Copyright

(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query medical. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query medical. Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, November 24, 2014

When An Employer Should Not Deny Medical Care

It is always tricky slope for an employer to deny medical care based on a pre-existing medical condition. The employer must be absolutely certain that the proofs offered at trial will provide a credible basis for a ruling by the Court. Without that certainty, the employer could be subject to paying for uncontrolled medical care as well as for penalties.

Some employers avoid those dire consequences by providing medical care with reservation as the NJ Statute allows. The employer can then subrogate a claim against the correct primary medical provider should the claim be denied.

“The employer need not be asked to authorize medical care but may be responsible for payment for such care entirely in cases where the employer has disavowed compensability of a claim which is ultimately found to be compensable.” 38 NJ Practice §12.7, Workers’ Compensation Law, Jon L Gelman.

 An employer recently lost an appeal from such an adverse ruling. The employer who challenged compensability of a back injury and denied “legitimate” medical treatment based on an alleged pre-existing MRI.  The employer was held liability for medical treatment when the Court found the testifying radiologist on behalf of the petitioner to be a credit witness.

“Johnson [injured worker] presented extensive medical proofs, including the testimony of treating physicians and expert witnesses. This included the deposition testimony of Steven P. Brownstein, M.D., a practitioner of diagnostic radiology. Brownstein opined that the disputed MRI could not belong to Johnson because herniated discs and bone spurs do not spontaneously disappear. Brownstein also stated that the 1999 MRI films depicted a fifty-year-old man, while Johnson’s 2006 MRIs were of a man no older than thirty-five.

Additionally, the employee testified that he never had the prior MRI. The Court found the petitioner to be a credible witness.

The employer refused to pay for medical care following from a compensable accident at work. The Court ruled that the actions of the employer were incorrect and that the employer should be held responsible for paying for medical care since it was requested by the injured employee and subsequently denied by the employer. Following the rule in Benson v Coca Cola Co., 120 N.J. Super. 120 (NJ App. Div. 1972),  a NJ employer was responsible for medical care requested by the employee and denied by the employer as the accident was held compensable.

“The JWC also found, pursuant to Benson v. Coca Cola Co., 120 N.J.Super. 60 (App.Div.1972) , that Johnson “was well within his rights to seek outside treatment” based upon City’s denial of the April incident, the dilatory fashion in which it referred Johnson for treatment after the May incident, and its refusal to provide medical care even when recommended by its first medical examiner. He thus concluded the exception expressed in Benson  applied and that it would have been futile for Johnson to have continued to request coverage for medical expenses.

The Compensation Judge is giving a wide spectrum of discretion as to determine the credibility of the testimony of the witnesses:
“Our highly deferential standard of review is of particular importance in this case, where appellant’s principal points of error hinge on the JWC’s credibility determinations. See Hersh v. Cnty. of Morris, 217 N.J. 236, 242 (2014)  (quoting Sager, supra, 182 N.J. at 164).  The JWC has the discretion to accept or reject expert testimony, in whole or in part. Kaneh v. Sunshine Biscuits, 321 N.J.Super. 507, 511 (App.Div.1999) . The judge is considered to have “expertise with respect to weighing the testimony of competing medical experts and appraising the validity of [the petitioner’s] compensation claim.” Ramos v. M & F Fashions, 154 N.J. 583, 598 (1998 .

The Court went also reiterate the Belth Doctrine holding that the employer takes the employee as he finds him. While the Belth decision predates the 1979 Amendments to the NJ Workers’ Compensation Act it remains valid as to the exacerbation of an underlying medical issue. Belth v. Anthony Ferrante & Son, Inc., 47 N.J. 38, 219 A.2d 168 (1966).

“ Employers are responsible for treatment of a preexisting condition which is exacerbated by a work accident. Sexton v. Cnty. of Cumberland, 404 N.J.Super. 542, 555 (App.Div.2009) . The burden is on the employer to prove that the compensable accident was not the cause of the exacerbation. In this case, City did nothing more than attempt to prove that Johnson was lying about his 1999 medical conditions.  Even if City is correct, in the judge’s opinion, Johnson objectively established that the May 2006 accident caused him significant cervical and psychiatric injuries from which he currently suffers.


