A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 30-9.1, relating to employment discrimination against members of the General Assembly; prohibition; penalty.
HB1364 would add a new section to the Code of Virginia prohibiting employers from discharging or otherwise taking adverse personnel action against a person because that person is a member of the General Assembly and is absent from work to attend a regular or special legislative session, or a meeting of a legislative committee, subcommittee, commission, council, or similar body on which the member serves. The bill also bars employers from requiring the legislator to use sick leave or vacation time for those absences.
The bill creates a criminal penalty for violations: an employer who violates the section would be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor. In practical terms, the measure is intended to protect legislators’ jobs and leave balances while they fulfill official legislative duties, and it would apply to private or public employers covered by the statute’s terms.
If enacted, HB1364 would add a new employment-protection statute in Title 30 of the Code of Virginia focused specifically on members of the General Assembly. It would limit employer discretion to discipline, terminate, or force leave usage when an employee is absent for legislative service, and it would create a misdemeanor enforcement mechanism for noncompliance. The bill would affect employers and working legislators by establishing a statutory right to attend legislative duties without employment retaliation tied to those absences.
There is limited recorded debate or vote detail in the available materials, but the bill’s referral to the Rules Committee and subsequent continuation to the next session in Rules by voice vote suggest it did not advance quickly and may not have generated strong public committee controversy in the record provided. The measure appears to have been treated as a protective employment-rights bill for legislators rather than a broadly contested policy change.
The main point of potential contention is the balance between protecting elected officials’ ability to perform legislative duties and preserving employer control over attendance, staffing, and leave policies. Employers may object to being prohibited from requiring sick leave or vacation time and to the criminal penalty for violations, while supporters would likely emphasize that legislative service should not cost members their jobs or personal leave. No specific committee objections or recorded opposition are included in the provided materials.