Not an Exception

In most instances, the sole remedy for a worker injured at work is Workers’ Compensation Act [WCA] benefits. Even if the employer fails to obtain workers’ compensation insurance, the employee remains limited to those remedies provided under the WCA.

NJ Uninsured Fund Cracks Down on Uninsured Employers

It has been reported tat the NJ Uninsured Fund is vigorously seeking reimbursement for assessments and penalties from employers who do not have workers' compensation insurance. 

In a recent case, a former employer was required to reach a deal with the NJ Attorney

General's Office to repay $111,813.00. It was reported that the former employer had to mortgage his house for repayment in order to avoid a potential 18 month prison term and a $10,000 fine in addition to the assessment.

Click here to read: Franklin Lakes business owner must mortgage home to avoid jail in workers compensation case

NJ Aims to Speed up Uninsured Penalties

The NJ Legislature is considering speeding up the processing of penalties and assessments against uninsured employers. Bills are pending before both houses of the legislature.


"This bill amends the workers’ compensation law to require that the Director of Workers’ Compensation shall, in any case in which an award of compensation payable by an uninsured employer or an assessment has been ordered by the director, file with the Clerk of the Superior Court a statement of the findings and judgment of the workers’ compensation judge or a certified copy of the director's order.  Upon that filing, the statement or order, as the case may be, shall have the same effect and may be collected and docketed in the same manner as judgments rendered in causes tried in the Superior Court.


"Under current law, the director is not permitted to make the filing until 45 days after payment is due and 10 days after the uninsured employer fails to comply with any demand to deposit with the director the estimated value of the compensation, and 20 days after orders by the director to pay any assessments for failure to pay.  The bill requires, rather than permits, the director to make the filing, and requires that the filing be made without the delays currently imposed.

Identical Bill Number: S2495    Quijano, Annette   as Primary Sponsor Barnes, Peter J., III   as Primary Sponsor Moriarty, Paul D.   as Primary Sponsor Egan, Joseph V.   as Co-Sponsor Diegnan, Patrick J., Jr.   as Co-Sponsor Vas, Joseph   as Co-Sponsor
1/15/2009 Introduced, Referred to Assembly Labor Committee 1/26/2009 Reported out of Assembly Committee, 2nd Reading 5/21/2009 Passed by the Assembly (76-0-0) 5/21/2009 Received in the Senate without Reference, 2nd Reading Statement - ALA 1/26/09 - 1 pages PDF Format    HTML Format Introduced - 3 pages PDF Format    HTML Format Committee Voting: ALA  1/26/2009  -  r/favorably  -  Yes {9}  No {0}  Not Voting {0}  Abstains {0}  -  Roll Call Egan, Joseph V. (C) - Yes Evans, Elease (V) - Yes Dancer, Ronald S. - Yes DeAngelo, Wayne P. - Yes Doherty, Michael J. - Yes Oliver, Sheila Y. - Yes Quijano, Annette - Yes Scalera, Frederick - Yes Webber, Jay - Yes Session Voting: Asm.  5/21/2009  -  3RDG FINAL PASSAGE   -  Yes {76}  No {0}  Not Voting {4}  Abstains {0}  -  Roll Call Addiego, Dawn Marie - Yes Albano, Nelson T. - Yes Amodeo, John F. - Yes Angelini, Mary Pat - Yes Barnes, Peter J., III - Yes Biondi, Peter J. - Yes Bramnick, Jon M. - Yes Burzichelli, John J. - Yes Caputo, Ralph R. - Yes Carroll, Michael Patrick - Yes Casagrande, Caroline - Yes Chiappone, Anthony - Yes Chiusano, Gary R. - Yes Chivukula, Upendra J. - Yes Conaway, Herb, Jr. - Yes Conners, Jack - Yes Coutinho, Albert - Yes Coyle, Denise M. - Yes Cruz-Perez, Nilsa - Yes Cryan, Joseph - Yes Dancer, Ronald S. - Yes DeAngelo, Wayne P. - Yes DeCroce, Alex - Yes DiMaio, John - Yes Diegnan, Patrick J., Jr. - Yes Doherty, Michael J. - Yes Egan, Joseph V. - Not Voting Evans, Elease - Yes Giblin, Thomas P. - Yes Green, Jerry - Yes Greenstein, Linda R. - Yes Greenwald, Louis D. - Yes Gusciora, Reed - Yes Handlin, Amy H. - Yes Holzapfel, James W. - Yes Jasey, Mila M. - Yes Johnson, Gordon M. - Yes Lampitt, Pamela R. - Yes Love, Sandra - Not Voting Malone, Joseph R., III - Yes McHose, Alison Littell - Yes McKeon, John F. - Yes Merkt, Richard A. - Yes Milam, Matthew W. - Yes Moriarty, Paul D. - Yes Munoz, Nancy F. - Yes O'Scanlon, Declan J., Jr. - Yes Oliver, Sheila Y. - Yes Polistina, Vincent J. - Yes Pou, Nellie - Yes Prieto, Vincent - Yes Quigley, Joan M. - Yes Quijano, Annette - Yes Ramos, Ruben J., Jr. - Yes Rible, David P. - Yes Riley, Celeste M. - Yes Roberts, Joseph J., Jr. - Yes Rodriguez, Caridad - Yes Rooney, John E. - Yes Rudder, Scott - Yes Rumana, Scott T. - Yes Rumpf, Brian E. - Not Voting Russo, David C. - Yes Scalera, Frederick - Yes Schaer, Gary S. - Yes Smith, L. Harvey - Yes Spencer, L. Grace - Yes Stender, Linda - Yes Thompson, Samuel D. - Yes Tucker, Cleopatra G. - Yes Vainieri Huttle, Valerie - Yes Van Pelt, Daniel M. - Yes Vandervalk, Charlotte - Yes Vas, Joseph - Not Voting Voss, Joan M. - Yes Wagner, Connie - Yes Watson Coleman, Bonnie - Yes Webber, Jay - Yes Wisniewski, John S. - Yes Wolfe, David W. - Yes