….
Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author of NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson-Reuters) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson-Reuters). For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L Gelman  1.973.696.7900  jon@gelmans.com  have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.

Sunday, January 8, 2012

PROTECT America's Injured Worker Medical Rights



Why This Is Important
The goal of this petition is to garner the support and representation of the American Civil Liberties Union in a due process lawsuit against the State of New York and/or other states within the United States under violations of the civil rights law pertaining to “Deliberate Indifference”, against injured worker’s legal rights to timely and qualified medical treatment thereof.
American workers were improperly stripped of their rights to sue their employer or the state for damages sustained in workplace accidents in 1917 before most of us were even born. Workers Compensation laws, in direct conflict with employee due process rights, quickly spread nationally. Only one lawsuit resulted, ironically, on behalf of employer due process rights. Despite the fact that this contract which lives in infamy violates both employer and employee rights, it has survived for 95 years.
Meanwhile, the "contract" has become so inequitable that millions of American workers are defrauded of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, after being thrown into an adversarial court system, where their $5.00 lawyers fight against six figure slingers who represent insurance companies that are raping America.
Injured workers are forced to obtain treatment from an inadequate, unspecialized list of providers, often with disastrous long term results and are barred from both timely and appropriate medical treatment through a complex paper trail of denials for basic medical care.
Further, their lifetime awards are severely limited, and their income reduced to nothing. Paid Independent Medical Examiners with little or no experience with the injury at hand are allowed to pass judgment on degrees of life time injury, literally whisking away damages for the benefit of the insurance providers who pay them. It's only a matter of time until Claimant’s are completely penniless and wind up on welfare, which lets the insurance company off the hook, but leaves the taxpayers holding the tab for social programs such as food stamps and medical coverage or social security disability, as the statutorily promised income protection and medical coverage is non-existent.
Additionally, Injured Workers who are legally entitled to lifetime medical benefits are finding these benefits are unavailable when they relocate from one state to another unless an out of state provider is willing to take on complex paper processes and pathetic reimbursement rates. Once injured in New York, you will never leave New York, or, in essence, you forfeit your right to coverage.
Due to low reimbursement, high medical malpractice risk (due to lack of timely treatment and authorization), and complex paper processes, the list of available providers is shrinking rapidly from year to year. Often, professional review processes are not employed by State government, and substandard physicians are the only ones left on the medical provider list.
Americans are being defrauded and led to believe they will be dealt with fairly, but all fairness has been removed from the system. Ultimately, Corporations are paying the highest insurance rates in history, while the Claimants are getting next to nothing. Meanwhile, the insurance industry makes a killing. The Workers Compensation contract is inequitable.
PROTECT AMERICAN INJURED WORKERS by repealing the 1917 Workers Compensation Act. In varying degrees, this violation of civil rights due process laws is creating a “deliberate indifference” situation, due to unrealistically low provider rates, medical malpractice risk, and shrinking provider lists. Provider fees and attorney fees haven’t been updated for years, and medical guidelines are being employed which haven’t even been ratified by the State, with each new guideline taking another chunk out of what little the injured worker is currently entitled to.
Before long, we’ll have to pay our employers when we’re injured, rather than the other way around.
The failure of Workers Compensation to meet the needs of injured workers is leading to lifetime injuries which were originally treatable and the collapse of American families.
Additionally, America’s social systems are picking up the tab as injured workers flock to obtain early social security, food stamps, and Medicaid due to their lack of coverage under Workers Compensation laws.
Ironically, while American workers are being ignored, American prisoners are getting free medical treatment. In fact, American prisoners are successfully being represented by civil rights lawyers across this country in order to obtain the same quality of care that Americans have come to expect, and that American Injured Workers desire.
If prisoners have rights under “Deliberate Indifference” guidelines to fair treatment, why not the American Worker?
Under current laws, Deliberate Indifference in relation to prisoners medical or safety rights is defined as a “a failure to act where prison officials have knowledge of a substantial risk of serious harm to inmate health or safety.” Crayton v. Quarterman, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103709 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 14, 2009) (Wikipedia, 2011)
Deliberate indifference is defined as requiring (1) an "awareness of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists" and (2) the actual "drawing of the inference." Elliott v. Jones, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91125 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 1, 2009). (Wikipedia, 2011)
In short, failure to provide timely and appropriate medical care resulting in damage is considered a civil rights violation.
Injured American Workers should never have been deprived of their constitutional right to a fair trial, representation, justice, humanity, and freedom. They should not be restricted to substandard medical care, any more than their legal representatives or medical providers should be asked to work for free.
Enough is enough. PROTECT AMERICAN INJURED WORKERS. It is clear based on hundreds of advocacy websites across the country that Workers Compensation does not work. Therefore, the band-aid approach needs to stop. We need real change, and a new system, which is fair and equitable to the American Worker.

