Category Archives: Government

Dirty Tricks Lead To Reduced Benefits In Cuomo’s New Budget

Governor Cuomo signed a new budget this week. While many extolled his progressive agenda that included free college tuition for the middle class, renewing the millionaire’s tax, and giving a tax break on dues for union members, he also quietly and without much fanfare in the news media, struck a huge blow to injured workers. 

Unfortunately for those members of our society who no longer are able to work as a result of an injury, or sustained a life altering injury while on the job, their benefits became part of a horse-trade in Albany much to their detriment. Governor Cuomo, anxious to get his big publicity items in the budget in case he seeks higher office, seems to have used Workers’ Compensation as a bargaining chip. 

The Business Council circulated fake facts blaming injured workers’ benefits for the high cost of doing business in the state, when in reality employer costs nationwide for Workers’ Compensation are at their lowest levels in 35 years.  Locally, Workers’ Compensation costs in New York have declined dramatically as well; compensation is only a small portion of employer costs and is extremely profitable for insurers. The Business Council seems to have a number of members with strong ties to the insurance industry, which makes their position even further suspect.

In 2007, the Council was successful in lobbying to obtain caps on indemnity benefits and has now continued its assault so that the prior limit on weekly benefits will be further reduced. When caps were first put into place, they did not go into effect until judges determined that injured workers had reached maximum medical improvement and that their conditions could be classified as permanent. This new provision automatically starts the cap after 2½ years, regardless of a person’s abilities or condition, or whether or not he will ever be able to work again or find work that meets medical restrictions. It is up to the injured worker to show that he has not reached maximum medical treatment that the carrier can refute.  

The Business Council has continued its attack by alleging that permanent loss-of-use awards were unfair to the employer. They argue that the prior guidelines were outdated and did not take into consideration new advances in medicine. Again, fake facts! The guidelines are based on range of motion and loss of function after all modalities are exhausted, including new advances in medicine available. As a result, the new law directs the Board to “consult” with a group stacked with pro business and insurance interests, but no representatives of injured workers to “review” the current guidelines with the ultimate goal of reducing benefits. The fact that workers who have permanent life-altering injuries to their arms, legs, hands, feet, fingers, and toes have absolutely no say is extremely distressing.

When does this eroding away of Workers’ Compensation benefits end? Two years ago, ProPublica published a series of articles entitled “The Demolition of Workers’ Comp”.  They documented the cutbacks made in many states with disastrous consequences. Their report noted that since 2003, 33 states passed Workers’ Compensation laws that reduce benefits or make it more difficult to obtain benefits. New York is part of that list, having enacted laws not once, but twice, since then.

Many believe that reducing benefits to injured workers will force them back to work. Studies have shown that this is another myth perpetuated by the falsehood that injured workers are frauds. What happens in reality is that many injured workers are unable to work and are forced into poverty or have to collect alternate benefits. Social Security Disability benefits, which are paid by the American taxpayers, are generally offset by Workers’ Compensation benefits. Without Workers’ Compensation payable by the insurance carrier, the burden on the taxpayer is larger. Rather than the Workers’ Compensation insurance carrier paying for medical treatment, it is put through Medicare. This is known as cost shifting and it affects all of us, as we are the ones who end up paying – and paying dearly.

 

Catherine M. Stanton is a senior partner in the law firm of Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano, LLP. She focuses on the area of Workers’ Compensation, having helped thousands of injured workers navigate a highly complex system and obtain all the benefits to which they were entitled. Ms. Stanton has been honored as a New York Super Lawyer, is the past president of the New York Workers’ Compensation Bar Association, the immediate past president of the Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy Group, and is an officer in several organizations dedicated to injured workers and their families. She can be reached at 800.692.3717.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Proposed Legislation Threatens To Eliminate 100 Years Of Progress

More than a century ago, 146 garment workers, mostly women, died when a raging fire trapped them behind doors that were locked by their employer to prevent perceived theft. They died of smoke inhalation or falls while trying to flee the fire, or were burned alive because they were unable to get out.  In order to save money and increase profits, their employer had previously refused to install sprinkler systems and provide working fire equipment. Despite clear fault on their part, the employers were cleared of any wrongdoing in what is known as the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire in 1911.

