Safety in the workplace is now a growing concern as US aging workforce expands. It has been frequently reported that the expansion of this dimension of the labor sector has generated an increase in serious accidents and illness at work.
Over the past decade the work force has demographically changed. The number of those who are working past age 55 has grown. This increase mirrors an increase in accidents at work. It well known that those age 55 and older have a higher propensity for illness and disease resulting in complex of medical conditions.
The workers' compensation claims for this age group have become more serious and eventually evolve into Social Security Disability Claims. Besides the administrative complexity of navigating a fragile and dysfunction workers' compensation, these workers are require more emergent medical care for exigent conditions.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has recognized this issue and is attempting to put SAFETY back into the equation.
"A report of conference presentations and discussions among participants from the National Academies of Science, universities and research institutions, and representatives of professional associations, industry and labor, recommends attention to workplace environments to maintain “work ability” as workers age, along with legislative fixes and research to fill in knowledge gaps for keeping workers healthy and productive."
As Social Security studies these issues, and more reliable data becomes available through NIOSH's efforts, a redesign of the approach to mandate safety, and deliver medical benefits universally and in a more efficient fashion, appears to be the next logical step.
Click here to read more about safety and workers' compensation.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
US Supreme Court About to Rule on RICO Case
The US Supreme Court has placed Cassens Transport Co., et al., Petitioners v, Paul Brown, et al., No. 08-1375 on its conference agenda for December 4, 2009. At that time the Justices will review the Petition for Certiorari.
Pending before the US Supreme Court is a petition for a writ of certiorari to review a decision where: the employer, insurance company and their experts were found to have conducted themselves in violation of the RICO Act.
In this reverse preemption case, Public Citizen filed a brief which crystallizes the issues before the Court.
Deepak Gupta and Allison Zieve of Public Citizen are co-counsel for the respondent.
"Respondent’s Brief in Opposition to the Petition for Certiorari.
The McCarran-Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1012(b), “precludes application of a federal statute” that would “invalidate, impair, or supersede” a state law “enacted * * * for the purpose of regulating the business of insurance.” The questions presented in this case are:
1. Whether a state workers’ compensation law that transfers the risk of workplace injuries to employers, and requires that employers secure their ability to assume those risks either by purchasing of insurance or by self insuring, regulates the “business of insurance” within the meaning of the McCarran-Ferguson Act.
2. Whether a State’s exclusive, administrative remedial scheme for handling contested workers’ compensation benefit determinations is impaired within the meaning of the McCarran-Ferguson Act by the availability of suits under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., contesting the denial of worker’s compensation claims."
Click here to see the Workers' Compensation Blog for additional articles on RICO matters and workers' compensation.
Pending before the US Supreme Court is a petition for a writ of certiorari to review a decision where: the employer, insurance company and their experts were found to have conducted themselves in violation of the RICO Act.
In this reverse preemption case, Public Citizen filed a brief which crystallizes the issues before the Court.
Deepak Gupta and Allison Zieve of Public Citizen are co-counsel for the respondent.
"Respondent’s Brief in Opposition to the Petition for Certiorari.
The McCarran-Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1012(b), “precludes application of a federal statute” that would “invalidate, impair, or supersede” a state law “enacted * * * for the purpose of regulating the business of insurance.” The questions presented in this case are:
1. Whether a state workers’ compensation law that transfers the risk of workplace injuries to employers, and requires that employers secure their ability to assume those risks either by purchasing of insurance or by self insuring, regulates the “business of insurance” within the meaning of the McCarran-Ferguson Act.
2. Whether a State’s exclusive, administrative remedial scheme for handling contested workers’ compensation benefit determinations is impaired within the meaning of the McCarran-Ferguson Act by the availability of suits under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., contesting the denial of worker’s compensation claims."
