Limits the liability of employers and premises owners for the conduct of certain employees who have been convicted of certain crimes. (8/1/14)
The implementation of SB 339 is expected to significantly impact state laws regarding employer liability in the context of negligent hiring. By enacting this bill, Louisiana would formally recognize the need to provide certain protections for employers against claims related to past misdemeanors and felonies, thereby encouraging businesses to employ individuals with criminal backgrounds who may otherwise face discrimination. It also ensures that courts will not consider such past convictions as relevant evidence in these legal proceedings, facilitating opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration into the workforce.
Senate Bill 339, sponsored by Senator Donahue, aims to limit the civil liability of employers and premises owners for the actions of employees or independent contractors who have been convicted of certain crimes. The bill provides that when a lawsuit arises from claims of negligent hiring or inadequate supervision, employers and premises owners may be immune from civil liability if the employee or independent contractor was convicted of a misdemeanor or felony offense, specifically if it was nonviolent and non-sexual in nature. This legal immunity serves to protect employers from lawsuits concerning employees' past criminal records that do not relate to violence or sexual offenses.
The sentiment surrounding SB 339 appears to be favorable among employer groups and advocates who support the reintegration of formerly convicted individuals into the workforce. Proponents argue that the bill will reduce unnecessary discrimination against past offenders and contribute to a more inclusive labor market. However, there may be reservations expressed by advocacy groups that focus on victim rights or public safety, who might argue that this could undermine accountability for negligence regarding employee supervision, especially in sensitive job roles.
Notable points of contention likely arise regarding the bill's exclusion of violent or sexual offenses from its protections. Critics may argue that allowing immunity from liability for employees with certain past convictions poses risks to public safety and could potentially enable negligent hiring practices. Furthermore, concerns around how the exceptions to this immunity will be interpreted in legal contexts may lead to further debate over the balance between rehabilitation opportunities and the safety of the community.