Wednesday, April 10, 2019

An Employer Must Provide Accommodation for Off-Hours Use of Medical Marijuana


An employee licensed to use medical marijuana under the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act may proceed with a the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) action ageist his employer for unlawful termination. 

Monday, December 3, 2018

Fee Schedules: A defense of bureaucracy in workers compensation

Today's guest post was authored by Jon Rehm**, Esquire of the Nebraska Bar.


Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie
Lawyers on “both sides of the v.” in Nebraska like to grumble about rules and regulations imposed by the workers’ compensation court.

Friday, February 1, 2013

Universal Medical and Workers' Compensation: It's Not "If", It's "When" - California

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is going to definitely change the landscape of medical delivery over the coming future. Medical care afforded by workers' compensation delivery systems will ultimately be merged into a universal national program, despite all the opposition along the way.

My friend, and cycling inspiration, who keeps me trying to think I can enter the Tour de France while under the influence of Starbucks coffee, David DePaolo, points out that the "fusion" may be coming slowly through legislation of unintended consequences in California.
"The concept of universal care, 24 hour care, single stop shop, etc. has been floating for a couple of decades now with very little progress.

"But the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the signing of HB 1 back in February 2009, and other Federal health related laws and regulations including ERISA, have accelerated the fusion of workers' compensation medicine and general health medicine. Outsourcing MPN [Medical Provider Networks] oversight to a health care related agency is just another step towards this outcome.
David, an expert in analyzing what's around the curve, sees the next wave of change coming to workers' compensation. For so many reasons, including the expansion/reimbursement integration of the Medicare program, the writing is on the wall on this one. 

Every time the lobbyists think that have eliminated the imminent threat of Federal intrusion, ie. Enactment of The SMART Act, the reality of which is that the regulations will eat up the statute, and also their lunch. I plan to write more on The SMART Act in the coming weeks. Maybe that wasn't so smart after all for the cottage industries that supported it.

Sunday, January 11, 2015

High Compensation Medical Costs Raises Concern in New Hampshire

Medical costs now constitute a huge percentage of every workers' compensation claim. A recent editorial published in New Hampshire asserts that soaring and unequal medical costs have broken the workers' compensation system. Today's post is shared from concordmonitor.com/

Lawmakers should make 2014 the last year that doctors and other health care providers are guaranteed payment no matter how much they charge when a worker is injured on the job. The workers’ compensation system is broken.

The state, and the employers who pay into its workers’ compensation fund, have been paying two and three times the going rate for medical services when the patient is a workers’ compensation recipient. On average, surgeons charge 156 percent more, according to a report by the state’s Department of Insurance. Bills for radiology are 107 percent higher, 95 percent higher for occupational therapy and for something as simple as an ice pack, 300 percent more.

The extra paperwork required to document workers’ compensation cases and perhaps the added severity of the average injury, probably explains some of the price difference. But, human nature being what it is, it’s likely that, when the bill has to be paid no matter what the provider charges, the temptation to pad it can be irresistible, especially when providers can rationalize the surcharge by using it to offset underpayments in areas such as Medicare or Medicaid.