Click here to see the Workers' Compensation Blog for additional articles on RICO matters and workers' compensation.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
AIG Declines on Questionable Workers Compensation Reserves
A CNBC analyst has estimated that AIG's workers' compensation reserves may fall short this year contributing to an $11 Billion loss for the company. Shares of AIG were down 12% on the news of the possible deficiet.
To read more about AIG and workers' compensation click here.
To read more about AIG and workers' compensation click here.
The Gift That Keeps Giving: The SSA Reverse Offset
Social Security (SSA) has been subsidizing a select group of States since 1981. The workers' compensation insurance carriers in only those select States are permitted to take a credit against SSA payments.
The US Congress legislated that if a State had a recognized Social Security Offset Plan in effect on February 18, 1981, then the SSA would not offset workers' compensation benefits to those injured workers. In those jurisdictions, the offset is taken by the workers' compensation insurance carrier, who gains the advantage.
It was recently estimated that that over 583,923 individuals were receiving Social Security Disability Benefits. Of those, 156,096 were eligible for an offset to be taken by SSA. But, of those, 44,748 or 28.7%, were eligible for a reverse offset to be taken instead by the workers' compensation insurance companies.
To read more about Social Security and workers' compensation click here.
Those States that have been designated as "reverse offset"States, and are permitted have the workers' compensation carrier to take the credit are: California, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin.
The US Congress legislated that if a State had a recognized Social Security Offset Plan in effect on February 18, 1981, then the SSA would not offset workers' compensation benefits to those injured workers. In those jurisdictions, the offset is taken by the workers' compensation insurance carrier, who gains the advantage.
It was recently estimated that that over 583,923 individuals were receiving Social Security Disability Benefits. Of those, 156,096 were eligible for an offset to be taken by SSA. But, of those, 44,748 or 28.7%, were eligible for a reverse offset to be taken instead by the workers' compensation insurance companies.
To read more about Social Security and workers' compensation click here.
Those States that have been designated as "reverse offset"States, and are permitted have the workers' compensation carrier to take the credit are: California, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Social Security's Inconsistencies
To read more about Social Security and productivity reports click here.
OSHA Sets H1N1 Flu Employer Responsibility Standard for Health Care Workers
The "exclusivity doctrine" in workers' compensation limits an employers' responsibility to only scheduled workers' compensation benefits for harm caused to workers that "arises out of" and occurs "within the course of employment." Those benefits have become increasingly difficult to obtain for a multitude of reasons.
The OSGA directive closely follows the prevention guidance issue by The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to prevent the spread of H1N1 flu. The purpose of the compliance directive is "to ensure uniform procedures when conducting inspections to identify and minimize or eliminate high to very high risk occupational exposures to the 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus."
The CDC has reported that the H1N1 flu activity continues to be widespread in the US and remains above epidemic in proportion for the seventh consecutive week. Over 99% of all subtyped A viruses being reported to the CDC were 2009 influenza A (H1N1) viruses. A total of 171 deaths in children associated with the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus infection have been reported to the CDC.
OSHA announced, "In response to complaints, OSHA inspectors will ensure that health care employers implement a hierarchy of controls, and encourage vaccination and other work practices recommended by the CDC. Where respirators are required to be used, the OSHA Respiratory Protection standard must be followed, including worker training and fit testing. The directive also applies to institutional settings where some workers may have similar exposures, such as schools and correctional facilities."
"OSHA has a responsibility to ensure that the more than nine million frontline health care workers in the United States are protected to the extent possible against exposure to the virus," said acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Jordan Barab. "OSHA will ensure health care employers use proper controls to protect all workers, particularly those who are at high or very high risk of exposure."
To read more about workers' compensation and the H1N1 Flu click here.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Congress, Health Care & Unintended Consequences
This past week some very dramatic things happened in the workers’ compensation world. The US Senate moved forward on initiating a floor debate on health care. At the same time, a group of workers’ compensation scholars met in Washington DC to discuss the future of workers’ compensation and the interplay with social security disability.
