Tag Archive for Washington Workers

Tucson Tragedy Highlights Workers’ Comp Issues

The tragic shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, members of her staff, and several constituents in Tucson last month has highlighted many issues confronting our country today: questions of gun control, the level of vitriol in political discourse, and, interestingly, many questions of public health services and workers’ compensation.

It is well known that the suspect in the shooting, Jared Lee Loughner, suffered from various mental health issues and many sources in the Arizona Mental Health community commented that he might have received help had he sought it.  While this can never be known, his mental illness has prompted several discussions about the many cuts proposed to health care budgets as states tighten their belts across the country.

The flip side of this issue of access to health care is the fact that Representative Gabrielle Giffords was injured while on the job and her closely scrutinized recovery could be the result of Federal workers’ compensation.

According to Rebecca Shafer, President of Amaxx Risks Solutions, “As Congresswoman Giffords and the members of her staff are federal employees, and as they were at an official function for Congresswoman Giffords, she and her staff would be covered for workers compensation by the U.S. Department of Labors Office of Workers Compensation Programs, which administers the Division of Federal Employees Compensation.”  Shafer notes this kind of workers’ compensation is known as FECA – Federal Employees’ Compensation Act.

The next step in Giffords’ recovery will be a lengthy rehabilitation process. On January 21 she was transferred to the Memorial Hermann Medical Center in Houston, Texas and then moved to the Institute for Rehabilitation and Research.   Many experts have assured the public that she is receiving the absolute best care possible for someone with her severe neurological injuries.

The Federal Workers’ Compensation that covers Giffords and her staff is often singled out as a kind of “gold standard” by which other workers’ compensation programs are measured. Still, even Federal workers’ compensation benefits are under greater scrutiny in the current fiscal climate.

Joe Davidson writes in the Washington Post that Senator Susan M. Collins wants “the Government Accountability Office to study the program that provides income to injured federal workers.” Collins argues elderly workers who have no intention of returning to work continue to collect workers’ compensation benefits at taxpayer’s expense.

As Representative Giffords continues to recover under the best medical care available and with the well wishes of the Nation, it seems important to reflect on how her recovery stands in relation to the thousands of other injured workers who struggle to receive the same benefits guaranteed to them under the law.  As states continue to slash entitlement budgets, workers injured in preventable workplace incidents will need to find workers’ compensation attorneys who are abreast of the rapidly changing landscape of workers’ compensation law.  Injured workers should consult a Washington Worker’s Compensation Lawyer at Emery Reddy.

NJ Workers’ Compensation Benefits to Decrease in 2011

For the first time in state history, workers’ compensation benefit rates in New Jersey will be decreasing. In the coming year, the highest benefits will fall from $794 to $792 per week, a 0.3% decrease.  This may be compared to 2007, when rates increased 2.7 %.

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.

Worker Files $16 Million Lawsuit For Injuries in Construction Accident

The lone survivor of a Toronto construction accident from December of 2009 has reportedly filed a $16.3 million suit under the Occupational Health and Safety Act against Metron Construction of Toronto and Swing N Scaff of Ottawa.  The worker is seeking damages from an incident that occurred last Christmas Eve, when a scaffolding structure broke and killed four men. The suit follows 61 charges by the Canadian Ministry of Labor against the same two companies and a number of their officials.

According to the Globe and Mail, the lawsuit is being filed by Dilshod Marupov, a 22-year-old worker from Uzbekistan who was repairing balconies on a Toronto apartment building when the scaffolding he was using snapped in half, causing him to fall 13 stories to the ground. Both of Marupov’s legs were crushed and his spine was broken, forcing him to stay in the hospital for several months. All other workers who fell from the scaffolding were killed.

Charges filed against Metron Construction of Toronto and Swing N Scaff of Ottawa include failure to ensure that workers were provided with proper devices to protect them from falling, and failure to make certain that the work platform was not overloaded.  “We are suing them because we think they have a duty that they didn’t exercise properly,” said Marupov’s lawyer, William Friedman.

Unfortunately, such workplace accidents are common in Washington as well.  While OSHA reports a declining trend in deaths from workplace accidents, workplace injuries remain at unacceptably high levels.  If you have been seriously injured in a workplace accident, contact a Washington workers’ compensation attorney to help you recover damages including medical costs, lost wages and compensation for pain and suffering.

