WeVote
Log In

Bill

EB

Bill

HB 5983

Labor: working conditions; suitable seats; require employers to provide to employees under certain circumstances. Creates new act.

2023-2024 Regular Session Introduced by Erin Byrnes and 8 co-sponsors

HB 5983 requires employers to provide a suitable seat when sitting is reasonable, or a nearby seat if not; fines of $250 per aggrieved employee per 2 weeks; enforced publicly.

bill electronically reproduced 09/26/2024
#labor:fairemploymentpractices #labor:workingconditions #stateagencies(existing):laborandeconomicopportunity
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 5983

Summary — HB 5983 (House Bill No. 5983)

Overview / Purpose

HB 5983 would require employers to provide "suitable seats" to employees working on employer-controlled premises when it is reasonable for the employee to use a seat while performing the work. The bill establishes definitions, sets employer duties, authorizes rulemaking by the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO), and creates civil penalties for violations.

Key definitions

  • Department: Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity.
  • Employee: any individual employed by an employer.
  • Employer: any person or entity that employs one or more employees.
  • Suitable seat: a chair, stool, bench, or any similar object that has support for an individual's back.

Employer requirements (substantive provisions)

  • Employers must provide a suitable seat to an employee performing work at a location owned, leased, operated by, or under the control of the employer if it is reasonable for the employee to use a seat while performing that work.
  • If it is not reasonable for the employee to sit while actively performing the task, the employer must still provide a suitable seat in close proximity to the employee’s work area.
  • Employers may not prohibit an employee from using the nearby suitable seat except while the employee is actively performing work.

Enforcement and penalties

  • Civil fine: $250.00 × (number of employees aggrieved by the violation) per 2-week period that the employer remains in violation.
  • Enforcement actors: county prosecutor where the violation occurred or the Attorney General may bring an action to collect fines.
  • Collected fines are deposited into the state general fund.
  • The bill does not create a private right of action for employees; enforcement is by public prosecutors or the AG.

Rulemaking and labor agreements

  • LEO may promulgate implementing rules under the Administrative Procedures Act.
  • Collective bargaining agreements or other employment agreements in effect on the act’s effective date that conflict with the act will become subject to the act only after the agreement expires, is terminated, amended, extended, or renewed.

Who would be affected

  • Employers of any size (defined as 1 or more employees) operating premises where work is performed.
  • Employees who perform work where sitting would be reasonable or where a nearby seat must be provided.
  • Industries common examples: retail, hospitality, food service, manufacturing, warehousing, and some service occupations—especially where standing work is common.

Procedural status & timeline (selected)

  • Introduced: read first time 09/26/2024 (introduced by Rep. Dylan Wegela; sponsors listed as Juan R. Candelaria and Jason Rojas).
  • Referred to Committee on Labor; later referrals to Joint Committee on Finance, Revenue and Bonding.
  • Public hearing: 03/14/2025; vote to draft, drafting and committee actions occurred in spring 2025.
  • 05/08/2025: Reported out of LCO with a favorable report, tabled for House calendar (House Calendar No. 548; File No. 856).

Practical considerations / potential impacts

  • Compliance steps for employers: assess job tasks for "reasonableness" of seating, procure suitable seats, place seats in close proximity where sitting is not feasible, update policies, and coordinate with collective bargaining obligations.
  • Financial risk: fines accrue biweekly per aggrieved employee, which could be substantial for large workforces and persistent noncompliance.
  • Rulemaking by LEO could clarify ambiguous terms (e.g., what constitutes "reasonable" use) and implementation details.

This summary focuses on the bill’s substantive requirements, enforcement mechanism, affected parties, and legislative progression as recorded through May 2025.

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

Sign in to ask a question.