WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2808

PAID LEAVE FOR ALL-BOATS

104th Regular Session Introduced by Larry Walsh

Illinois HB 2808: Excludes vessel operators documented under 46 U.S.C. 12105 from coverage under the Paid Leave for All Workers Act.

Referred to Rules Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2808

HB 2808 — Summary (materials provided contain two different measures with the same bill number)

Note: The documents you supplied appear to include text from two distinct bills both labeled “HB 2808” in different jurisdictions. One is an Illinois amendment to the Paid Leave for All Workers Act (820 ILCS 192/10). The other is an Arizona bill that amends Arizona Revised Statutes §32‑1451 (Arizona Medical Board). Below are concise, separate summaries of each so you can identify which version you want further detail about.

A. Illinois HB 2808 — Amendment to Paid Leave for All Workers Act

  • Citation: 820 ILCS 192/10 (Amendment)
  • Sponsor (as introduced): Rep. Lawrence “Larry” Walsh, Jr.
  • Introduced: 2/6/2025; effective date: upon becoming law (Section 99).
  • Purpose / intent: Narrow the statutory definition of “employee” in the Paid Leave for All Workers Act by excluding persons who operate vessels documented under federal law (46 U.S.C. 12105).
  • Key provision:
    • Adds an explicit exclusion: “Employee” does not include an employee who is engaged in the operation of a vessel that is documented by the United States under 46 U.S.C. 12105.
  • Who would be affected:
    • Maritime vessel operators documented under the cited federal statute (e.g., certain commercial vessel crew) — they would be excluded from coverage and protections under Illinois’ Paid Leave for All Workers Act.
    • Employers that employ such vessel operators — may no longer be required under this Act to provide paid leave benefits to those workers.
    • State Department of Labor and other enforcement bodies — would implement and interpret the statutory exclusion.
  • Procedural / timeline notes:
    • The draft shows standard statutory definition edits and an immediate effective date upon enactment.
    • Legislative actions included first reading (2/6/2025) and other steps noted in the materials; confirm current status with the Illinois General Assembly website.

B. Arizona HB 2808 — Amendment to §32‑1451, Arizona Medical Board (discipline & reporting)

  • Citation: Arizona Revised Statutes §32‑1451 (amendment)
  • Sponsors (as shown): Representatives Heap, Keshel, Way (materials show Arizona sponsors).
  • Introduced: 2/13/2025 (Fifty‑seventh Legislature, First Regular Session)
  • Purpose / intent: Amend and restate provisions governing the Arizona Medical Board’s authority, disciplinary procedures, reporting duties, confidentiality, and investigatory tools regarding doctors of medicine.
  • Key provisions (as reflected in the introduced/engrossed text):
    • Reinforces the board’s authority to investigate physicians for incompetence, unprofessional conduct, or inability to practice safely.
    • Mandatory reporting duties for certain entities (doctors, Arizona Medical Association, county societies, and health care institutions) when they have information indicating a physician may be unfit; board/exec director must notify the physician of complaint content “as soon as reasonable.”
    • Immunity from civil liability for persons/entities that report in good faith.
    • Confidentiality measures: board must not disclose the identity of persons reporting a licensee’s drug or alcohol impairment when requested.
    • Health care institutions must inform the board when physician privileges are restricted or when a physician resigns during an investigation; notifications must include a general reason and patient chart numbers.
    • Board may require competency exams, drug testing, physical/mental evaluations and may require participation in board‑approved rehabilitation or retraining programs — all at the physician’s expense.
    • Emergency powers: board may impose summary suspension or restrict license if public safety imperatively requires emergency action; licensee is entitled to a formal hearing within 60 days.
    • Range of non‑disciplinary and disciplinary options (dismissal, continuing medical education, advisory letters, consent agreements, formal complaints and hearings).
  • Who would be affected:
    • Licensed physicians in Arizona.
    • Health care institutions (hospitals, clinics) — reporting obligations and possible reporting to licensing agencies if they fail to report.
    • Patients and public safety stakeholders — affected by changes in procedural enforcement of physician discipline.
  • Procedural / timeline notes:
    • Materials include both “Introduced” and “House Engrossed” drafts, indicating movement through the Arizona House. Confirm current status (committee referrals, votes) on Arizona legislature site.
    • No explicit effective date shown in the provided Arizona text.

If you want, I can:
- Provide a side‑by‑side comparison of the Illinois and Arizona texts, or
- Focus only on one jurisdiction (IL or AZ) and produce a more detailed analysis of legislative status, likely impacts, and stakeholder implications. Which would you prefer?

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

Sign in to ask a question.