Protracted lawsuits filed against them by the families of the dead were eventually settled for $75 per life lost. While this tragedy temporarily outraged the public and forced public officials to improve worker safety, which was the impetus for Workers’ Compensation legislation, years later workers are still getting injured, maimed, and killed and are not at all compensated adequately for their injuries.

I recently read a story in the New York Post about an incident that took place 10 years after the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire about young women who were hired to paint watch dial numerals and hands with radium.  At the time, these young ladies were unaware of the dangers of radium, which is highly radioactive with exposure that can result in cancer and other illnesses, as well as death. The women would dip their paint brushes in the radium and then paint the watches. Since the brushes needed to have a fine point, they would put the tip of the paint brush in their mouths. They were never informed of the dangerous nature of their work. 

It appears that at least some, if not all, of the managers and owners of the factory knew of the dangers, but almost nothing was done to discourage the practice as it would have slowed down the work and thus reduced profits. Within a number of years, many of these women became quite ill and died torturous deaths. There was very little investigation by the Department of Labor, which was pro- business and worker safety was low on their list of priorities. Once the dying women learned that they had been poisoned by the radium, a law suit was filed. Despite the fact that the women’s skin was perpetually glowing, the company fought against the claim for years hoping they would die before they could testify, but eventually agreeing to a meager monetary settlement. 

Both tragic stories are similar in that worker safety was very much ignored in favor of profits. The hope for monetary compensation was pretty much a David and Goliath battle with big business and insurance companies pitted against the sick and injured. Neither was a fair fight.

Here we are, 100 years later and still fighting a battle against greed. Once again, big business in the form of the Business Council is using its vast resources to try to get Albany to again reduce the benefits given to injured workers in this state. Those people who now are unable to obtain adequate wage replacement or medical treatment, whose lives are uprooted, or have lost their homes and their hope for a healthy future are engaged in a battle that they are financially, physically, and emotionally unable to fight alone. 

You can help by contacting your State Senator and Assemblymember to vote against any bill that would reduce benefits to injured workers. Injured workers include those who have built your towns and cities, who have watched your children, who have served you at restaurants, and who have taken care of your sick. They are your family, your friends, and your neighbors – and they need you to help them battle Goliath. 

 

Catherine M. Stanton is a senior partner in the law firm of Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano, LLP. She focuses on the area of Workers’ Compensation, having helped thousands of injured workers navigate a highly complex system and obtain all the benefits to which they were entitled. Ms. Stanton has been honored as a New York Super Lawyer, is the past president of the New York Workers’ Compensation Bar Association, the immediate past president of the Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy Group, and is an officer in several organizations dedicated to injured workers and their families. She can be reached at 800.692.3717.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Removing The Safety Net: A National Trend Of Benefit Reductions For Injured Workers

Benefits for injured workers continue to be under attack throughout the country. In New York, there have been a number of changes in the last decade, all in the name of reform. These reforms were encouraging at first as they increased the weekly benefits for some higher wage-earning injured workers for the first time in decades. They also created medical treatment guidelines under the guise of allowing injured workers to obtain pre-approval on certain medical treatments and procedures. 

Unfortunately, the changes also resulted in reduction of benefits for many injured workers. Monetary benefits were capped, so injured workers deemed partially disabled could only receive a certain number of weeks of benefits regardless of their ability to return to their pre-injury jobs. The determination of the degree of disability has become a battle involving multiple, lengthy depositions of medical witnesses where the outcome is how long injured workers get wage replacement or whether they receive lifetime benefits. The criteria is not whether injured workers can return to their prior employment, but whether they are capable of performing any work at all, regardless of their past job experience or education. The battle is not limited to the amount of weeks of benefits injured workers can receive, however. The medical treatment guidelines, touted as getting injured workers prompt medical treatment, discounts the fact that if the requested treatment is not listed within the guidelines, it is denied and the burden is placed upon injured workers and their treating doctors to prove the requested treatment is necessary.

