Positive Pathological Findings in the Lungs of World Trade Center Patients

The forensic pathological skills of the Mt. Sinai Medical Center (MSMC) in New York have yet again revealed the mysteries of an occupational exposure. MSMC was the medical laboratory of Irving J. Selikoff and sentinel studies on asbestos related disease attributing exposure to asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioms.

MSMC took the early initiative in medically investigating the World Trade Center (WTC) first responders. Following up on the 2001 event MSMC had conducted pathologic evaluations of WTC dust present in lung tissue of a sampling of the lose exposed to WTC dust. It is estimated that between 60,000 to 70,000 responders have been exposed.

"We found that three of the seven responders had severe or moderate restrictive disease clinically. Histopathology showed interstitial lung disease consistent with small airways disease, bronchiolocentric parenchymal disease, and nonnecrotizing granulomatous condition. Tissue mineralogic analyses showed variable amounts of sheets of aluminum and magnesium silicates, chrysotile asbestos, calcium phosphate, and calcium sulfate. Small shards of glass containing mostly silica and magnesium were also found. Carbon nanotubes (CNT) of various sizes and lengths were noted. CNT were also identified in four of seven WTC dust samples."

Click here to read more about the WTC exposures and workers' compensation.

Bio-Tech Worker Awarded $1.37 Million in Suit Against Pfizer

A former bio-technical scientist of Pfizer was awarded $1.37 Million dollars as a result of being infected by an experimental virus in the company's laboratories. After a 3 week trial, the award was entered in what is  considered to be the first successful employee claims in the biotech and nanotech industry.

While the intentional tort claim was dismissed by the Judge  and injured worker proceeded under the theory that the company, Pfizer, violated whistleblower laws. The plaintiff also alleged that The Occupational Safety and Health Administration failed to thoroughly investigate the matter and take action.

Click here for  a detailed analysis of the case "Prescription for Bioterrorism by Steve Zeltzer.


Click here to read more about nanotechnology and workers compensation.

Revised CMS Implementation Timetable - Mandatory Reporting

Revised March 29, 2010

Liability Insurance (including Self-Insurance), No-Fault Insurance and Workers’ Compensation (Non-GHP or NGHP):

Medicare Secondary Payer Mandatory Reporting Provisions in Section 111 of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 (See 42 U.S.C. 1395y(b)(7)&(b)(8))

Revised Implementation Timeline

Note: “RRE” stands for “responsible reporting entity.” “COBSW” stands for “Coordination of Benefits Secure Web site.” “COBC” stands for CMS’ Medicare “Coordination of Benefits Contractor.”

• 05/01/2009

Electronic registration via the Section 111 COBSW began for all liability insurance (including self- insurance), no-fault insurance and workers’ compensation RREs (NGHP RREs) excluding foreign RREs.

• 07/01/2009

Test and production Query Input Files accepted for NGHP RREs that completed registration and are in a testing status (the RRE’s signed Profile Report has been received by the COBC).

• 01/01/2010 – 12/31/2010

Claim Input File testing period for all NGHP RREs.  

• 04/05/2010

Electronic registration commences via the Section 111 COBSW for foreign NGHP RREs (those that are based in countries outside the United States and have no Internal Revenue Service-assigned tax identification number and/or US mailing address).

• 01/01/2011 – 03/31/2011

All NGHP RREs must submit initial Section 111 Claim Input production files to the COBC according to assigned file submission timeframes for their RRE IDs.

• 04/01/2011

All NGHP RREs must be reporting production Claim Input Files on a quarterly basis by this date.

Click here to rad more about CMS and mandatory reporting and workers' compensation.

At Home Injury Held Compensable

A truck driver who did maintenance on his vehicle at home on Sunday was allowed to recover benefits. The Court held that the injury occurred "within the course of the employment" even though the accident occurred off premises and not during normal work hours.


