A House committee approved legislation April 24 that would have required the unemployed to contact five, rather than the current three, prospective employers for each week they filed an unemployment claim.

HB468 by Rep. Ed Oliver, R-Dadeville, also further defined “failure to seek or accept suitable work” and warnings related to drug testing.

Under HB458, “failure to appear for a previously scheduled interview or skills test without notifying the prospective employer of the need to delay or reschedule the interview or test, unless there is good cause for the failure to notify, shall be deemed a failure to seek or accept suitable work. A claimant who fails to respond to an offer to return to work or an offer of suitable employment within 72 hours of the offer being made shall be deemed a rejection of an offer of suitable employment.”

The bill also considered an employee warned if he/she “has been advised in writing of the provisions of the employer’s drug policy and that either testing positive or the refusal to submit to or cooperate with a blood or urine test could result in termination of employment.”

The House Commerce and Small Business Committee’s approval sent the bill to the full House with only five legislative days remaining in the session. The full House never considered it.

Other legislation introduced in the 2024 regular session that did not reach enactment includes:

EMPLOYMENT

Hairstyle discrimination bill introduced, but never moved
Legislation introduced in February would have made it illegal for an employer, employment agency or labor organization, including on-the-job training programs, to discriminate against anyone, based on their hair texture or hairstyle, if that hair texture or hairstyle is commonly associated with a particular race or ethnicity or national origin.

Failing or refusing to hire or discharging anyone based on hairstyles such as “braids, locks, twists, cornrows, afros, bantu knots and fades” would have been illegal under SB172 by Sen. Rodger M. Smitherman, D-Birmingham. The bill also created a new cause of action for lawsuits. The Senate Judiciary Committee never considered the bill.

Bills concerned breast-feeding breaks and body weight/size discrimination
Rep. Juandalynn Givan, D-Birmingham, introduced two bills related to employment that could have affected retailers:

• HB6 would have required employers to provide reasonable break time and location for employees to express breast milk. The House Commerce and Small Business Committee never considered it.
• HB18 would have made it unlawful (1) to deny an individual full and equal enjoyment of public accommodations based upon the individual’s weight or body size or (2) for an employer to discriminate against an applicant or employee based upon the applicant or employee’s weight or body size. The bill, assigned to the House Judiciary Committee, also would have created a state cause of action against an employer who so discriminates.

Learn more about the status of bills introduced in 2024 at the links below:

• Applying state income tax overtime exemption based on federal overtime law
• Prohibiting economic incentive recipients from voluntarily recognizing unions
• Data broker accountability / Data breach notification amendment
• Repeal annual report requirement for corporations
• Ratio of pharmacy technicians to supervising compounding pharmacist
• Baby, maternity and menstrual product state sales tax exemption
• Eliminating eligibility-to-work form for 14- and 15-year-olds
• Prohibit food products from cultured animal cells
• State gaming proposal
• Tax rate for remote sellers
• Country-of-origin labeling for restaurants and grocery stores

This article is part of the Alabama Retail Report, a communication for Alabama Retail Association members. Not a member? Join us!

Reprints or republishing are welcomed but require permission. Contact us for permission.