Thursday, October 24, 2013

California: Medical Delay and Denial Protested

Sedgwick vs. The People
Round 4: Sedgwick v. Debbye Mazzucca

Operating Room Nurse’s Injury no Emergency to Kaiser, Insurer: Defy Judge’s Order, Refuse to Provide Urgent Medical Care Injured Workers’ Advocates to Seek Penalties, Investigation

Injured Kaiser OR nurse Debbye Mazzucca tells how Sedgwick defied a judge's order to provide careThe California Applicants’ Attorneys Association (CAAA), whose members represent Californians injured on the job, today held a news conference outside Kaiser Foundation Hospital with Debbye Mazzucca, a former operating room nurse who was injured while working there. They called for sanctions against Sedgwick Claims Services, Kaiser’s workers’ compensation insurer, for defying a judge’s order to provide Ms. Mazzucca urgently needed medical care, causing her to lose her teeth. On February 11, 2013, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) ordered that Sedgwick “shall” provide dental treatment to Ms. Mazzucca. After eight months, Sedgwick and Kaiser have still refused to do so. Sedgwick faces a relatively small monetary penalty for ignoring the court order, which means little to a huge corporation.

Operating Room Nurse Debbye Mazzucca, of La Mesa, has thirty-five years’ experience, and worked for Kaiser for 12 years. She was injured in 1998, when she tripped and fell over a parking lot barrier while at work. Kaiser treated her injured knee, but ignored multiple doctors’ reports that she had also injured her neck and back. In spite of four doctors reports confirming that fact, Kaiser denied that those injuries were from the fall. Now, due to complications from medications, and delays in approving medical care, Ms. Mazzucca has lost her teeth.

CAAA President Jim Butler said, “Insurers’ Utilization Review (UR) routinely delays and denies doctors’ legitimate requests for appropriate medical treatment. This is unnecessary and expensive, and has got to change. We’ve seen the evidence of out-of-control delay and denial in the 15,000 denials of recommended medical care in just the month of August. It’s time to bring UR to heel, and stop insurance carriers from using it as a routine roadblock.”

“A doctor, agreed to by the company and their insurer, determined this Kaiser operating room nurse’s injury was a result of her work accidents. The insurer still refused to provide urgent medical care. A judge ordered the insurer to provide urgently needed medical care. But Sedgwick continues to refuse medical care and Debbye lost all her teeth during the months of delay,” said Alicia Hawthorne, the president of CAAA’s San Diego chapter, and Ms. Mazzucca’s attorney. “This nurse has been in pain, and in need of medical treatment. Yet, the insurance company defied a judge’s order to provide care. Kaiser and its insurer have spent years fighting their responsibility to treat these injuries. Why does the State of California allow workers’ compensation insurance companies to further damage patients through delaying and denying medical care and disability compensation?”

 “Kaiser has failed to provide the care needed to heal my injuries,” Mazzucca told a news conference outside Kaiser Foundation Hospital in San Diego. “For years, all they would approve were painkilling drugs. These drugs’ side effects have caused more medical problems, including ‘dry mouth syndrome,’ which is insidious and dangerous. The drugs prevent your saliva glands from working properly, causing your teeth and gums to deteriorate.  Mine became infected, abscessed and threatened my health and my life. In 2010, my teeth started cracking and breaking off at the roots. I lost seven of my teeth this way.”

Sedgwick denied the dental treatment I needed, so Ms. Mazzucca took them to court.  In February 2013, the judge ordered Sedgwick to provide this urgent medical treatment. To this day, they have refused to do so. “It has been more than a year and a half since the medical expert the insurer agreed upon said I urgently needed dental care. The pain and infection became so unbearable in July that my doctor sent me to the emergency room, and 25 of my teeth were removed. I then spent the entire month of July in the hospital, in agony, and on painkillers. Kaiser and their insurance company are defying a judge’s order to provide urgently needed medical care,” said Mazzucca.

