WeVote
Log In

Bill

JA

Bill

HB 5005

Employment security: claimants; employee who involuntarily leaves employment; strike provision regarding absences without notice. Amends sec. 29 of 1936 (Ex Sess) PA 1 (MCL 421.29).

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Joey Andrews and 19 co-sponsors

Florida HB 5005: resolves 2025–2026 state employee bargaining impasses by maintaining status quo and using current rules if not in the GAA.

bill electronically reproduced 09/18/2025
#employmentsecurity:claimants
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 5005

Summary — HB 5005 (materials provided contain two distinct bills with the same number in different jurisdictions)

Note: The documents provided relate to two separate measures both labeled “HB 5005.” One is a Florida enactment (passed as SB 2504) addressing resolution of state-employee collective bargaining impasses for FY 2025–2026. The other is a Michigan House bill proposing amendments to section 29 of the Michigan Employment Security Act (MCL 421.29) concerning disqualifications from unemployment benefits. Both are summarized below.

Florida — HB 5005 (passed as SB 2504; Ch. 2025-200, L.O.F.)

  • Purpose: To establish how collective-bargaining impasse issues for state employees will be resolved for the 2025–2026 fiscal year.
  • Key provision:
    • Any collective-bargaining issues at impasse between the State of Florida and certified bargaining units for state employees that are not addressed in the General Appropriations Act (GAA) for FY 2025–2026 are to be resolved by:
    • Applying personnel rules in effect as of June 14, 2025, and
    • Otherwise maintaining the status quo language of the current collective bargaining agreement.
  • Scope / who is affected:
    • State of Florida and certified bargaining units representing state employees (e.g., AFSCME Council 79 units, Florida Nurses Association, Florida State Lodge FOP units, Federation of Physicians and Dentists, Police Benevolent Association units, Florida State Fire Service Association, Federation of Public Employees, etc.—as listed in the committee analysis).
  • Fiscal impact: Committee report states “None.”
  • Procedural/timeline:
    • The Legislature substituted SB 2504, the measure was approved by the Governor on June 30, 2025, became law (Ch. 2025-200), and took effect July 1, 2025.
    • The directive applies specifically to the 2025–2026 fiscal year impasse resolution process.

Michigan — HB 5005 (Introduced Sept. 18, 2025) — proposed amendment to MCL 421.29

  • Purpose: To amend the Michigan Employment Security Act (1936 Ex Sess PA 1) section 29, which lists grounds for disqualification from unemployment benefits.
  • Key provisions (as shown in the introduced text):
    • Reaffirms that an individual is disqualified from benefits if they voluntarily leave work without good cause attributable to the employer, with multiple specific presumptions and rules:
    • Presumption that a person who leaves work did so voluntarily without good cause.
    • A rebuttable presumption that reducing to less-than-full-time employment or being absent from work for 3 consecutive work days or more without contacting the employer constitutes voluntary leaving without good cause.
    • Specific rule for losing a job due to negligently losing a job requirement learned at hire (treated as voluntary leaving).
    • Claimant bears the burden of proving the leaving was involuntary or for employer-attributable good cause.
    • For alleged medical reasons for leaving, claimant must have beforehand: (1) a medical professional’s statement that continuing the job would harm physical/mental health, (2) unsuccessfully attempted to secure alternative work with the employer, and (3) unsuccessfully attempted to be placed on leave until health improved.
    • Special COVID-19-era exceptions remain for claims with weeks beginning before April 1, 2021 (self-isolation/quarantine circumstances treated as involuntary leaving or layoff in certain situations).
    • Certain voluntary leavings (e.g., unsuitable work left within 60 days, military spouse relocation, leaving part-time work while keeping other employment, victims of domestic violence meeting qualifications) are exceptions and, when applied, benefits are charged to the nonchargeable benefits account rather than the employer’s experience account.
    • The bill lists other disqualifying circumstances in section 29 (misconduct, failure to apply/accept suitable work, absence due to conviction, discharge for strike participation, etc.); the provided text is truncated after the start of the strike-related provision, so the full scope of edits to other subsections cannot be confirmed from the provided excerpt.
  • Scope / who is affected:
    • Claimants for Michigan unemployment benefits, employers whose experience accounts may be charged or not, and the unemployment insurance agency (procedures for determinations).
  • Procedural/timeline:
    • Introduced in the Michigan House on Sept. 18, 2025; referred to the Committee on Economic Competitiveness. Additional actions listed (first reading, referral) but the bill remains at early stages based on provided information.

If you want, I can:
- Extract and summarize the full Michigan Section 29 language if you provide the complete text past the truncation, or
- Produce a side-by-side comparison of pre- and post-amendment language for MCL 421.29.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.