Highlights of the NASI (National Academy of Social Insurance) conference convened in Washington were findings presented by eminent leaders in the field. Professor John Burton, Rutgers University, pointed out that newly created barriers to workers’ compensation were pushing more injured workers to the Social Security disability system for benefits. This reflects a phenomenon that occurred in the late 1970’s when a study commissioned by the US Department of Labor and conducted by Mt. Sinai Hospitals’ Environmental Sciences Laboratory, revealed that the inadequate benefit delivery system of workers’ compensation for asbestos related illness, was forcing injured workers and their families into the civil justice arena for adequate compensation.
The problems have not changed in decades; they have only gotten worse, maturing into a system that is in critical condition and on life support. In 1980 Irving J. Selikoff, M.D. reported, “There has been widespread acknowledgement of significant problems with disability compensation for workers in the United States. One major area of concern has been the shortcomings with regard to occupational disease. Whatever the suitability of current workers’ compensation systems in the 50 states for injuries and work accidents, there has been little disagreement about the inadequacies of such systems for workers who become disabled by illness or, if they die, for their surviving dependents.”
Complex questions continue to exist between the scientific and legal communities as to the path to be taken. Barriers placed into the path of recovery, including pre-existing and co-existing conditions, which result in limited or delayed recovery and major shifting of the economic responsibility upon the public/private benefit systems need to be removed. The unspoken social consequences continue as a silent epidemic as families and survivors struggle in silence.
Looking backward over the noble experiment in California which turned sour, Tom Rankin, former President of the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO, expressed his regret of the reform. The former Labor leader theorized that the results were “unintended consequences.” Indeed he is looking forward to solutions springing forth in a “public option” embedded into the national health care legislation.
Some participants at the NASI conference alleged a major shortcoming of the California workers’ compensation legislative reform effort. Doug Kim, a lobbyist for the claimant’s attorneys, disclosed that the injured workers’ advocates were not invited to partake in the discussion that lead up to crafting the initial drafts of the 2004 California reform legislation SB 899.
History reveals, that when the theoretical reforms were practically applied, the injured workers suffered serious setbacks. If these were in fact “unintended consequences,” then one must consider the active involvement of all stakeholders when looking forward to solutions. The courts in California have consistently upheld challenges to the inequitable results, pointing to the legislative intent to reduce costs. Absent from the discussions of the presenters were practical systemic applications to improve the present system. The “blood and guts” of the traumatic, delay and denial, struggles of navigating in a crippled workers’ compensation system, in California and elsewhere, is verification that change is mandated.
As North Carolina attorney, Valerie A. Johnson, so eloquently remarked, “workers’ compensation is supposed to be a simple system.” The process has now been obstructed by encroaching elements of fault, contributory negligence, apportionment of pre-existing conditions and difficulties of the element of time, manifested by latent diseases unknown to the fathers of the system a century ago. The advance of medical science has brought forth new and innovated modalities that have contributed to soaring medical costs. The convergence of these issues has generated higher administrative costs.
Pecuniary Industry motives have worked adversely to improving safety in the workplace. The need for workers’ compensation would be minimized by adopting a safer occupational environment. Under reporting of workplace accidents continue as the Government Accountability Office announced. Nebraska Appleseed reveals that workers feel intimidated and are apprehensive to report injuries and unsafe work conditions. This is scenario is compounded by the fact that undocumented workers, who have even less job security, work in jobs with higher risk. The Bush Administration did not make efforts to allow OSHA to heighten enforcement efforts. All of these ingredients combine to create a recipe that just doesn’t work.
The US Senate advanced the health care legislation to a floor debate in an unusual late Saturday night session. This action may indeed provide an opportunity for the stakeholders in workers’ compensation to all join in the debate and look for solutions to the delivery of appropriate medical care in an efficient and timely fashion. To avoid “unintended consequences” yet again, injured workers and their advocates will need to be active participants and engage in the debate now.
.......
To read more about workers’ compensation and universal health care solutions click here.