.........
Click here to read more about uninsured  employers and workers' compensation.

NJ Employer Indicted for Failing to Have Workers' Compensation Coverage

A NJ employer who failed to have workers' compensation insurance was criminally indicted the NJ Attorney General announced. The owner of Accurate Paving, Mack Setvens, was alleged not to have insurance coverage.

The NJ Uninsured Employers' Fund (UIF) is required to make payments to injured workers when no coverage is maintained by the employer. In this instance the UIF paid $253,000 in payment to the injured worker.

The Next Crisis in Comp: What Happens When the Funds Go Insolvent?

Workers’ Compensation coverage is not immune from the economic realities of the market and injured workers again fail to lose big time as the economy falters. Many States have established UEFs, Uninsured Employer Funds and IFs, Insolvency Funds but they are not uniform in application, some are based on weak economic foundations and others do not provide full benefits.

When the system fails on the employer side of the ledger the consequences trickle down to the employees on the benefit end. In a recent development in the State of New York 12 trusts embracing $200 Million have failed. The domino effect is now a real threat for 50 group trusts remaining covering 20,000 business and 500,000 employees.

States will now have to scramble to provide a resolution of this issue or the consequences of further economic impact will fall upon the taxpayers who are unable to accept the shift in this burden as injured workers seek alternate avenue for at least medical care.

NJ Workers' Compensation Carriers Win a "Get Out of Jail Card" on Asbestos Liability Claims

Workers' compensation insurance companies have a long history of guarding themselves from liability from asbestos exposure issues. Recently the NJ courts have ruled that workers' compensation insurance companies are shielded from liability when the insurance company performs hygiene studies and does not take action to protect the employees that it has insured under the policy. This ruling further limits the ability of asbestos victims to obtain benefits.

The court in Fackelman v Lac d'Amiante du Quebec, LTEE, et al ruled on that workers' compensation carriers are shielded from liability for failing to notify workers of known hazards on the job site and take efforts to correct them. An asbestos victim worked at the Owens-Corning plant in Berlin NJ for 10 months as a stripper of Kaylo, asbestos pipe covering. The ambient air conditions were described as "dusty" and "foggy" in the plant. His employer provided no information to the employee about presence of high levels of asbestos fiber and a mask was not required to be worn. Air testing was conducted by the workers' compensation insurance carrier, but the employees were not informed as to the results nor the hazards of asbestos fiber. The employee was diagnosed with asbestosis in 2002.

Between 1958 and 1972 Aetna insurance company conducted air testing at the plant. The testing revealed that asbestos in the air (10,000,000 parts per cubic foot) at the plant far exceeded the minimal standards then in place. Aetna had meetings with Owens and discussed with Owens Corning, the employer, what actions should be taken to improve the industrial environment.

The asbestos worker filed a civil action against Aetna for failing to warn the employees of the hazardous conditions and for its failure to minimize the exposure to a safe level at the Owens Corning plant. The Court dismissed the case and did not extent third party liability against the workers' compensation carrier. The court reasoned that there was no surrender of responsibility to maintain a safe workplace from the employer to the insurance carrier. The court also held that there was no common law liability for an insurance carrier did not have a duty "to reduce the risks of exposure or to warn the employees directly."

The long history of the involvement of the insurance industry with the asbestos industry has been memorialized in depositions and affidavits for decades. The conspiracy of silence has lead to premature and needless and agonizing deaths of those who have been exposed to asbestos fiber. NJ has been reported to have one of the highest rates of asbestos related disease in the US. That should be no surprise since it is the legacy of the State's enormous rate of asbestos production during the war years and shortly thereafter.

The NJ compensation system for the payment of benefits to asbestos victims is stagnant. The recent legislation to provide benefits from the "Uninsured Employers Fund" has been ineffective in moving the cases along and adequately compensating asbestos victims. The civil litigation system has been bogged down in bureaucratic bankruptcies. Hopefully the NJ Legislature will see fit to review this inequitable situation and provide the speedy and remedial benefits to asbestos victims.