Other changes designed to cut administrative costs and court personnel include reducing the number of hearings held, thereby denying injured workers due process. There also has been a reduction in the number of presiding judges, and in many hearing locations the judges are not even at the site but are conducting hearings through video conferencing. At the end of October, the Board announced a new procedure authorizing the insurance carrier to request a hearing on whether injured workers should be weaned off of opioids that are used by many medical providers to treat chronic pain. While everyone would agree that the misuse of prescription pain medication is an epidemic in this country, many question whether the insurance industry really has the injured workers’ best interest at heart.    

As an attorney who has represented injured workers for more than 26 years, I have seen many workers successfully transition from injured worker back into the labor market. It is very encouraging to note that for many people the system has worked. They receive their treatment, which may involve physical therapy, surgery, pain management, prescription therapy, or whatever else their treating physician recommends. They are paid a portion of their prior income and after a period of convalescence, they are able to return to work. Some injured workers, however, are not so lucky. The decisions about what happens to those unable to work have been left to those who seem to care more about business and insurance industry profits. 

Just about one year ago, 14 people were killed and 22 more injured when ISIS-inspired terrorists went on a shooting rampage in San Bernardino, California. The nation and the world were horrified to hear about this tragedy and the story was in the news for many weeks. Now a year has gone by and many of the survivors have complained about treatment being denied and prescription medication being cut off.  While many injuries happen quietly without the headlines seen in the California attack, there are many similarities. It seems that when an initial injury occurs, there are many good protections and benefits in place. However, as time goes on and costs increase, injured workers are looked upon as enemies to defeat or to forget about. Unfortunately for injured workers and their families, they don’t have this luxury and they don’t have the means to fight.

Most people don’t think it will ever happen to them. That is what most of my clients have thought as well.

 

Catherine M. Stanton is a senior partner in the law firm of Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano, LLP. She focuses on the area of Workers’ Compensation, having helped thousands of injured workers navigate a highly complex system and obtain all the benefits to which they were entitled. Ms. Stanton has been honored as a New York Super Lawyer, is the past president of the New York Workers’ Compensation Bar Association, the immediate past president of the Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy Group, and is an officer in several organizations dedicated to injured workers and their families. She can be reached at 800.692.3717. 

 

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

A Dismantling of the Grand Bargain That Created Workers’ Compensation

This week marks the official start of the holiday season. It is a time for family and loved ones, and a time to reflect on the blessings that we have received in our lives. This week marks the countdown to a number of holidays including Christmas, Hanukah and Kwanzaa. Unfortunately for some people, however, the holiday season is fraught with anxiety, depression, illness and injury. Many people who sustain work-related injuries find that without their weekly salary, the holidays are a stark reminder of how their lives have changed dramatically. The inability to provide for even the basic necessities, let alone splurge on holiday presents, is a prescription for depression.

The Grand Bargain Premise of Workers’ Compensation laws in this country is that the employer, through their insurance carrier, is responsible to pay for injured workers’ medical treatment, lost wages, and permanent disability in exchange for injured workers giving up their rights to sue their employers for negligence. During the last couple of decades, Workers’ Compensation benefits have been under the continuous scrutiny of the Business Council, which has been alleging that the cost of benefits to injured workers is at the root of their increase in costs and reduction in profits.

However, a report from the National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI) indicates otherwise. Benefits as a percent of payroll declined in 46 states between 2010 and 2014, continuing a national trend in lower benefits relative to payroll that began in the 1990s. Costs to employers, on the other hand, continue to climb. Between 2010 and 2014, employer costs associated with Workers’ Compensation – such as insurance premiums, reimbursement payments, and administrative costs – grew at a rate nearly five times faster than benefits. Instead of using employers’ money to provide benefits for injured workers, insurance companies pay a host of businesses, including insurance medical examiners, nurse case managers, vocational rehabilitation companies and defense counsel, all of which profit from the system at the expense of workers and reap record profits for themselves. Meanwhile, the insurance industry and the Business Council falsely blame the claims of disabled workers so they can continue to increase profits by slashing benefits and shifting costs to taxpayer-funded programs instead of employer-paid insurance.

