Tag Archive for L & I Workers Compensation claim

Study Shows Improved Recovery from Work Related Injuries

According to this month’s issue of the American Public Health Association journal, Medical Care, studies of occupational healthcare in Washington indicate that improving medical care for injured workers significantly decreases missed work time. The study was conducted by Dr Thomas Wickizer of Ohio State University, College of Public Health, and Dr. Gary Franklin, medical director at Washington State’s Department of Labor & Industries (L&I).

“Work-related disability is a major public health problem that’s largely overlooked in the U.S.,” Dr. Franklin of L&I said. “This study shows that using occupational health best practices when treating injured workers can have an important effect on their recovery.”

In 2008, L&I began to collaborate with physicians in both Washington and throughout the U.S., University of Washington medical researchers, and business leaders and labor advocates to assess best practices for helping workers recover during the first 12 weeks following a work-related injury. L&I’s Centers of Occupational Health and Education (COHE) were the direct outcome of this project; these organizations function as community-based centers that promote the most effective procedures and treatments of injured workers.

Specifically, these practices emphasize the safe, healthful recovering of injured workers and their return to full capacity and employment in the workplace. Such “best practices” include quickly filing a workers’ compensation claim with L&I, directly contacting the employer to discuss the worker’s ability to resume their job (or some lighter tasks in the workplace), and frequently evaluating a worker’s ability to perform tasks and activities at work.

L&I provides monetary incentives and administrative support to COHE healthcare providers to help them put injured workers back to work as soon as possible. Health services coordinators are central to the success of this process: these individuals work with COHEs and report to healthcare delivery teams, supporting community-wide integration of medical care.

This undertaking, and the enhanced integration of care by way of best practices and incentives, has emerged as an early prototype of what many imagine could be a more “accountable-care” concept within national health care reform.

The study involved seven workers compensation researchers from L&I, the Ohio State University’s College of Public Health, and the University of Washington’s Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences. Together, this team examined and evaluated 105,000 + workers’ compensation claims from 2001 to 2007, including both COHE and non-COHE-related claims.  Findings show that injured workers who received treatment from healthcare providers following COHE best practices had 20% fewer “disability days” compared to other injured workers receiving treatment, as well as a $510 drop in total medical and disability costs per claim. One of the most promising figures related to back strain: workers with back injuries showed a 30% drop in disability days. In his report, Dr. Franklin stated: “We’re especially encouraged that the outcomes for workers with low-back strain were significantly better. Lower-back strain is a costly and common disabling condition in workers’ compensation.”

At the moment, four COHE sites work with 2,000 providers and hundreds of workplaces, providing treatment to nearly one-third of injured workers in Washington. Figures from the study brought about new legislation this year that will make COHEs more accessible, expanding access to all injured workers in Washington by 2015.

States Shrink Workers’ Compensation Commissions

Labor & Industries claims continue to evolve across the States and a recent development in Michigan may signal an alarming trend in the downsizing of L & I Commissions that specialize in protecting injured worker rights in the face of business lobby interests.

Governor Rick Snyder pressed ahead in late May with his effort to trim State costs.  Among the many moves to downsize State bureaucracies and streamline government services and efficiency was the creation of the Michigan Compensation Appellate Commission.

According to Compnewsnetwork, “Gov. Snyder issued Executive Order 2011-6, which transfers the authorities and responsibilities of the Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission and the Employment Security Board of Review to the new Michigan Compensation Appellate Commission.”

“With this reorganization, Michigan becomes a model of efficiency for appellate decisions in these two case areas,” Snyder said. “It provides greater flexibility in addressing fluctuating caseload levels and variations.”

The Michigan Compensation Appellate Commission will now consider appeals of decisions issued by magistrates and administrative law examiners, specifically in the realm of unemployment and workers’ compensation claims.

The most important, and perhaps most troubling, part of the creation of this new Commission, is that it takes on the workload that was previously performed by two separate Commissions: The Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission and the Employment Security Board of Review. Although our economy is slowly recovering, what is striking about this consolidation of Commissions is that it does not seem to acknowledge the massive increase in unemployment and workers’ compensation claims the recession has engendered.

Further, while the Executive Order issued by the Governor requires that the new appellate commissioners be evaluated under defined standards to ensure that appeals are handled in a timely, knowledgeable and appropriate manner, the Order also requires that the commissioners adhere to productivity and timeliness standards.  In short, the effort here is to move claims and reviews through the Commission quickly, and as such, the important scrutiny that each individual injured worker’s claim should receive might be compromised.

Every experienced Washington workers compensation attorney is watching these developments across the country to ensure that injured workers in this state will continue to receive all the protections afforded to them by constantly evolving Labor & Industries law. Injured workers should first seek medical attention, then seek out the advice of an experienced L & I attorney at Emery Reddy as they pursue their claim.


Tsunami Aftermath: Disaster, Contract Labor, and Workers’ Comp

They have become known in the press around the world as the “Fukushima 50,” the 50 anonymous workers who venture into the dark, flooded depths of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in the wake of the March earthquake and tsunami that sent the plant’s systems spinning perilously out of control.  Ethicists and labor rights activists wring their hands over the morality of sending in civil workers into what is certain to be a radioactive environments while editorials and politicians praise their bravery and selflessness in the face of disaster.

In the wake of their acts of bravery, labor advocates began to ask important questions about these nuclear workers’ access to health care and workers’ compensation benefits should they suffer any ill effects from their important work.  After all, a startling “88 percent” of Japanese nuclear workers are contract workers with uncertain access to benefits, according to the NYTimes.com.

The New York Times noted these workers are “emblematic of Japan’s two-tiered work force, with an elite class of highly paid employees at top companies and a subclass of laborers who work for less pay, have less security and receive fewer benefits.”  The Times reports that the medical care and benefits for these workers tends to dwindle as you work your way down the ladder from contracted worker, to subcontracted, to even sub-subcontracted.  Essentially “nuclear migrants,” these workers attempt to conceal injuries or exposure to radiation so they can retain their employment.

As the United States re-evaluates its own nuclear power industry, the spotlight has shifted to how the U.S. treats those workers who are asked to put themselves in jeopardy in what is essentially a work situation.  Just today, Scientific American reports that the U.S. nuclear safety regulator is investigating how three nuclear workers in Nebraska were exposed to radiation in a workplace setting in early April. Scientific American writes, “The three workers triggered radiation alarms by incorrectly moving a radioactive tube on April 3. They immediately set the tube down and fled the area.  Nebraska Public Power District, which operates the Cooper Nuclear Station, does not believe the workers were exposed to radiation above regulatory limits, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a release.”  There is no word if these workers were subcontractors or full-time employees.

Of course, if the United States suffered a disaster so severe that it forced not only nuclear workers, but emergency workers to enter extreme environments to save lives, the most obvious, and unfortunate parallel is 9/11.  Chris Bragg wrote as late as 2007 that “many cleanup workers who rushed to help the city in its time of need say they have developed serious physical conditions due to that work: 756 cleanup volunteers and many more paid workers have submitted claims. Many claimants say, however, the Workers’ Compensation Board has been slow in helping them get back on their feet.”  Workers employed by the city, such as firefighters and police officers, go through a tailored compensation process.  But contract workers are at the mercy of the city’s Workers’ Compensation Board, and literally hundreds of articles over the years have detailed their struggle.

Labor & Industries experts will continue to watch the drama unfolding in Japan with an eye to how workers in the U.S. would be treated in similar circumstances.  If anything, the situation reveals the need for greater protection of subcontracted workers of all stripes, especially in terms of workers’ compensation, before a disaster happens and workers must rush into the unknown.  If you have been injured and have questions about your employment status as it relates to workers’ compensation, contact an expert Washington Labor & Industries Attorney.

Oklahoma Senate Passes Workers’ Comp Bill

Recently the full Oklahoma Senate approved a series of bills ostensibly designed to reduce the cost of doing business in Oklahoma.  As states compete to bring in companies amidst a slowly recovering economy, the usual suspects have emerged as siren songs of the “pro-business” community: lower corporate taxes, heavy deregulation, and limitations on workers’ compensation claims.  These proposals often have ramifications beyond their stated goals.  Lowering corporate taxes creates gaps in state budgets already suffering from lack of revenue leading to cuts in social and public services.  Deregulation can lead to abuses of corporate power, as exemplified by the mortgage crisis that kicked off the current recession.  And heavy-handed reforms to workers’ compensation can limit the ways workers can lawfully pursue and receive legitimate injury claims.

Oklahoma Senate Bill 878 purports to be a comprehensive approach to workers’ compensation reform.  Brian Bingman, R-Salupa said, “We are committed to reducing Oklahoma’s workers’ compensation rates and making our state more competitive for job creation in every way.  This bill is progress towards a goal of making Oklahoma more competitive economically with surrounding states.”

The provisions of the Bill include mandating a judge to render a decision within 60 days, mandatory annual reviews of disability recipients, placing more authority in the hands of medical experts when reviewing claims, and encouraging early return to work as a form of rehabilitation.

Critics are skeptical of bill’s true intent.  Barbara Hoberock reports that the bill could limit injured workers’ access to medical treatment. It ties rates of compensation for doctors treating injured workers to 120 percent of Medicare. She quotes Dr. William Gillock, who practices occupational medicine in Tulsa. “We are concerned it would eliminate access to care and affect the quality of care we can provide,” he said.  The primary concern is that the reduction of compensation would make it difficult for doctors to refer their patients to specialists who charge higher raters.

Another measure passed by the Oklahoma Senate is aimed at limiting the amount workers’ compensation lawyers can be paid to represent injured workers.  Critics like Senate Minority Leader Charles Laster argue that the resolution would force injured worker’s to stand alone against the well-funded legal teams representing insurance companies.  Although supporters argue the measure would motivate workers’ compensation lawyers to work harder on behalf of their clients to obtain larger compensation, another possible outcome is reluctance to take cases in the first place.

