Including three types of cancer for which rebuttable presumption of injury from employment exists for firefighters
HB2197 amends West Virginia’s workers’ compensation law for professional firefighters by expanding the list of diseases covered by a rebuttable presumption that the condition arose out of and in the course of employment. The bill specifically addresses bladder cancer, mesothelioma, and testicular cancer, adding them to the existing firefighter presumption framework that already covers cardiovascular and pulmonary disease, leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma. Under the bill, a firefighter who meets the statutory conditions would be presumed to have suffered a compensable work-related injury or occupational disease, which also simplifies notice and self-infliction issues for qualifying claims.
The bill also extends the sunset date for the cancer presumption from July 1, 2027 to July 1, 2028, unless the Legislature further extends it. The new language keeps the presumption limited to professional firefighters who meet specified service and exposure requirements, including minimum years of employment, recent firefighting participation, and restrictions related to tobacco use and age. The bill does not broadly rewrite workers’ compensation law; it makes a targeted change to one section of the code governing occupational disease claims for firefighters.
HB2197 would amend West Virginia Code §23-4-1, which governs workers’ compensation disability and death benefits and defines compensable occupational diseases. Its practical effect is to make it easier for qualifying professional firefighters to obtain workers’ compensation benefits for bladder cancer, mesothelioma, and testicular cancer by shifting the burden to the employer or insurer to rebut the presumption that the disease is job-related. The bill would also preserve the temporary nature of that presumption by extending the expiration date to July 1, 2028, unless the Legislature acts again.
The bill’s stated purpose and caption suggest a generally supportive policy approach toward firefighters, reflecting a legislative intent to recognize certain cancers as presumptively work-related for those in hazardous fire service. Because no committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the available record. Based on the text alone, the measure appears to be framed as a narrow, protective workers’ compensation expansion rather than a controversial overhaul.
The main points of potential contention are the scope and cost of the presumption, and the evidentiary conditions attached to it. Employers, insurers, or fiscal conservatives may question whether bladder cancer, mesothelioma, and testicular cancer should be presumed compensable and whether the presumption could increase claims costs. The bill also retains eligibility limits—such as minimum years of service, recent firefighting activity, age limits, and tobacco-use restrictions—which may be seen as necessary safeguards by supporters but potentially restrictive by firefighters or advocates who believe the presumption should be broader. The sunset date itself may also be a point of debate, since it makes the policy temporary unless renewed.