Benefits in New York have decreased under the current Workers’ Compensation system. The changes in the law in 2007 allowed higher wage earners to benefit in the short term as the amount of their weekly benefits has increased. However, these benefits are only available for a fixed period of time. If injured workers are able to return to work after a short period of lost time and a limited period of medical treatment, then some may say the system is a success. Unfortunately for many severely-injured high and low wage earners, the Grand Bargain wasn’t so grand. Medical providers’ hands are tied by Medical Treatment guidelines that limit the amount of treatment authorized based upon “best practices” or cookie cutter treatment, as opposed to what is recommended by the treating doctor. Now there is the prospect of limiting prescription medications as well, all in the name of cost reduction.

The reduction of medical treatment based on the treatment guidelines to injured workers should not imply they are fully recovered. Also, they don’t all return to work once they reach their indemnity cap. The cost of providing monetary benefits and medical treatment are shifted to the taxpayers to pick up the tab. Injured workers don’t expect that the very act of working will forever alter their lives in a negative way. Workers’ Compensation benefits are not a charitable donation, but an entitlement based upon a compromise between workers and their employers. Unfortunately, it is clear that these benefits have been gradually eroded. We should not allow any legislation that further erodes these benefits. While the holidays will continue to bring depression and despair for some injured workers, it should not be as a result of our treatment of them afterward.

 

Catherine M. Stanton is a senior partner in the law firm of Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano, LLP. She focuses on the area of Workers’ Compensation, having helped thousands of injured workers navigate a highly complex system and obtain all the benefits to which they were entitled. Ms. Stanton has been honored as a New York Super Lawyer, is the past president of the New York Workers’ Compensation Bar Association, the immediate past president of the Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy Group, and is an officer in several organizations dedicated to injured workers and their families. She can be reached at 800.692.3717.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Labor Report Urges Study Of A Federal Role In State Workers’ Comp Laws

Howard Berkes and Michael Grabell have been investigating the decline of workers compensation for Pro Publica and NPR.

Howard Berkes and Michael Grabell have been shining a light on the deterioration of state workers’ compensation benefits over the last decade. A new U.S. Department of Labor report bolsters their investigative journalism, noting that those hurt on the job are at “great risk of falling into poverty” because state workers’ compensation systems are failing to provide them with adequate benefits.

The Workers Injury Litigation Group (WILG) has been fighting against this decline for 20 years, and we will continue to advocate for fair benefits for injured workers. The following is a summary of Mr. Berkes and Grabell’s recent article:

A “race to the bottom” in state workers’ compensation laws has the Labor Department calling for “exploration” of federal oversight and federal minimum benefits.

“Working people are at great risk of falling into poverty,” the agency says in a new report on changes in state workers’ comp laws. Those changes have resulted in “the failure of state workers’ compensation systems to provide [injured workers] with adequate benefits.”

In the last decade, the report notes, states across the country have enacted new laws, policies and procedures “which have limited benefits, reduced the likelihood of successful application for workers’ compensation benefits, and/or discouraged injured workers from applying for benefits.”

The 44-page report was prompted by a letter last fall from 10 prominent Democratic lawmakers, who urged Labor Department action to protect injured workers in the wake of a ProPublica/NPR series on changes in workers’ comp laws in 33 states.

The ProPublica/NPR stories featured injured workers who lost their homes, were denied surgeries or were even denied prosthetic devices recommended by their doctors.

A “race to the bottom” in state workers’ compensation laws has the Labor Department calling for “exploration” of federal oversight and federal minimum benefits.

“Working people are at great risk of falling into poverty,” the agency says in a new report on changes in state workers’ comp laws. Those changes have resulted in “the failure of state workers’ compensation systems to provide [injured workers] with adequate benefits.”

In the last decade, the report notes, states across the country have enacted new laws, policies and procedures “which have limited benefits, reduced the likelihood of successful application for workers’ compensation benefits, and/or discouraged injured workers from applying for benefits.”

The 44-page report was prompted by a letter last fall from 10 prominent Democratic lawmakers, who urged Labor Department action to protect injured workers in the wake of a ProPublica/NPR series on changes in workers’ comp laws in 33 states.

The ProPublica/NPR stories featured injured workers who lost their homes, were denied surgeries or were even denied prosthetic devices recommended by their doctors.

“The current situation warrants a significant change in approach in order to address the inadequacies of the system,” the report says.

That’s where federal intervention comes in. The Labor Department calls for “exploration” of “the establishment of standards that would trigger increased federal oversight if workers’ compensation programs fail to meet those standards.”