Today’s release is the fourth in CAAA’s series of cases spotlighting the abuse of Utilization Review (UR) and other methods for delaying and denying legitimate medical care and disability compensation in the workers’ compensation claims handling practices of insurers like Sedgwick Claims Management Services.



Monday, January 5, 2015

NJ Medical Costs Per Claim Increase

NJ is a jurisdiction where the employer has exclusive control over the selection of medical providers for workers' compensation claims. NJ also has no medical fee schedule. Neverthe less, WCRI report that medical costs per claim are increasing above the national average.

The report, CompScope™ Medical Benchmarks for New Jersey, 15th Edition, found medical payments per claim grew less than 3 percent per year from 2010 to 2012―about half the annual rate of the prior three years.  

The study cited changes in both key components of medical payments per workers’ compensation claim: the price paid for each service rendered and the number of services performed in each claim (generally called utilization).  

The study found a decrease or little change in utilization of many nonhospital services─a key factor in the recent slower growth in medical costs because payments for nonhospital care accounted for roughly two-thirds of medical payments in New Jersey. Slower growth in hospital outpatient payments per service was also a factor. Payments for hospital inpatient treatment continued to rise though. 

The recent trends coincided with an increase in the use of networks in caring for injured workers. States  that do not regulate reimbursements for medical care through a traditional fee schedule (like New Jersey) often use medical networks to help control medical costs through the management of claims and negotiated payment discounts.

Despite the recent slower growth, medical payments per claim in New Jersey remained higher than most of the 16 states WCRI studied, primarily due to higher prices paid for medical care. 

In several states, WCRI researchers saw slowdowns in claims growth similar to what they found in New Jersey, namely growth of 3 percent or less from 2010 to 2012, after growth of 4 to 8 percent a year, on average, from 2007 to 2010. Reasons for the slowdown differed by state, the study said. 

The Cambridge-based WCRI is recognized as a leader in providing high-quality, objective information about public policy issues involving workers' compensation systems.   

Click on the following link to purchase a copy of this study:http://www.wcrinet.org/result/csmed15_NJ_result.html

Monday, October 23, 2017

Electronic Medical Bills for Workers' Compensation Claims

The State of NJ has recently adopted an "electronic medical bill" process. N.J.S.A. 34:15-144, P.L 2016, c. 64. On October 16, 2017, Regulations were proposed to implement the Statute. Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday, November 14, 2017, 10:00 A.M. to 12:00 Noon.  The deadline for written comments is December 15, 2017.

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Medical Costs Soar in Workers' Compensation


The cost of medical care has increased tremendously according to a recently issued  report. The NCCI (National Council on Compensation Insurance Inc.) reports an increase in medical costs from 40% in the early 1980s to almost 60% currently.


NCCI reports that the increase appears to be national, "....Furthermore, although there are differences in the medical share by state, the change in the relative mix of states has had very little impact on the estimated countrywide share of medical and indemnity benefits."


The national workers' compensation medical delivery system has now become a focus of attention in light of the prospects of an overhaul of national health care system as medical costs continue to put American businesses at a economic disadvantage with foreign competitors. James Kvaal, in his article, "The Economic Imperative for Health Reform," highlights that "...ever rising medical costs are threatening to drive an unsustainable explosion in the national debt." Higher insurance premiums result in lower wages or lack of medical coverage all together and the loss of preventive care.


The costly and inadequate workers' compensation medical delivery system provides a fragmented approach to medical care. The system's focus should treat current medical conditions and provide for preventive care. The administrative costs savings in providing global coverage will translate into reduced delivery costs and a healthier work force. Some of the extra savings could be well spent on much needed medical research to avoid the need for costly medical care.

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

NJ Medical Payments Stabilize - But Why?

