A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Proposal to require third‑party app for IME recordings draws split testimony over worker access and security

February 02, 2026 | Legislative Sessions, Washington


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Proposal to require third‑party app for IME recordings draws split testimony over worker access and security
Susan Jones, committee staff, told the Labor and Commerce Committee that Senate Bill 61‑28 would require independent medical exam (IME) recordings to be conducted through a Department of Labor & Industries‑approved third‑party application, prohibit independent recordings, and require secure storage for the life of the claim plus at least 10 years after final closure. The staff report cited a pilot program and estimated potential reductions in cancellations and time loss.

Sponsor Senator Braun described the bill as a "good government" process measure to standardize recording so recordings are secure, reliable and defensible in disputes. Proponents from the Washington Independent Medical Exam Coalition, employer representatives and trade groups said a single secured copy preserved on a vendor server prevents duplicate, edited, or altered recordings and would reduce appeals and scheduling delays.

Opponents including AJ Johnson (injured‑worker advocate), Jennifer Duran (Washington State Association for Justice), and Brenda Weiss (Teamsters Local 117) urged the committee not to advance the bill. AJ Johnson said the current right to record on personal devices, granted by the 2023 change, has improved IME thoroughness and accountability and argued the bill would force workers to use an app and upload sensitive recordings to a third‑party cloud, which he said would "take away" their practical ability to record.

Testimony included operational details: the bill prohibits independent local copies, requires vendor access on request to parties named in the record, and treats costs of platform retention as a cost of the claim. Witnesses also discussed timing and worker access: proponents argued apps can be preinstalled or provided by attorneys to avoid burden; opponents said many IMEs are scheduled quickly and the app requirement could be a practical barrier for vulnerable injured workers. The committee heard both technical and policy recommendations and did not record a final vote in the provided transcript.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee