The Illinois bill is touted as “reform,” but many critics and labor rights activists see it as a giveaway to Big Business with workers bearing the cost.  Touted by many pro-business Democrats, Senate President John Cullerton argued “This reform package is the single most important thing we can do to improve our business climate and ensure our economic recovery continues.  Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel also backed the bill as essentially job-creation legislation.

At the heart of the legislation is a 30 percent reduction in fees that businesses are required to pay doctors who treat injured workers. Proponents of the bill argue this would save Illinois businesses up to $700 million.  Of course, what is not addressed is how this gap in coverage will be addressed.

Other features of the bill include establishing a medical network for workers compensation claims and cutting the duration when a worker can receive payments for carpal tunnel syndrome from 40 weeks to 28 weeks.  Perhaps most troubling, the measure places the burden of proof on workers when proving that drugs or alcohol did not not contribute to a workplace accident.

Predictably, while these features certainly represent major change, Republicans did not feel the Bill went far enough.  Hyperbole and rhetoric abound when state Republicans complain that Bill does not go far enough:

“The person who plays football on Sunday afternoon gets hurt and goes to work on Monday and says he has a workers compensation injury, we don’t address that, the very meat and potatoes of what we need to do,” complained House Minority Leader Tom Cross (R-Oswego).

Attorney Michael Helfand notes the dishonesty at the heart of such a statement: “That sounds outrageous and would be if it was true.  But the truth is that any injured worker has to prove that their injury arose out of and in the course of their employment.  In the course of means while they were working or doing something for the benefit of the employer.  So if the scenario that Tom Cross describes happens then the case can and will be fought and in fact the worker can be charged with fraud.”

Helfand is on point when he notes that such statements play into old, dangerous stereotypes of the “scamming” injured worker. As any worker who has been injured on the job can attest, being forced to seek medical care that prevents one from working is not a pleasant experience, and can often be trying and fraught with obstacles.

We will continue to watch this bill and others as they make their way through state legislatures.  Workers’ Compensation law is complex and dynamic, but an attorney who specializes in such cases is an injured workers’ greatest ally.  An expert Washington workers’ compensation lawyer at Emery Reddy is standing by to help with your very important claim.

]]> http://emeryreddy.com/blog/2011/06/illinois-workers-compensation-bill-reform-or-assault-on-workers-rights/feed/ 0 http://emeryreddy.com/blog/2011/06/construction-accident-attorneys/ http://emeryreddy.com/blog/2011/06/construction-accident-attorneys/#comments Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:13:16 +0000 Jennifer Atkinson http://emeryreddy.com/blog/?p=353 Construction site jobs are among the most dangerous work in the U.S.  Each year, thousands of Washington workers are seriously injured or killed in construction site accidents.  Some of the most frequent injuries include falling, crane accidents, scaffolding accidents, hazards from compressed gases, defective machinery or equipment, nail gun mishaps, explosions, and welding or cutting accidents.  According to some industry estimates, 40% of construction site fatalities involve electrocution.

Construction accidents cause Washington workers to suffer more than just serious injury; employees also face financial hardships, the inability to support families, long-term medical complications and expenses, surgery, and sometimes life-long difficulties maintaining employment.

When the responsible party is the workers’ employer, a coworker, or even the injured worker him- or herself, claims and benefits are managed by the Department of Labor and Industries.  However, if a construction site injury is caused by the negligence of someone other than a direct employer – or if accidents occur at a location other than the place of employment – workers may have the right to additional compensation and benefits through a third-party liability claim.  In distinction from workers’ compensation benefits, there is virtually no limit to the settlement amount in a third-party liability claim. This can give injured workers access to additional medical benefits and wage-loss benefits, and further compensate them for personal pain and suffering as well as loss of services for dependents or a spouse.

From a legal perspective, construction accident claims are highly complex. Construction sites are demanding and rapidly-changing environments where projects are managed under intense time constraints, and projects often involve multiple businesses, contractors, sub-contractors, rental companies, property owners, workers, and equipment manufacturers and owners.  Simply pinpointing the party responsible for an accident can be overwhelming.  This means that victims without skillful and experienced legal representation can face an endless series of questions and criteria in assessing the viability of their construction accident claim: what personnel were present on the site when an accident occurred? What machinery or equipment was involved? Who manufactured, owned, installed, or operated it? Are there available witnesses?  A construction site attorney with comprehensive knowledge of third-party liability and workers’ compensation laws can be crucial to the success of a case. The Construction Site Accident Attorneys at Emery Reddy are experienced in maximizing compensation that workers receive from serious injury and wrongful death cases.