A recent study by an insurance based data organization has reported that NJ is experiencing a leveling of medical costs. The real question is "why?" Are declining medical benefits caused by fewer claims based on a shift of challenging employment status in the shared economy or a shift of medical costs under Obamacare to the private sector? 
Medical payments per workers’ compensation claim in New Jersey were stable from 2010 to 2013, in contrast to rapid growth in the 2008 to 2010 period, according to a recent study by the Workers Compensation Research Institute (WCRI).
The report, CompScope™ Medical Benchmarks for New Jersey, 16th Edition, indicates results for New Jersey differed from those of other states WCRI studied, many of which experienced moderate to rapid growth in medical payments per claim.
The study found the following to be contributing factors: 
  • Increased use of networks, which may be linked to a decrease in prices paid for non hospital care. In recent years, two-thirds of total medical payments came from non hospital services.
  • Flat or decreasing trends in utilization of many non hospital services.
  • Slower growth in hospital outpatient payments per service.
  • A continued decrease in the percentage of claims that had hospital inpatient care.
“From 2010 to 2013, medical payments per claim with more than seven days of lost time rose less than 2 percent per year in New Jersey,” said Ramona Tanabe, executive vice president and counsel for WCRI. “From 2008 to 2010, payments rose nearly 10 percent per year.”
WCRI studied medical payments, prices, and utilization in 17 states, including New Jersey, looking at claim experience through 2014 on injuries that occurred in 2013 or earlier. WCRI’s CompScope™ Medical Benchmark studies compare metrics of medical costs and care from state to state and across time.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Medical Witness Cannot Be An Advocate - Knee Replacement Surgery Authorized

A workers' compensation medical witness is not permitted to be become an advocate. A Judge of Compensation disregarded an insurance company medical witness when the medical expert "crossed the line from being a medical witness to an advocate."

In reaching her decision, Diana Ferriero, Judge of Compensation, rationalized that the insurance company's medical expert by the "convoluted cover letter sent by respondent counsel," along with medical records on the injured worker. 

The injured employer suffered two work related accidents as a mechanic for American Airlines. The first accident in to the right knee occurred in July 2004 and resulted in a partial menisectomy and no prolonged sequelae. The worker was symptom free until a second accident in January 2007when he slipped and fell on both knees and hands. The insurance company authorized 28 medical office visits, 15 Hyalgan injections, 14 aspirations and physical therapy for treatment to his right knee. A diagnosis was made by the treating physician and the insurance company refused the injured worker a total knee replacement claiming that the medical condition was unrelated to the 2nd accident of January 2007.

The workers' compensation Judge ordered an independent medical evaluation by a renowned specialist in knee and hip replacements, Mark A, Hartzband of the Hackensack University Medical Center. The judge concluded that, "Dr, Hartzband opined that petitioner's need for a right total knee replacement was directly and causally related to the accident of January 17, 2007."

The court also found that the insurance company's treating physician, who opined that the 2nd accident was unrelated to the need for a knee replacement, was "disingenuous given the contents of his office chart," and reasoned that the insurance company's authorized treating physician did not have an understanding of arthritis and its progression.

The court granted the injured workers' motion for medical treatment, evaluation and scheduling of the right knee replacement, and ordered the payment of temporary medical benefits.

Pepe v. American Airlines, CP No. 2008-5878, NJ DWC 2010), Decided November 11, 2010.

Saturday, January 12, 2013

Medical Outcome Based Compensation - Essentially a Workers' Compensation Concept Already

Outcome Based Medicine Being Adopted by NYC
The idea of compensation medical providers for the end result, or benefits of medical care provided, is not a new concept as it is already embraced theoretically by the workers' compensation system. Employers, who usually control the delivery of medical benenfits, not only pay for medical benenfits, but also compensate the injured worker for the outcome through permanent disability awards.

In actuality the workets' compensation system rewards the employer for the most favorable outcomes by theoretically awarding lower permanent disabillity benenfits to those with the most favorable outcomes.
Adopting this concept to the nation's entire medical care system, is a wise step and one that is being advanced in the New York City Hospital system.

"In a bold experiment in performance pay, complaints from patients at New York City’s public hospitals and other measures of their care — like how long before they are discharged and how they fare afterward — will be reflected in doctors’ paychecks under a plan being negotiated by the physicians and their hospitals."

