HOUSE BILL NO. 4439

May 06, 2025, Introduced by Reps. Weiss, McFall, Morgan, Rheingans, Pohutsky, T. Carter, Hoskins, Price, Wilson, Martus, Brixie, Hope, Foreman, B. Carter, Breen, Rogers, Longjohn, Young, Wegela, McKinney, Skaggs, Wooden, Andrews, Mentzer, Paiz and Miller and referred to Committee on Economic Competitiveness.

A bill to amend 1974 PA 154, entitled

"Michigan occupational safety and health act,"

(MCL 408.1001 to 408.1094) by adding section 66a.

the people of the state of michigan enact:

Sec. 66a. (1) An employer shall not discharge, discriminate against, or retaliate against an employee who refuses to work or report to work if all of the following conditions are met:

(a) The employee reasonably believes that working or reporting to work would expose the employee, another employee, or the public to a communicable disease as that term is defined in section 5101 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.5101, or to an unsafe or hazardous condition.

(b) The employee or the employee's bargaining representative, before the employee's refusal, requested the employer to correct the condition that would result in the exposure described in subdivision (a).

(c) The condition described in subdivision (b) was not corrected at the time of the employee's refusal.

(d) The employee contacted, via telephone or email, the Michigan occupational safety and health administration to report the condition described in subdivision (b).

(2) If an employee refuses to work or report to work under subsection (1) and is not reassigned to other work by the employee's employer, the employer must pay to the employee the wages that the employee would have otherwise earned for the period of time that the condition described in subsection (1)(b) remains uncorrected.

(3) If an employer discharges, discriminates against, or retaliates against an employee not later than 90 days after the employee engages or attempts to engage in an activity that is protected under this section, there is a presumption that the employer violated this section. This presumption may be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence that the employer's action was otherwise authorized by law.