The agency also suggests a fresh look at reestablishing a 1972 Nixon administration commission that recommended minimum benefits and urged Congress to act if states failed to comply.

“In this critical area of the social safety net, the federal government has basically abdicated any responsibility,” says Labor Secretary Thomas Perez.

Without minimum federal standards for workers’ comp benefits, Perez adds, the current system “is really putting workers who are hurt on the job on a pathway to poverty.”

Prior to the report’s release, employers, insurance companies and others involved in workers’ comp programs expressed alarm at the possibility of federal intervention.

“There has never been federal ‘oversight of state workers’ compensation programs’,” says a statement posted on the website of a group called Strategic Services on Unemployment and Workers’ Compensation, which says it represents the workers’ comp interests of the business community.

“Federal requirements imposed on a national basis would be inconsistent with the state workers’ compensation system, which has been in place for more than 100 years without federal oversight,” the group wrote.

Federal minimum benefits could ensure that injured workers across the country would not receive lesser benefits for often shorter periods of time simply because they lived in a state where lawmakers dramatically cut workers’ comp costs for employers.

“This is a system with no federal minimum standards and absolutely no federal oversight,” says Deborah Berkowitz, a senior fellow at the National Employment Law Project. “Clearly, more federal oversight is necessary to assure that that this system works for those most in need of assistance.”

No direct administrative or legislative action is proposed in the report, but Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, says he’s “drafting legislation to address many of the troubling findings laid out in this report and will be working with my colleagues to advance it in the next Congress.” 

Brown echoes Perez, saying injuries on the job shouldn’t force workers into poverty.

“But without a basic standard for workers compensation programs, that’s exactly what’s happening in too many states across the country,” Brown adds. 

Another incentive for federal involvement, the report notes, is a shift of billions of dollars in workplace injury costs to taxpayers when state workers’ comp benefits fall short and workers are forced to turn to Medicare and Social Security for treatment and lost wages.

The report lays the groundwork for federal intervention by providing an extensive section detailing the government’s role in promoting national benefits standards in both Republican and Democratic administrations dating back to 1939.

But many in the workers’ comp world consider workplace injury policy and regulation a states’ right and any prospect of a controlling federal role will likely face stiff resistance.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Despite Majority Support, Albany Legislators Fail To Consider Lavern’s Law

Lavern Wilkinson’s family was barred from seeking justice because of an archaic law.

There was a recent lawsuit filed by a woman against a major coffee chain for injuries sustained when the lid came off of a coffee cup as it was being handed to her by the barista. According to the lawsuit, the woman sustained serious burns as a result and missed more than a month of work. The lawsuit was filed two years after the accident occurred and the injured woman maintained the only reason she pursued legal recourse was that the coffeehouse failed to respond to her repeated requests for payment of medical bills. The woman indicated she was very hesitant to file a law suit as she was opening herself up to ridicule. I was extremely saddened by her reaction, but understand her reluctance.

This case brings up a similar story from a number of years ago when another woman filed suit after she was injured by scalding hot coffee in a McDonalds drive thru when it spilled on her. This was the topic of conversation for many talking heads, citing it as the poster child for frivolous lawsuits that clog the court system and cost hard-working taxpayers billions of dollars every year. The lawsuit became fodder for countless comedians and an alarm for tort reform around the country. 

What was left out in the entire media blitz is the fact that the injured woman – Stella Liebeck – then 79 years old, asked McDonalds to pay for the medical bills totaling approximately $20,000, but they refused. It was only then that she filed the lawsuit, as she sustained third degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, skin grafts, and horrific scarring. McDonalds admitted they knew the coffee could not be consumed immediately as it was at a scalding temperature and had to cool down. The company also admitted it was aware that more than 700 people had sustained serious injuries in the 10 years prior to the Liebeck lawsuit. It appears their coffee was kept at such a high temperature in an effort to last longer. In this case, McDonalds made a conscious decision to put savings before consumers. 

The tort reform movement has been fabricating or exaggerating facts for years to push its agenda, with the legal profession being portrayed negatively on many occasions. As an attorney, I laugh along with others at the humorous lawyer jokes I hear. But putting aside that humor, I am proud to be an advocate for the injured. I have seen first hand what can happen as a result of the negligence of others.