Click here to read New York Ties Doctors’ Pay to Quality of Care (NY Times)
Nov 09, 2012
On Tuesday, the American people expressed its support for a unified medical care program that will embrace all aspects of life, including industrial accidents and diseases. They validated, as did the Supreme Court, the ...
Jan 10, 2013
Soaring medical costs have afflicted the workers' compensation industry with economic distress and have severely impacted the efficient and effective delivery of medical care to injured workers. Both increased costs/profits ...
Nov 16, 2012
Adopt the new carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) medical treatment guidelines (MTG) as the standard of care for the treatment of injured workers with carpal tunnel syndrome;; Modify current MTGs to include new maintenance ...
Jan 01, 2013
Medical costs continue to be shifted to other programs including employer based medical care systems and the Federal safety net of Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Administration and Tricare. While a trend continues to ...

Thursday, October 8, 2009

New Jersey’s Shining Star



Significant progress has been made by the NJ Division of Workers’ Compensation (NJ-DWC) in carrying out the legislative mandate for the newly enacted emergent medical care motion practice.   The Honorable Peter J. Calderone, Director and Chief Judge of the NJ-DWC, delivered a highly favorable report to attorneys attending a workers’ compensation seminar yesterday. The academic seminar was sponsored by the New Jersey Institute for Continuing Legal Education.


Judge Calderone’s report, based on intense statistical tracking and personal involvement  of the Director himself, reveals that New Jersey’s injured workers are in fact receiving medical treatment to “cure and relieve their medical conditions” without delay.


The NJ-DWC has approximately 95,000 cases open cases pending in the system each year. The program efficiently and effectively handles disputes as to medical benefits, temporary disability and permanent disability issues.


Two procedural motions are available to parties who seek medical care when a dispute arises. An ordinary motion for medical care, established by regulation,  has been utilized for years, if not decades, as an avenue to seek redress. The ordinary motion addresses the needs of the parties who require medical care but their condition is not emergent. These motions are handled at the local hearing office level and their status reported to the Director every 90 days, as they remain pending. Approximately 2% of the pending claims statewide involve such ordinary medical motions.


As a result of concerns expressed  in the media approximately 2 years ago, alleging long  delays in the handling of claims for emergent medical care, the NJ Legislature, enacted a statutory mechanism to resolve disputes. That motion requires the observance of a stringent time table for judicial action.  In those cases, where there is a need for emergent medical care, and the failure to provide it on a timely basis would result in irreparable harm, the new administrative procedures for an emergent medical motion may be invoked.  


Immediately following the enactment of the statute, almost a year ago, the NJ-DWC proposed Rules to be followed in processing emergent care motions that would conform with the Legislative mandate. The NJ-DWC operated in conformance with the proposed Rules until they were finally adopted on October 5, 2008, which followed a period for public comment, The rules set forth specific criteria and address procedural compliance issues.  The carefully drafted Rules permit those injured workers who are in need of urgent medical care immediate access to the NJ-DWC system for a speedy and efficient resolution of their claim.


Over the last year, Judge Calderone, has taken an active role in reviewing every single motion that has been filed, in consultation with the supervising judge of the district  office where the case has been venued. A joint determination was then made as to whether or not the statutory criteria had been met and the procedural and substantive compliance with the rules addressed.  If there was compliance by the filing party, the NJ-DWC acted immediately to list the matter for a pre-trial conference in an effort to resolve the dispute before the commencement of a trial. This process remains ongoing.


The statistical evidence reported by Judge Calderone reflects the fact that very few cases have utilized the process, and of those filed, almost all have been resolved within a matter of days on an amicable basis. Within the last year, approximately 50 motions have been filed for emergent medical care, and of those, 16 (32%) had actually satisfied the criteria for filing.  Of the 16  that met the criteria  to be listed for a conference,  all of the cases have been resolved at the conference except for two matters during last year, and those had been set down for trial.


