| Alabama | AL | 1 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 3 | ■ | | |
| Alaska | AK | 2 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | | ■ | 1 | 2 | 1 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
AK - Liability bill under consideration |
| Arizona | AZ | 4 | 1 | 1 | | | ■ | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
AZ - Workers' compensation statement was advisory, not a mandate |
| Arkansas | AR | 5 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 2 | 1 | 2 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
AR - Liability immunity established in executive order (law under consideration has not been voted on) |
| California | CA | 6 | 1 | 1 | ■ | | ■ | ■ | | | ■ | ■ | | | 0 | 2 | 2 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
CA - Air filtration discussed in guidelines but left open ended; Aerosol transmissible disease standards in place pre-pandemic; COVID-19 liability protection bill under consideration |
| Colorado | CO | 8 | 3 | 0 | | | | | ■ | | ■ | ■ | | | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 3 | | | Notes
CO - Bills introduced that consider business liability; Permanent paid family and medical leave SI program passed but not yet in effect |
| Connecticut | CT | 9 | 2 | 1 | | | ■ | | | | | ■ | | | 0 | 2 | 2 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
CT - Liability legislation under consideration; Executive order grants health providers liability protections (preexisting statutes do not specify health providers explicitly and are focused on public employees supporting emergency response); More workers' compensation legislation under consideration; Permanent paid family and medical leave SI program passed but not yet in effect |
| Delaware | DE | 10 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0 | 0 | ■ | . | ■ | | |
| District of Columbia | DC | 11 | 3 | 0 | | | ■ | | | ■ | ■ | ■ | | ■ | 1 | 1 | 2 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
DC - Healthcare liability, but not businesses |
| Florida | FL | 12 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 2 | 1 | ■ | . | | | Notes
FL - Additional workers' compensation legislation failed April 2021 |
| Georgia | GA | 13 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | 7 | ■ | | |
| Hawaii | HI | 15 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | | ■ | 2 | 0 | 0 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
HI - Healthcare liability, but not businesses |
| Idaho | ID | 16 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | 1 | | | Notes
ID - Healthcare providers not explicitly included in liability law |
| Illinois | IL | 17 | 2 | 1 | | | | | | | | | | ■ | 2 | 2 | 1 | | 3 | ■ | | Notes
IL - Anti-retaliation law previously in place, but not specific to COVID-19; Business liability law under consideration (pre-existing statutes for general emergencies in place) |
| Indiana | IN | 18 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 1 | ■ | | |
| Iowa | IA | 19 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 3 | ■ | | |
| Kansas | KS | 20 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
KS - New workers' compensation law under consideration |
| Kentucky | KY | 21 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 1 | 2 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
KY - Burden of proof falls on non-frontline health workers for workers' compensation expansion; Presumed work exposure for frontline health workers' compensation; Follow-up order places burden of proof for occupational exposure on employee and refuting on employer |
| Louisiana | LA | 22 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 7 | ■ | | Notes
LA - Workers' compensation expansion under consideration |
| Maine | ME | 23 | 2 | 2 | | | | | ■ | | | | | | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
ME - Paid leave law implemented on 1/1/2021, but not specifically in response to COVID-19; Paid leave law guarantees "up to 40 hours in a defined year" -- too few hours to be considered extended leave |
| Maryland | MD | 24 | 1 | 1 | | | ■ | | | | ■ | ■ | | | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 3 | ■ | | Notes
MD - Liability bill under consideration; Paid leave law states "an employee is not entitled to earn more than 40 hours of earned sick and safe leave in a year or accrue more than 64 hours of earned sick and safe leave at any time" -- too few hours to be considered extended leave |
| Massachusetts | MA | 25 | 3 | 0 | | | ■ | | | ■ | ■ | ■ | | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 5 | ■ | | Notes
MA - Liability bill for healthcare, not all businesses. Pre-existing statutes specify emergency care, but not specific to public health emergency. Did not consider this sufficient. New worker compensation law not passed or ordered, is being considered. |
| Michigan | MI | 26 | 1 | 2 | | ■ | ■ | | | | ■ | ■ | ■ | ■ | 1 | 2 | 1 | | 7 | ■ | | Notes
MI - Paid leave for COVID-19 not mandated, but businesses must allow for leave (if workers exhausted paid leave, then leave may be unpaid); Workers' compensation legislation under consideration |
| Minnesota | MN | 27 | 1 | 1 | | ■ | | | | | | ■ | | | 0 | 1 | 2 | | 3 | ■ | | Notes
MN - Liability under consideration; Additional workers' compensation legislation passed, but not specific to COVID-19 and will not be enforced until later this year; Frontline workers have presumption of exposure at workplace (i.e. burden of proof falls on rebuttal) for workers' compensation; For non-frontline workers, burden of proof of contraction occurring in workplace occurs too |
| Mississippi | MS | 28 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 5 | ■ | | Notes
MS - Pre-existing statutes appear applicable generally, but additional laws passed specifically for COVID-19 |
| Missouri | MO | 29 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 2 | 1 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