Last week the New York State Legislature had an opportunity to rectify an unjust, archaic law by passing a bill known as Lavern’s Law, named after a woman who died of cancer three years after she had gone to the emergency room with a cough. The hospital performed an x-ray and sent her home, but never advised her that the x-ray showed a curable cancer growth. By the time she discovered the cancer was terminal, she could not seek justice because the time to file the suit had passed.

Lavern’s Law proposed to start the statute of limitations from the time a patient discovers the malpractice, rather than from the time the medical malpractice occurred. Unfortunately for many victims of malpractice, the bill never reached the floor for a vote despite overwhelming support by a majority of both the Assembly and Senate. Those who opposed this bill felt it would cause malpractice insurance to skyrocket and put many in the medical profession out of business.

The opposition misses the point. A tort in law is a civil wrong that unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who committed the act. It holds accountable the person who caused the injury. The current law for malpractice claims weakens incentives for hospitals and doctors to improve patient safety measures so these harmful incidents never happen in the first place. Lavern’s Law and other laws allowing citizens the right to jury trials actually result in a safer and healthier society.

Hopefully Lavern’s Law will be a continued topic of conversation when legislators return to Albany in January. Malpractice isn’t always discovered within what the current law considers a timely fashion. However, that doesn’t mean that injured people won’t suffer for the rest of their lives, or die, due to the negligence of others.

— 

Catherine M. Stanton is a senior partner in the law firm of Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano, LLP. She focuses on the area of Workers’ Compensation, having helped thousands of injured workers navigate a highly complex system and obtain all the benefits to which they were entitled. Ms. Stanton has been honored as a New York Super Lawyer, is the past president of the New York Workers’ Compensation Bar Association, the immediate past president of the Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy  Group, and is an officer in several organizations dedicated to injured workers and their families. She can be reached at 800.692.3717.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Give Injured People In New York The Time Necessary To File Medical Malpractice Claims

Lavern Wilkinson’s family was barred from seeking justice for her death due to the statue of limitations. (DEBBIE EGAN-CHIN/NEW YORK DAILY NEWS)

Almost two years ago, many of us were shocked and saddened when we heard Comedian Joan Rivers was critically injured during a medical procedure and was subsequently removed from life support. I had been lucky enough to see her perform live; she was so full of energy and had such an incredible presence. Although Ms. Rivers was 81 years old, she was actively performing at the time of her death and had a number of appearances scheduled. 

I just read that her family reached a settlement in their malpractice claim against the clinic that performed the procedure, ultimately leading to her death. It appears the clinic engaged in procedures not authorized by the comedian, and they were performed by physicians not licensed to perform them in the clinic setting. Most disturbing was that the medical personnel failed to properly identify her deteriorating condition during the procedure, which caused damage to her brain and heart when her oxygen levels decreased. The settlement is rumored to be in the tens of millions.

While Joan Rivers’ death was tragic, her family was able to secure their financial future as the current law in New York allows for a two-and-a-half-year statute of limitations from the date the medical malpractice occurred to file suit against private, nonprofit hospitals or doctors. That window, however, is just 15 months when suing a municipal hospital. In Joan Rivers’ case, it seemed obvious from the very beginning that her death occurred as a result of medical error and a lawsuit was commenced.

There are many others who have been prevented from seeking justice and monetary benefits as a result of medical malpractice because it was not discovered until after statute of limitations passed. One example of this was Lavern Wilkinson, a single mom with a severely handicapped daughter, who died in March 2013 from a curable form of lung cancer. Wilkinson had gone to the emergency room at Kings County Hospital in 2010 with a terrible cough. The staff performed an x-ray showing a suspicious mass, but the single mom was never notified of this and was sent home. When she returned to the hospital two years later, it was discovered that the cancer had spread and her condition was terminal. When she tried to sue the hospital to ensure financial security for her disabled child, she was advised that the current statute of limitations barred her from seeking damages against the hospital. Tragically, Lavern died in March 2013. Unfortunately, Lavern is not alone in this miscarriage of justice. There are so many more horrible examples of people who did not find out about the errors committed by medical personnel within the two-and-a-half-year years they have to file. New York is one of only six states that adhere to this archaic rule; 44 others allow for some sort of statute based upon the date of discovery of the malpractice.

