|
|
|
|
State of
|
|
|
JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM governor |
DEPARTMENT
OF NATURAL RESOURCES |
K. L. COOL director |
|
|
|
|
State of
|
|
|
JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM governor |
DEPARTMENT
OF NATURAL RESOURCES |
K. L. COOL director |
BILL
NUMBER: House Bill 5102 AS INTRODUCED
TOPIC: Employee Safety – Require Wearing of Hunter Orange
Garment
SPONSOR: Representative
John R. Pastor
CO-SPONSORS: Representatives
Jacob W. Hoogendyk, Jr., Neal Nitz,
John Stahl, Philip J. LaJoy, Tom Casperson, Shelley Taub, Fran Amos, John Pappageorge, Daniel J. Acciavatti, Brian Palmer, Leon Drolet,
Jerry O. Kooiman,
Barb Vander Veen, David Farhat
COMMITTEE: Conservation
and Outdoor Recreation
Analysis Done:
POSITION
The
Department opposes this legislation.
PROBLEM/BACKGROUND
It
is unclear what type of problem this legislation may be trying to address.
DESCRIPTION OF BILL
House
Bill 5102 would amend Part 16, “Enforcement of Laws for Protection of Wild
Birds, Wild Animals, and Fish,” of 1994 PA 451 to require Conservation Officers
and other Department employees to wear hunter orange garments while on duty
during a hunting season in an area frequented by game.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
Pro
State
law requires the wearing of hunter orange garments during the daylight hunting
hours from August 15 to April 30 by all hunters except persons hunting
waterfowl, crow or wild turkey, or archery bear hunters, or archery deer
hunters except during the November firearm deer season.
Con
There
is no history or documentation of a safety problem involving conservation
officers or other Department of Natural Resources employees that could be
addressed by establishing state law requiring these employees to wear hunter
orange garments during the hunting seasons when in an area frequented by game.
The
use of safety equipment by employees is currently addressed through the Michigan
Occupational Safety and Health Act, 1974 PA 154, and the employer
for the particular needs of safety equipment by employees performing specific
tasks. For example, the Law Enforcement
Division has policy that addresses protective equipment requirements for
certain activities including:
·
The wearing of
soft body armor (“bulletproof vests”) when in uniform
·
The wearing of
Personal Flotation Devices (PFDs) when engaged in
on-the-water patrols
·
The wearing of
hunter orange during the November firearm deer season
·
The wearing of
eye and ear protection during firearms training
·
The wearing of
safety vests (reflective vests or suits) when on snowmobile patrol
·
The wearing of
helmets when on mountain bike patrol
Other
Divisions have similar provisions, for example, the use of protective safety
equipment by employees using chainsaws and other specified equipment.
Under
current regulations,
As
proposed, an employee failing to wear the required hunter orange garment would
be subject to criminal sanctions under law (misdemeanor).
FISCAL/ECONOMIC
IMPACT
Are there revenue or budgetary implications in the
bill to the --
Budgetary:
Yes.
Revenue:
None.
Comments:
This proposed bill would require an undetermined expenditure of funds by
the Department to stock, distribute, outfit and enforce the wearing of required
hunter orange garments by thousands of employees. The stocking, distributing and outfitting
costs may be relatively minor in comparison to the potential lost productivity
resulting from compelling employee compliance with this proposed State law,
associated disciplinary actions and difficulty supervisors would face in
directing employees to wear these garments under circumstances that may be
described, at best, to be of outright dubious safety value.
Budgetary:
None.
Revenue:
None.
Comments:
None.
Comments:
None.
OTHER STATE DEPARTMENTS
None.
ANY OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE
RULES IMPACT
None.
_______________________________
K. L. Cool
Director
_______________________________
Date
LE/