Our attorneys have successfully negotiated and litigated construction site accident cases involving defective products that are commonly used in commercial building projects.  Each year, poorly manufactured or improperly maintained construction equipment causes thousands of serious injuries and fatalities.  Life-altering injuries and deaths, for instance, commonly result from scaffolding that is incorrectly installed or that fails to follow L&I and OSHA safety regulations.  Rental companies that do not properly care for or install equipment may be held accountable in a third-party liability claim.

While some workers are tempted to accept a quick settlement from an insurance company, this rarely reflects the full cost of personal, medical, financial and professional damages suffered by the injured worker.  What is in the insurer’s best interest is generally not in the best interest of the victim, since insurance companies will look for every available means to pay claimants as little as they can.

Emery Reddy’s Construction Accident Attorneys can help client recover the maximum compensation to which they are entitled by Washington law. As committed advocates of Washington workers, we take pride in our successful record of securing benefits for the injured and disabled, and will guide you through every step of your personal injury, third party liability or workers’ compensation claim.  Contact one of our attorneys today for a free consultation.

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.

However, the Northern District Court of California denied class certification citing skepticism that an overall trend could be established through analysis of individual records. This ruling demonstrates the difficulties faced by employees who want to use the collective power granted by Class Action suits to redress illegal corporate policies that are often “off the books” and unofficial company culture.

According to court documents, “Plaintiff’s position is that common questions predominate because the main issue is whether…Joe’s Crab Shack restaurants in California followed a common unwritten policy of denying meal and rest breaks, failing to pay employees who did not take breaks, failing to pay for overtime, requiring employees to purchase their own uniforms, and so forth.”  Lawyers for the employees argued that they could establish a pattern of abuse through analysis of the restaurant’s Aloha computer system.

The Court responded that establishing this and other wrongs would emerge from individualized inquiries, thus the “only way of showing the ‘practice’ that plaintiff claims existed in California restaurants would be to determine how when and how it was applied in each instance.”

Like many systematic infractions on labor rights, the practice of discouraging or outright prohibiting meal breaks was not written into official company policy.  As such, proving that such abuses were institutional can be difficult. As the court notes, Plaintiff “must show that the employer impeded, discouraged, or prohibited him from taking a proper break.”

Examination of employee time cards clearly show a pattern of “breakless” shifts. The Court’s view is that it might have been an employee’s choice not to take a meal break. It is an interesting position: after all, how many workers routinely reject the chance to take a break and consume a meal during a long, physically demanding shift?  On the other hand, food workers are primarily dependent on tips, and time not spent on the floor waiting tables is viewed as lost money.  How does one determine collective intentions across a class?

In any event, the Court’s reasoning for declining to certify the class invites questions about the nature of Class Action in general.  If one cannot establish a pattern of institutional abuse through analyzing a trend that emerges through individual experience…then how does one construct a pattern at all?  All Classes are composed of individuals who suffered common wrongs.  Further, it is often only the collective power of a Class that can confront the combined legal might of a large corporation.

The California Court’s refusal to certify may signal a shift in the willingness of Courts to side with Workers against their Employers in the case of Class Actions.

Employees In Washington and Seattle who believe they are subject to unfair labor practices should contact an expert Labor & Industries Lawyer.  Denying basic access to meal and rest breaks and withholding pay are serious violations of Labor Laws and Workers should not be intimidated when securing their basic rights as workers. An experienced Washington L & I Attorney is waiting to speak to you.

Historically, New Jersey’s maximum workers’ compensation has increased by modest increments on a yearly basis. The decrease slated for 2011 indicates a significant faltering of the state’s economy.  And while there will be a decline in scheduled disability rates, skyrocketing medical costs will continue to go uncapped.  The financial consequences of that disparity remain unclear in a period of declining payrolls and smaller premium collections on workers’ compensation benefits.
2011’s maximum workers’ compensation benefits for temporary disability, permanent partial disability and permanent total disability rates are based upon the States’s Average Weekly Wage (SAWW) for the prior year. Currently, New Jersey allows a maximum benefit of 75 percent of the state’s average weekly wage.

Maximum workers’ compensation benefit rates in New Jersey have been regarded as rather low in relation to other states in the U.S., and many workers’ compensation attorneys and workers’ rights advocates have purchased for a higher adjustment.