Through the efforts and concerns of the NJ Legislature and the Division of Workers’ Compensation, a good system has been made even better. While this favorable aspect of the NJ workers’ compensation system cannot be globally utilized to solve all the short comings of the national health care crisis, it is a star that shines brightly and may provide some guidance in the on going national health care debate.



.......


Thursday, March 29, 2018

NJ Expands Access to Medical Marijuana to Include Common Work-Related Conditions

Governor Phil Murphy announced major reforms to New Jersey’s Medicinal Marijuana Program. The permitted medical conditions now include many common work-related medical conditions. 

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Who Is Paying the Bills for Occupational Illnesses and Disease?

A recently published study from the US Department of Health and Human Services (NIOSH) reports that 45% of emergency room medical expenses for occupational illnesses and disease are not expected to be paid by workers' compensation insurance coverage.

Click here to read the complete report: Use of Workers’ Compensation Data for Occupational Safety  and Health: Proceedings from  June 2012 Workshop (May 2013) Identifying Workers’ Compensation as the Expected Payer in  Emergency Department Medical Records,  Larry L. Jackson, PhD, Susan J. Derk, MA, Suzanne M. Marsh, MPA, Audrey A. Reichard, OTR, MPH  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Workers’ Compensation Is About Relationships

Today's post comes from guest author Ryan Benharris (MA) from Deborah G. Kohl Law Offices.

Prevention of accidents should be the first step in establishing a successful workers’ compensation system. If an employer were truly concerned about the health and safety of the employee there would be no need for workers’ compensation.

Unfortunately the profit motive of the employer sometimes corrupts the process, and shortcuts are taken at work to increase production at an anticipated lower cost to the employer.

Employers need to understand that the human and financial costs of industrial accidents and exposures can be devastating. Injured workers, through the workers’ compensation process, may seek the payment of medical benefits, lost time payments and permanent disability awards. 

Hopefully, the relationship between employees and employers can improve, and the workplace can become a safer environment.
....
Jon L.Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson). For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.

More About Workers' Compensation and Medical Benefits

Jul 30, 2011
The just published, Issue 3 of the Workers' Compensation Resources Research Report (WCRRR) provides 23 years of information on cash benefits, medical benefits, and total (cash plus medical) benefits per 100,000 workers ...
Mar 21, 2012
The implementation of the Act will ultimately have far reaching consequences of the overall operation of both the delivery of workers' compensation medical benefits and the ultimate assessment/apportionment of permanent ...
Nov 13, 2008
Now that Barach Obama is a going to be at the helm of the US, greater attention is being focused on the need for a national health care system incorporating workers' compensation medical coverage. With private insurance ...
Aug 29, 2011
The medical issue remains open usually and medical benefits remain the responsibility of the employer. The medical issue becomes a complication when costs are attempted to be shifted to collateral medical carriers or ...

Monday, August 29, 2011

Pensions, Workers Compensation and Medical Benefits

The State of New Jersey has taken assertive action to guarantee medical benefits to injured workers for their lifetimes even though they are receiving accidental injury pensions. The Director has issued an Administrative Directive requiring language to literally toll the statute of limitations and permit the Division of Workers' Compensation to retain jurisdiction over such matters where the injured worker has accepted the continuing medical benefit option.

"Petitioner has been awarded and accepted an accidental disability pension effective _(date)_. To resolve the workers' compensation case, petitioner and respondent have agreed to provide petitioner with reasonable and necessary medical treatment for injuries related to the _(date)_ accident. This Order for continuing medical benefits shall not be subject to the two year statute of limitations and such medical benefits shall continue for the life of the petitioner or until further order of this court."

By statute, workers' compensation awards are offset by pension awards. The medical issue remains open usually and medical benefits remain the responsibility of the employer. The medical issue becomes a complication when costs are attempted to be shifted to collateral medical carriers or Medicare. The subsequent reimbursement issue then generates medical lien claims that must be litigated. The incorporation of the language will greatly clarify responsibility and expedite medical care and payment.

For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman  1.973.696.7900  jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.