An Act Requiring Uninsured And Underinsured Motorist Coverage For Department Of Transportation Employees.
Summary
HB 6413 requires the state to provide uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage under the State Fleet Insurance Policy for employees of the Department of Transportation. The coverage must be in place no later than July 1, 2026, and must include bodily injury or death limits of at least $1 million. The protection applies to DOT employees who are legally entitled to recover damages from uninsured or underinsured motorists for injuries, including death, arising out of and in the course of employment when the employee is required to be outside a motor vehicle.
In practical terms, the bill creates a new state insurance obligation for a specific group of public employees whose work places them in roadside or other outside-the-vehicle settings. It would add a new statutory requirement to the state fleet insurance framework and likely shift some risk and cost to the state, while providing a defined layer of coverage for DOT workers injured by uninsured or underinsured drivers during work duties.
Impact
The bill adds a new section to state law requiring the state to extend uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage to Department of Transportation employees under the State Fleet Insurance Policy by July 1, 2026. It establishes a minimum bodily injury or death coverage limit of $1 million and applies only when employees are outside a vehicle in the course of employment. The measure affects state insurance administration, state liability/risk management, and DOT employee protections, but does not broadly change private insurance law.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests broad support for the bill. It received unanimous or near-unanimous favorable votes in the Labor and Public Employees Committee and strong approval in the Appropriations Committee, indicating general agreement that DOT employees should receive this added protection. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded debate to indicate significant opposition in the materials supplied.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided transcripts, but the likely policy issue is the cost to the state of adding a new insurance mandate with a relatively high minimum coverage limit. Any disagreement would most likely center on fiscal impact, insurance administration, or whether the coverage should be limited to DOT employees rather than extended to other state workers with similar roadside exposure. The vote in Appropriations, while favorable, was not unanimous, suggesting some concern may have existed about cost or scope.