I-1082 Opens Workers’ Compensation to Private Insurers

In mid-July, an initiative qualified for the November ballot that could have far-reaching effects for Washington workers, employers and taxpayers.  I-1082, which would effectively privatize the current state-run workers’ compensation program, is backed by the insurance industry and a conservative trade group called the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW).  If the initiative passes, these two groups will reap enormous benefits.

I-1082 would allow private insurers to offer workers’ compensation coverage in competition with the current public system, giving yet another lucrative handout to the taxpayer-bailed-out insurance industry.  After receiving billions of taxpayer dollars over the past few years, firms like AIG (the world’s largest workers’ compensation insurer) are now attempting to undermine Washington’s non-profit public system — a system that “is statutorily required to keep costs down,” says Nicholas Corning, former President of the Washington State Association for Justice. If the private insurance industry is successful, I-1082 will leave Washington businesses “to deal with out-of-state corporations [who are] only concerned about siphoning profits into their Wall Street war chests.”  And state employers can expect a costly outcome from this transfer; as Corning points out, the existing state-run workers’ compensation program, L&I, operates with only 18% administrative costs; the private industry average, on the other hand, is 68%.

Opposition to I-1082

Small business owners and community leaders feel that privatization would prove highly unfavorable to businesses, employees and taxpayers, and have organized opposition groups to I-1082.  The campaign No on I-1082 maintains that the highest priority of our existing public system is to ensure that injured workers receive the medical care and job retraining they need.  For-profit insurers are not likely to share this priority.  According to the opposition group’s communications director, Adrianne Williams, “Handing our public, non-profit system over to the private insurance industry is mostly [designed] to generate profits for the industry and less about getting injured workers back to work.”  Other prominent groups opposing I-1082 include the Washington State Labor Council AFL-CIO, the Washington State Association for Justice, and Democratic Underground,

Many Washington businesses are also concerned about the higher insurance premiums they can expect if 1082 passes.  Alex Fryer, the spokesman of “No on I-1082,” argues that private insurance companies will end up “cherry-picking businesses that have low claims, forcing the remaining higher-risk businesses to pay higher premiums under the state plan.”  To underscore the consequences of moving away from a non-profit workers’ compensation plan, he cites figures on states that have adopted a private insurance option, some of which experienced a 200 percent premium increase.

In addition, I-1082 proposes to abolish the existing state mandate requiring employees to pay a portion of the state’s premium costs, shifting the entire financial burden to employers.  Analysts predict that this would cause small business owners’ annual costs to go up by 25 percent.

I-1082 would have an unfavorable outcome for workers as well, eliminating any transparency from the claims management process.  Under the present Washington State workers’ compensation system, L&I is required to come to a final decision regarding treatment of a worker’s injury or illness, and must notify all parties of that decision.  If L&I does not comply with these obligations, it can be compelled to do so by a writ of mandamus.  But I-1082 includes a provision stating that insurers do not have to notify anyone if a claim is rejected; in fact, the workers’ compensation insurer would never have to come to a decision on an injury claim at all.  This puts the insurance companies at a tremendous advantage, allowing them to protect their profit margins by denying or delaying claims indefinitely, without ever facing the threat of enforcement.  Not only would this potentially prevent workers from returning to their jobs; it would also make it extremely difficult for employers to verify whether an employee is able to work.

Critics of the initiative are also alarmed that I-1082 would leave the insurance industry unregulated and free of L&I oversight.  Private insurers would be allowed to set their own rates with no approval from the Washington State Insurance Commissioner. Equally troubling is the fact that I-1082 would abolish the Insurance Guaranty Act, leaving Washington businesses and employees vulnerable to insurer insolvency.  Currently, all lines of private insurance in the state are protected against fraud or bankruptcy by the Insurance Guaranty Act.  But with that regulation removed, an insurance company could collect workers’ compensation premiums and then fail to pay benefits due to insolvency.  Because of these reasons, Washington Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler and State Auditor Brian Sonntag both oppose I-1082.

Ultimately, I-1082 would establish an unregulated and largely independent playing field for private insurers to reap profits by squeezing Washington businesses and undermining worker safety.  Before voters cast their ballots in November, they should be aware that I-1082’s success would be a huge win for special interests, and a loss for the wellbeing of small businesses and injured workers.

Read more about I-1082: