Revising laws related to workers' compensation definition of wages
Summary
SB 291 revises Montana workers’ compensation law by changing how “wages” are defined for benefit and premium calculations, with a particular focus on lodging, rent, and housing provided as part of an employee’s compensation. The bill keeps lodging as a form of wages when it is part of remuneration, but requires the Department of Labor and Industry to set its value by administrative rule and to update those values annually. The rulemaking must also account for the employee’s geographic proximity to available housing and may consider other reasonable factors affecting value.
The bill also preserves and restates the broader wage-definition framework used in workers’ compensation, including treatment of commissions, bonuses, tips, board, concurrent employment, volunteer work, and certain employer-paid benefits that are excluded from wages. It retains the existing approach for calculating average actual earnings for compensation benefits, including the four-pay-period lookback and an alternative calculation for good cause, and it keeps the separate wage methodology used for certain premium calculations based on hours worked and the department’s published mean hourly wage by area.
Impact
If enacted, SB 291 would amend section 39-71-123, MCA, and require the Department of Labor and Industry to annually revise its administrative rules governing the valuation of lodging, rent, or housing counted as wages in workers’ compensation cases. That would affect injured workers, employers, insurers, and the department by changing how noncash housing benefits are valued for benefit and premium purposes, potentially altering compensation amounts and payroll-based calculations.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill had some support but was not broadly advanced: it passed a Senate Business, Labor and Economic Affairs committee table motion 11-1, yet the bill ultimately died in process. With no committee transcript provided, the record indicates the measure was considered seriously but did not secure enough momentum to move forward. Overall, the sentiment appears mixed to favorable on the committee level, but insufficient for final passage.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to have been the bill’s treatment of lodging and housing as wages and the requirement for annual rule updates, which could affect compensation costs and administrative discretion. Employers and insurers would likely be concerned about increased or more variable workers’ compensation exposure, while employee advocates may view the annual valuation requirement as a way to better reflect actual housing value, especially in areas where housing access is limited. The 11-1 committee vote to table suggests at least one member opposed the measure, but no transcript is available to identify the specific objections.