There is currently a law pending in the New York State Legislature that would address this travesty. This bill would provide that the two-and-a-half-year statute of limitations begins when the patient knows or should have known an alleged negligent act caused injury. This bill was introduced more than a year ago and is still pending. It is known as Lavern’s Law – named after Lavern Wilkinson. Lavern’s death should not be in vain. Ask your State Legislator to support this law and give victims of medical malpractice the justice they deserve.

 

Catherine M. Stanton is a senior partner in the law firm of Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano, LLP. She focuses on the area of Workers’ Compensation, having helped thousands of injured workers navigate a highly complex system and obtain all the benefits to which they were entitled. Ms. Stanton has been honored as a New York Super Lawyer, is the past president of the New York Workers’ Compensation Bar Association, the immediate past president of the Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy Group, and is an officer in several organizations dedicated to injured workers and their families. She can be reached at 800.692.3717.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

On The Ground In Albany: Lobbying To Preserve Your Benefits

The New York State Capitol

For the last five years, lawyers practicing in the field of Workers’ Compensation have used their voices to educate our State Senators and Assembly members on issues impacting injured workers. In keeping with this strategy, last week I attended Lobby Day in Albany with 70 other colleagues, including 11 members from my law firm, and we met with more than 50 of our state leaders. There was an added sense of urgency this time as Governor Cuomo has proposed a number of changes in the budget that would adversely affect those who get injured on the job.

In past few weeks, I have written about these budget proposals as part of the continuing attacks on injured workers and the less-than-adequate benefits they currently receive. The proposed budget amendment would grossly and negatively impact the ability of an injured worker to get a full and fair settlement. The law currently directs the insurance carrier to deposit the present value of a settlement into a fund to ensure that this money is available in the future or in the alternative, to settle the claim with the injured worker. Many insurance carriers opt to pay the money to the injured worker instead of depositing it into a fund. Without the worry of this deposit, there is less of an incentive for the insurance company to settle a claim that could lead to lengthy and time-consuming litigation with the injured worker receiving minimal or no benefits until the law judge makes a decision.

One of the proposed measures would give the Workers’ Compensation Board the power to qualify doctors and to bar them from the system. This is unacceptable. Doctors should be regulated by other doctors instead of by bureaucrats.

Even more egregious are the attacks and restrictions on due process. Injured workers should be entitled to a fair and impartial hearing. The budget proposals would remove the right of injured workers to have their cases heard by the same judge. The ability to direct policy and decisions would open the door to potential abuse. Additionally, if injured workers wish to appeal a detrimental decision, the appeal would be decided by one individual as opposed to the current three-panel of commissioners. Current law provides for the appointment of commissioners by the governor with approval by the legislature, which provides for some checks and balances. The Workers’ Compensation Board would instead be given unchecked power to control the outcome of every decision.

The Business Counsel was in favor of many of these changes as it felt they would help decrease costs and increase profit margin. However, an analysis by the New York Compensation Insurance Rating Board (NYCIRB) of the expected financial impacts of the governor’s proposed reforms found no solid evidence that these changes would result in any meaningful cost savings. At this juncture, one has to wonder why these proposed changes are still being pursued by the governor. Anyone who has been injured on the job, or knows someone who has been injured, knows that it has become more and more difficult to navigate the process to obtain benefits. We do need reform, but it should be done to improve the lives of those injured at work. These proposals are certainly not in workers’ best interest. If you agree and want to know what you can do, please click here to sign the petition to stop the further erosion of workers’ compensation. We need to insure that those vulnerable members of our families, community, and state are not abandoned by their government for wrongly perceived cost- cutting measures.

 

Catherine M. Stanton is a senior partner in the law firm of Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano, LLP. She focuses on the area of Workers’ Compensation, having helped thousands of injured workers navigate a highly complex system and obtain all the benefits to which they were entitled. Ms. Stanton has been honored as a New York Super Lawyer, is the past president of the New York Workers’ Compensation Bar Association, the immediate past president of the Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy  Group, and is an officer in several organizations dedicated to injured workers and their families. She can be reached at 800.692.3717.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.