The Washington State legislature is also pushing major changes in workers’ compensation benefits under the banner of reducing costs to the State.  While Governor Chris Gregoire’s proposal to push workers back into “light duty” while still recovering from injuries and to offer buy-outs to injured workers does not go as far the Oklahoma measures, it does reflect the national trend to push injured workers back into the workplace perhaps before they are ready.  The Seattle Times reports the “idea is to reconnect the worker with his boss, co-workers and paycheck, instead of having him sit at home on state benefit.”  One should note that the Times’ description of a worker sitting “at home” reflects an ugly prejudice in the mass media and by politicians against the plight of the injured worker.  As anyone who has suffered a workplace injury will tell you, recovery is a physically and emotionally exhausting process.

Labor and Industries laws continue to change across the nation.  Injured workers should consult with a Washington Workers Compensation Lawyer to ensure they receive the full protection of the law.

Emery Reddy Victory for Seattle Teacher: Appeals Court Grants Trial in Seattle School District Employment Discrimination Case

The Washington State Court of Appeals decided yesterday that a 14 year teaching veteran deserves a trial in an Employment Discrimination case.  At issue for the jury is whether the Seattle School District should have transferred her to a clean, mold free environment before terminating her.

Denise Frisino’s troubles with toxic mold began in 2000 when she acquired a respiratory illness in response to chemical toxins present at Hamilton International Middle School. The illness made her sensitive to a range of airborne toxins, from mold to other irritants.  After attempts to clean up the toxic environment at the school failed, Frisino was forced to go on medical leave in April 2004 and agreed to be transferred to Nathan Hale High School the following school year.

According to court documents, the extent to which Seattle Public Schools has failed to address widespread mold and toxin problems became clear when Frisino entered her new classroom at Hale.  She “immediately note[d] visible mold as well as blackened and missing ceiling tiles.”  Frisino discussed her concerns with Hale Principal Lisa Hechtman.  In September and October, a private firm, Clayton Group Services, as well as the Seattle/King Country Department of Health investigated and “reported no active mold growth in the building.”  Although they reported “the total fungal structure concentrations inside the hale building were lower than those found outdoors,” the District still performed some minimal remediation on the classroom.  On November 21, the issue came to a head when Frisino experienced a respiratory emergency in the classroom requiring a visit to the emergency room.

Michelle Esteban of KOMO News reported on November 29, 2004 on photos of mold that a Nathan Hale parent provided.  Esteban notes, “Some of the ceiling tiles are peeled away and, underneath, a black mold.”  The article also described Frisino’s reaction as “severe–everything from a hacking cough, swollen nose, ringing ears and now respiratory complications.”

Frisino was not the only person put in jeopardy by the continuing mold problem at Nathan Hale.  Seattlepi.com reported on December 7, 2004 that Jennifer Aspelund pulled her son out of Nathan Hale because of the threat the mold posed.  Her son, North Aspelund Jr., was “diagnosed with leukemia at age 4, relapsed four years later, then endured a bone marrow transplant and the removal of a cancerous kidney.”  After detecting a an odd smell in the library, officials confirmed an “area above a northeast stairwell contain[ed] Stachybotrys atra, a greenish-black mold.” His mother noted they never would have enrolled North in Hale had they been aware of the mold problem.

Meanwhile, Frisino was earnestly negotiating with the District to accommodate her disability.  According to court documents, the District hired Superior Colt to remove visible mold from Classroom 216.  The remediation project was completed in December and the District demanded Frisino return to work on January 3, 2005.  Thus began a flurry of communication between Frisino and the District, with the District claiming the environmental remediation was “appropriate” and Frisino’s doctors repeating she was “advised to remain away from her current workplace or be transferred to a more accommodating environment.”  The District terminated Frisino on June 1, claiming she failed to return to work.

Frisino’s original lawsuit alleged the District failed to provide a reasonable accommodation as required by the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and engaged in employment discrimination and retaliatory discharge.  The trial court dismissed her claim in favor of the District.

Yesterday Frisino’s claim was given new life by the Washington State Court of Appeals when she was granted a new trial.  Among other irregularities, the court noted the District attempted to apply an “objective measure” to her illness and questioned whether the District reasonably accommodated Frisino. Most importantly, in the last month many of the key players working for the School District have been terminated for misuse of District funds and poor leadership after being swept up in the Seattle Public Schools Scandal.

Since the case was dismissed in 2009, Nathan Hale has been completely renovated.

The Appeals Court’s granting of a trial is an important victory for injured workers whose employers violate their rights by refusing to accommodate a disability or terminate in retaliation.  There is a Washington L & I attorney at Emery Reddy  that has the expertise to protect your rights.  Stay tuned as this case continues to unfold…