SB 1519
Changes the formula for determining permanent and temporary total disability compensation.
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Session
2026 Regular Session
At the request of
(at the request of Senate Interim Committee on Labor and Business)
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
100%
Oppose
0%
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill modifies the way Oregon calculates permanent and temporary total disability compensation payments. It changes the formula used to determine the percentage of a worker's wage paid as compensation, basing it on the portion of the wage that is less than or equal to, or greater than, 75% of the state average weekly wage. The bill also updates definitions related to ‘average weekly wage,’ ‘permanent total disability,’ and ‘suitable occupation,’ and establishes a process for periodically re-examining permanent disability claims to determine if a worker has materially improved and is no longer permanently incapacitated. Finally, it clarifies how benefits are adjusted when a worker returns to work.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsor
Senate Interim Committee on Labor and Business
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Testifiers generally agree that Oregon's Workers' Compensation system disproportionately affects lower-income workers, who face significant financial instability during recovery and delayed healing due to inadequate wage replacement and tax bracket disparities. Many support increasing temporary disability benefits to better compensate workers who are injured on the job, with proposed amendments aiming to provide benefits equal to a percentage of the worker's weekly wage. Specifically, for higher payment rates, such as the proposed increase from 66 2/3% to 75% of the average weekly wage for Temporary Total injury, and argue that this would help reduce re-injury risks by allowing workers sufficient time to heal. By addressing these inequities, supporters believe that the system can better support injured workers, particularly those in vulnerable populations such as low-income individuals and school employees.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yoursRead the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.