An Act Adding Witnessing A Serious Physical Injury As A Qualifying Event For Purposes Of Post-traumatic Stress Injury Workers' Compensation Coverage.
Summary
HB 6954 would expand Connecticut’s post-traumatic stress injury workers’ compensation law by adding a new qualifying event: witnessing a serious physical injury. Under current law, certain first responders and other eligible workers can receive coverage when they experience specified traumatic events in the line of duty, such as witnessing a death, treating a fatally injured person, or seeing a traumatic injury that causes loss of a vital body part or function. This bill adds a new category for events occurring on or after October 1, 2025, where the worker witnesses a serious physical injury that does not result in death or permanent disfigurement.
The bill also preserves and restates existing qualifying-event rules for police officers, parole officers, firefighters, emergency medical services personnel, correction employees, telecommunicators, health care providers, and, for events on or after January 1, 2024, other employees. It continues the special COVID-19-related provisions for health care providers who were engaged in emergency response activities during the public health emergency. The bill amends the statutory definition section in CGS § 31-294k, which governs post-traumatic stress injury compensation eligibility.
Impact
The bill would broaden workers’ compensation eligibility for post-traumatic stress injury claims by expanding the list of covered traumatic incidents under section 31-294k of the general statutes. In practical terms, more workers who witness severe but nonfatal injuries could qualify for benefits, increasing potential claims exposure for employers and the workers’ compensation system. The amendment takes effect October 1, 2025, and specifically adds “serious physical injury” as a qualifying event while leaving the existing framework and covered occupations in place.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests generally favorable committee sentiment. The Labor Committee reported the bill out on a 9-4 joint favorable vote, indicating majority support but not unanimity. No committee transcript was provided, so the record does not show detailed floor or committee debate, but the vote pattern suggests the proposal was viewed positively by most members as an expansion of protections for workers exposed to traumatic incidents.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the scope of workers’ compensation coverage and the cost implications of expanding PTSD-related claims. Supporters appear to favor recognizing serious nonfatal injuries as traumatic events worthy of coverage, especially for first responders and other workers exposed to emergencies. Opponents likely object to the broader eligibility standard, potential increases in claims and premiums, and the difficulty of defining and proving when a witnessed injury rises to the level of a qualifying serious physical injury. The 9-4 vote reflects that the expansion was supported by a majority but not all committee members.