Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the concurrence because discussions with the bill's sponsor indicated that removing a specific sentence aligns with the Senate's intent to clarify the definition of misconduct.
Unemployment insurance-worker misconduct.
In one sentence
Not clearly identified in the stored source.
No additional limitations are listed.
Official record
Bill No.: <billno> Drafter: <drafterinit> Bill No.: HB0237 Drafter: LGC LSO No.: 13LSO-0608 Effective Date: 7/1/2013 Enrolled Act No.: HEA0107 Chapter No.: Prime Sponsor: Representative Reeder Catch Title: Unemployment insurance-worker misconduct. Subject: Defining misconduct connected with work for purposes of the Wyoming employment security law. Summary/Major Elements: Under current law, an employee will not receive benefits and benefits will not be charged against an employees account for unemployment benefits if the employee is found to have been discharged from employment for misconduct in connection with his work. The term is not defined. The act defines the term misconduct in connection with work as an act of an employee which indicates a disregard of the employers interests or the commonly accepted duties, obligations and responsibilities of an employee. The term does not include ordinary negligence in isolated instances or good faith errors. COMMENTS: This bill was vetoed by the Governor. The veto message noted that as introduced the bill would have provided a definition of misconduct connected to work which would have established a clear line as to when an employee was entitled to unemployment insurance. However, the bill was amended and the clarity was lost. In the Governors view, the enacted bill could have been interpreted that in no case would a discharged employee be eligible for unemployment insurance.
Public statements
Last checked Aug 7, 12:59 PM
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the concurrence because discussions with the bill's sponsor indicated that removing a specific sentence aligns with the Senate's intent to clarify the definition of misconduct.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker encourages an aye vote because they believe that isolated instances and good faith errors are already covered by existing law, making the amendment unnecessary.
R · S25
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker argues that denying unemployment benefits except for gross misconduct undermines the safety net and contradicts a Wyoming Supreme Court ruling.
S13
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because its final sentence limits harsh interpretations of misconduct, such as firing someone for a minor accident like spilling water.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because restoring only one sentence while leaving out others could confuse courts about legislative intent and create more problems.
R · S30
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because it would create a loophole allowing too many people to claim unemployment, which contradicts the bill's goal of rebalancing the system for employers.
R · S27
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill because it establishes clear definitions of misconduct, balancing employer interests with allowing benefits for ordinary negligence.
If a lawmaker is not listed, we couldn't find a published reason.
Wyoming roll calls
5 roll calls
Official activity
Changes
5 stored
Adopted 2nd reading by BROWN
Adopted 3rd reading by CONNOLLY
Adopted Standing Committee by H10
Adopted 2nd reading by SCOTT
Failed 3rd reading by CASE