GUILLERMO CHAVERRI - v. CACE TRUCKING INCORPORATED -Respondent  SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-3619-07T23619-07T2 Decided March 30, 2010


Click here to read more about premises and off-premises claims under workers' compensation.

Ohio Upholds New Limits on Liability Actions Against Employers

The Ohio Supreme Court has upheld a 2005 statute that restricts an employee's direct liability actions against employers. The statute requires a showing that the employer deliberately intended to injury an employee. Employees remain restricted to the the Ohio workers' compensation remedy for recovery of benefits.

"As this court has often recognized, workers' compensation laws are the result of a unique mutual compromise between employees and employers, in which employees give up their common-law remedy and accept possibly lower monetary recovery, but with greater assurance that they will receive reasonable compensation for their injury," Justice Robert Cupp wrote in one of the two opinions he authored. "Employers in turn give up common-law defenses but are protected from unlimited liability."

The issue was decided when the US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio certified constitutional questions to the Ohio Supreme Court.

Kaminski v. Metal & Wire Prods. Co. (Slip Opinion)

2008-0857

3/23/2010

3/23/2010

2010-Ohio-1027

Stetter v. R.J. Corman Derailment Servs., L.L.C. (Slip Opinion)

2008-0972

3/23/2010

3/23/2010

2010-Ohio-1029

Click here to read more about intentional actions and workers' compensation.

Putting a Value on Occupational Cancer Claims

Giving the sick the benefit of the doubt was the mantra the US District Court Judge charged with overseeing the settlement of 911 of the claims of the first responders. The Judge rejected the settlement of $575 several days ago as being inadequate.

The original settlement was crafted by the parties to cover the nearly 10,000 parties to the lawsuit. The Judge recognizes the difficulties in proving cancer claims and the unpredictability of the disease. The original cap offered was $100,000. The Judge said that was inadequate and suggested to the parties to find some method of increasing the benefits.

The 911 first responders were exposed to asbestos and petroleum products that could result in many types of future malignancies, including, lung cancer, mesothelioma and leukemia.

Click here to read more 911 claims.

David Michaels Testifies That OSHA Needs An Update-Enhance Penalties

In testimony before the Subcommittee on Workforce Protection of US Congress, David Michaels, Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health, reported that the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) needs to be strengthened and enhanced. He encouraged that both civil monetary fines and criminal penalties should be increased.

"....If we are to fulfill the Department's goal of providing good jobs for everyone, we must make even more progress. Good jobs are safe jobs, and American workers still face unacceptable hazards. More than 5,000 workers are killed on the job in America each year, more than 4 million are injured, and thousands more will become ill in later years from present occupational exposures. Moreover, the workplaces of 2010 are not those of 1970: the law must change as our workplaces have changed. The vast majority of America's environmental and public health laws have undergone significant transformations since they were enacted in the 1960s and 70s, while the OSH Act has seen only minor amendments. As a British statesman once remarked, 'The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery.'"

"Monetary penalties for violations of the OSH Act have been increased only once in 40 years despite inflation during that period. Unscrupulous employers often consider it more cost effective to pay the minimal OSHA penalty and continue to operate an unsafe workplace than to correct the underlying health and safety problem. The current penalties do not provide an adequate deterrent. This is apparent when compared to penalties that other agencies are allowed to assess."

"Criminal penalties in the OSH Act are also inadequate for deterring the most egregious employer wrongdoing. Under the OSH Act, criminal penalties are limited to those cases where a willful violation of an OSHA standard results in the death of a worker and to cases of false statements or misrepresentations. The maximum period of incarceration upon conviction for a violation that costs a worker's life is six months in jail, making these crimes a misdemeanor.....Nothing focuses attention like the possibility of going to jail. Unscrupulous employers who refuse to comply with safety and health standards as an economic calculus will think again if there is a chance that they will go to jail for ignoring their responsibilities to their workers...... A fresh look at the OSH Act and its relevance for the 21st century is indeed overdue."

Click here to read more about OSHA and workers' compensation.