Highlights of the NASI (National Academy of Social Insurance) conference convened in Washington were findings presented by eminent leaders in the field. Professor John Burton, Rutgers University, pointed out that newly created barriers to workers’ compensation were pushing more injured workers to the Social Security disability system for benefits. This reflects a phenomenon that occurred in the late 1970’s when a study commissioned by the US Department of Labor and conducted by Mt. Sinai Hospitals’ Environmental Sciences Laboratory, revealed that the inadequate benefit delivery system of workers’ compensation for asbestos related illness, was forcing injured workers and their families into the civil justice arena for adequate compensation.
The problems have not changed in decades; they have only gotten worse, maturing into a system that is in critical condition and on life support. In 1980 Irving J. Selikoff, M.D. reported, “There has been widespread acknowledgement of significant problems with disability compensation for workers in the United States. One major area of concern has been the shortcomings with regard to occupational disease. Whatever the suitability of current workers’ compensation systems in the 50 states for injuries and work accidents, there has been little disagreement about the inadequacies of such systems for workers who become disabled by illness or, if they die, for their surviving dependents.”
Complex questions continue to exist between the scientific and legal communities as to the path to be taken. Barriers placed into the path of recovery, including pre-existing and co-existing conditions, which result in limited or delayed recovery and major shifting of the economic responsibility upon the public/private benefit systems need to be removed. The unspoken social consequences continue as a silent epidemic as families and survivors struggle in silence.
Looking backward over the noble experiment in California which turned sour, Tom Rankin, former President of the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO, expressed his regret of the reform. The former Labor leader theorized that the results were “unintended consequences.” Indeed he is looking forward to solutions springing forth in a “public option” embedded into the national health care legislation.
Some participants at the NASI conference alleged a major shortcoming of the California workers’ compensation legislative reform effort. Doug Kim, a lobbyist for the claimant’s attorneys, disclosed that the injured workers’ advocates were not invited to partake in the discussion that lead up to crafting the initial drafts of the 2004 California reform legislation SB 899.
History reveals, that when the theoretical reforms were practically applied, the injured workers suffered serious setbacks. If these were in fact “unintended consequences,” then one must consider the active involvement of all stakeholders when looking forward to solutions. The courts in California have consistently upheld challenges to the inequitable results, pointing to the legislative intent to reduce costs. Absent from the discussions of the presenters were practical systemic applications to improve the present system. The “blood and guts” of the traumatic, delay and denial, struggles of navigating in a crippled workers’ compensation system, in California and elsewhere, is verification that change is mandated.
As North Carolina attorney, Valerie A. Johnson, so eloquently remarked, “workers’ compensation is supposed to be a simple system.” The process has now been obstructed by encroaching elements of fault, contributory negligence, apportionment of pre-existing conditions and difficulties of the element of time, manifested by latent diseases unknown to the fathers of the system a century ago. The advance of medical science has brought forth new and innovated modalities that have contributed to soaring medical costs. The convergence of these issues has generated higher administrative costs.
Pecuniary Industry motives have worked adversely to improving safety in the workplace. The need for workers’ compensation would be minimized by adopting a safer occupational environment. Under reporting of workplace accidents continue as the Government Accountability Office announced. Nebraska Appleseed reveals that workers feel intimidated and are apprehensive to report injuries and unsafe work conditions. This is scenario is compounded by the fact that undocumented workers, who have even less job security, work in jobs with higher risk. The Bush Administration did not make efforts to allow OSHA to heighten enforcement efforts. All of these ingredients combine to create a recipe that just doesn’t work.
The US Senate advanced the health care legislation to a floor debate in an unusual late Saturday night session. This action may indeed provide an opportunity for the stakeholders in workers’ compensation to all join in the debate and look for solutions to the delivery of appropriate medical care in an efficient and timely fashion. To avoid “unintended consequences” yet again, injured workers and their advocates will need to be active participants and engage in the debate now.
.......
To read more about workers’ compensation and universal health care solutions click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)