The new payment schedules will apply to workers who suffer on the job injuries and deaths in 2011.

In a conference announcing the proposed penalties, Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis stated that “Accurate workplace injury and illness records are vital tools for identifying hazards and protecting workers’ health and safety. Workers and employers need this information to recognize patterns of injuries and illnesses, and prevent future hazards.”

OSHA’s investigation of Goodman Manufacturing began in March 2010 after the agency received a series of complaints that Goodman had violated OSHA’s regulations by systematically failing to properly document workplace injuries and occupational illnesses. The investigation determined that from January 2008 to March 2010, the company had inaccurately recorded—or simply declined to document altogether—nearly 75 percent of employee injuries and illnesses on its premises.

Workers and regulators have commented that Goodman is highly knowledgeable of OSHA’s recordkeeping procedures, but nevertheless persisted in the decisions and actions resulting in the alleged violations.  Critical information pertaining to the degree and duration of its workers’ injuries and illnesses have been inaccurately documented, including the duration of their time off the job.  Such figures are vital to properly handling and treating injured workers in a workers’ compensation claim.

As OSHA’s Assistant Secretary of Labor, Dr. David Michaels explains, “OSHA takes these violations extremely seriously. We need accurate data to effectively target inspections and resources, and to measure the impact of OSHA’s actions on workplace safety. Employers and workers need to understand how important accurate data are to workplace safety and health.”

According to OSHA regulations, the definition of a willful violation is one that is committed with gross indifference to or intentional neglect for a worker’s safety and health.
Goodman Manufacturing was given 15 business days after the citations were issued to comply with OSHA’s protocol and request a consultation with the agency’s Houston director.  Goodman can also contest the citations with the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

OSHA recently implemented a National Emphasis Program on Recordkeeping to evaluate the accuracy of employer documentation of worker injury and illness.

All workers are urged to immediately report accidents, fatalities or dangerous workplace conditions to OSHA’s toll-free hotline at 800-321-6742. 
 Injured workers should also consult a Washington Workers’ Compensation Lawyer at Emery Reddy.

Washington Labor and Industries is in the process of overhauling its website, www.lni.wa.gov. The revisions to the Washington L&I website are the result of user feedback collected over a significant period of time, as well as the efforts of L&I website designers. The new look improves the homepage, streamlines navigation and uses space more efficiently.

The new Washington L&I homepage, the content of which provides details on injured workers’ employment and workers’ compensation rights, provides better visuals and a more welcoming portal to the rest of the L&I site. Online services like the Claim and Account Center simplify the search for injured workers’ rights and remedies, workers’ compensation information, and specific claim information.

Streamlined navigation was a major focus of the L&I site revisions, and the result is a menu that includes headings for Safety, Claims and Insurance, Workplace Rights, and Trades and Licensing. These headings are continuously available. The new L&I site also restricts views to exactly what workers need, eliminating the confusing overload of unnecessary information. An injured worker pursuing a claim will find it easier to review his or her workers’ compensation and Washington L&I rights, understand workers’ comp injury data and statistics, verify workers’ comp coverage, and complete insurance forms. These changes promise to ease the burden on workers who depend on this web tool for information about injury claims.

The new L&I website also makes the most of its available space by consistently packaging information into succinct titles and removing duplication of information, such as contact information and Spanish translation for non-ESL workers.

Of the many revisions to the L&I site, one of the most effective is a new tool that permits a site user (commonly a worker with an L&I covered injury) to maintain a set of links packaged specifically for that worker. For example, a worker who suffered a back injury on the job could build links and bookmarks about necessary claim information, PPD awards related specifically to his or her injury, relevant contact information, and crucial information the worker would need if he or she found it necessary to appeal a claim with the Washington Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals. These links would remain consistently available regardless of the user’s navigation to other locations on the site. A review of the new site is available at http://www.lni.wa.gov/refresh.

Previously, an injured worker in need of advice might navigate the L&I website without access to important links that remained buried in inconspicuous locations. New content and links refer an injured worker directly to information about pursuing claims or appeals for his or her injury.

For more information, please visit Emery Reddy, PLLC online, or contact us via telephone at (206) 442-9106.

Emery Reddy represents plaintiffs in L&I, employment law and personal injury matters.  The firm and its attorneys are trusted advocates for Washington workers who experience job related injuries.