
bills
that
I
testify
on.
We
all
know
that
systemic
racism
is
a
public
health
crisis
and
we're
only
going
to
get
rid
of
it.
If
all
of
us
roll
all
of
our
sea
sleeves
admit
that
it's
there
and
then
come
up
with
a
viable
solution
that
we
can
implement.
So
we
we're
not
talking
about
it,
we're
being
about
it.
So
that's
that's
a
challenge
to
everybody.
Q
Madam
chair,
if
I
could,
I
think,
you're
aware
of
some
of
the
issues
that
arise
last
summer
on
some
construction
sites
in
las
vegas,
and
I
think
my
response
to
those
issues
was
well
known.
R
Chris
thompson
for
the
record,
our
tracking
actually
begins
at
the
application
process.
We
have
some
they're
voluntary
questions
that
we
ask
as
far
as
identification.
R
We
also
track
through
the
the
work
opportunity,
tax,
credit
and
but
also
through
our
company
and
through
true
blue
who's,
our
parent
company.
We
have
a
diversity
and
inclusion
council
that
we
have
that
I'm
a
part
of
actually
that
I'm
proud
of.
R
We
actually
have
a
veterans
unit
of
our
company
as
well
that
I'm
a
part
of
so
we
go
out
of
our
way
to
trying
to
give
kind
of
a
a
space
for
everybody
to
kind
of
make
sure
that
their
voice
is
heard
and
also
to
address
any
problems
or
anything
like
that
and
kind
of
to
be
a
a
a
shoulder
to
lean
on
from
fellow
workers
and
individuals
that
they
can.
You
can
probably
get
advice
from,
or
also
kind
of
shoot,
questions
that
are
just
a
shoulder
to
lean
on
or
sometimes
defend.
A
A
J
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
So,
just
a
couple
of
administrative
announcements
we
will,
we
will
be
meeting
next
week
monday
and
wednesday.
We
will
not
meet
friday
because
that
is
the
day
of
one
of
our
dear
dear
colleagues
service.
A
So
we
will
not
be
meeting
friday
next
friday,
but
we
will
make
up
for
it
in
other
ways,
so
any
comments
remembers
okey-dokey.
Well
with
that
we
will
call
this
meeting
adjourned.
Thank.