MO - Liability under consideration; Workers' compensation presumption of exposure for first reponders assumed initially, but has since expired; Most recent legislation requires proof of workplace exposure |
| Montana | MT | 30 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | . | ■ | | |
| Nebraska | NE | 31 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0 | 0 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
NE - Liability under consideration |
| Nevada | NV | 32 | 1 | 1 | | | ■ | | | | ■ | | ■ | | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
NV - Passed law requiring employers provide paid time off specifically for COVID-19 vaccination purposes |
| New Hampshire | NH | 33 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 2 | 1 | ■ | . | | | Notes
NH - Liability under consideration |
| New Jersey | NJ | 34 | 2 | 2 | | ■ | ■ | ■ | | | ■ | ■ | | ■ | 1 | 2 | 2 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
NJ - Amended existing sick leave mandates to include certain public-health-related uses as protected uses of employees’ existing general sick leave benefits; Liability bills under consideration for businesses; Workers' compensation covers those in critical public-facing jobs (includes food work), assuming they have no option to work from home; Expanded paid family leave program during COVID-19 pandemic |
| New Mexico | NM | 35 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | | ■ | 2 | 2 | 1 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
NM - Passed paid leave and anti-retaliation provisions but will not take effect until 2022; Liability considerations focused on healthcare |
| New York | NY | 36 | 2 | 1 | ■ | | | ■ | ■ | | ■ | ■ | | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | 1 | ■ | | Notes
NY - Liability protections for health providers repealed; No business general liabitiy protections passed; Worker compensation laws considered, but no rules ordered; Expanded paid family leave program during COVID-19 pandemic |
| North Carolina | NC | 37 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
NC - New workers' compensation law was considered but not passed |
| North Dakota | ND | 38 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 1 | 1 | ■ | . | | | |
| Ohio | OH | 39 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | | 7 | ■ | | Notes
OH - New workers' compensation law was considered but not passed |
| Oklahoma | OK | 40 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | . | | | |
| Oregon | OR | 41 | 1 | 1 | ■ | ■ | ■ | | | | | ■ | | | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 3 | ■ | | Notes
OR - COVID-19 anti-retaliation implemented directly by Oregon OSHA; Liability bill focused on schools specifically; Permanent paid family and medical leave SI program passed but not yet in effect |
| Pennsylvania | PA | 42 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | | ■ | 2 | 0 | 0 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
PA - Philadelphia implemented anti-retaliation measures, but not statewide; Liability protections for businesses vetoed first time, now under consideration again; New workers' compensation law was considered but not passed |
| Rhode Island | RI | 44 | 3 | 0 | | | ■ | ■ | | | | | | ■ | 2 | 0 | 0 | ■ | 3 | | | Notes
RI - Liability order for healthcare; New workers' compensation law was considered but not passed; Paid family leave program called the Temporary Caregiver Insurance (TCI) program |
| South Carolina | SC | 45 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | 1 | ■ | | Notes
SC - Respiratory protections listed, not air/filtration; Liability order for healthcare; New workers' compensation law was considered but not passed |
| South Dakota | SD | 46 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | 7 | | | |
| Tennessee | TN | 47 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 2 | 1 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
TN - First workers' compensation law failed; New law passed that establishes WHO public health emerrgencies as situation where presumption applies for frontline health workers |
| Texas | TX | 48 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | | | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
TX - Liability protections under consideration; COVID-19 workers' compensation expansion under consideration |
| Utah | UT | 49 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 2 | 1 | ■ | . | ■ | | |
| Vermont | VT | 50 | 1 | 1 | | | ■ | | | | | | | ■ | 1 | 2 | 2 | ■ | 1 | ■ | | Notes
VT - Liability protections focused on healthcare; Workers' compensation presumption now applicable to all workers retroactively |
| Virginia | VA | 51 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | ■ | | ■ | 1 | 2 | 1 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
VA - Expanded paid sick leave to home healthcare workers only; New workers' compensation law was considered but not passed |
| Washington | WA | 53 | 1 | 1 | | ■ | ■ | ■ | | | ■ | | | | 0 | 2 | 1 | | 1 | ■ | | Notes
WA - Expanded paid sick leave to food workers; Workers' compensation rule initially appeared to place burden of proof on health workers, now there is a rebuttable presumption in the passed legislation that Governor is expected to sign; Expanded paid family leave program during COVID-19 pandemic |
| West Virginia | WV | 54 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 0 | 0 | ■ | . | ■ | | |
| Wisconsin | WI | 55 | 3 | 0 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 3 | ■ | | Notes
WI - Interaction w/ exposure to someone w/ COVID-19 at work needed as proof for workers' compensation (rebuttal needs proof too); If any exposure to someone w/ COVID-19 in work setting, presumption is held |
| Wyoming | WY | 56 | 1 | 1 | | | | | | | | | ■ | ■ | 1 | 2 | 2 | ■ | . | ■ | | Notes
WY - Workers' compensation law expands definition of occupational injury to include COVID-19 |
