Author Archives: Catherine Stanton

Slow Recovery Affects Workers’ Compensation Benefits and Costs

Today’s post comes from guest author Kit Case from Causey Law Firm.

A Press Release by the National Academy of Social Insurance

 

WASHINGTON, DC – Workers’ compensation benefits declined to $57.5 billion in 2010 according to a report released today by the National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI). The drop in workers’ compensation benefits was largely due to a 2.1 percent drop in medical benefits for injured workers. Employers’ costs for workers’ compensation also fell by 2.7 percent in 2010. As a share of covered wages, employers’ costs in 2010 were the lowest in the last three decades.

 

“As a share of covered wages, employers’ costs in 2010 were the lowest in the last three decades.”

 

“Employers’ costs as a percent of payroll declined in 43 jurisdictions,” said John F. Burton, Jr., chair of the study panel that oversees the report. “This decline is probably due to the slow pace of the recovery, with many jurisdictions still experiencing relatively high unemployment rates.”

 

Workers’ Compensation Benefits, Coverage, and Costs, 2010

Total

2010

Change   Since 2009 (%)

Covered workers (in thousands)

124,454

-0.3%

Covered wages (in billions)

$5,820

2.6%

Benefits paid (in billions)

$57.5

-0.7%

Medical benefits

$28.1

-2.1%

Cash benefits

$29.5

0.7%

Employer costs (in billions)

$71.3

-2.7%

Per $100 of Covered Wages

2010

Change   Since 2009 ($)

Benefits paid

$0.99

-$0.03

Medical benefits

$0.48

-$0.03

Cash benefits

$0.51

-$0.01

Employers’ costs

$1.23

-$0.06

Source: National Academy of Social Insurance, 2012.

 

The new report, Workers’ Compensation: Benefits, Coverage and Costs, 2010, is the fifteenth in the series that provides the only comprehensive data on workers’ compensation benefits for the nation, the states, the District of Columbia, and federal programs. 

 

“This report represents the first time the Academy has released employers’ costs by state.”

  

This report represents the first time the Academy has released employers’ costs by state. For a table showing employers’ costs for all fifty states and the District of Columbia, refer to Table 12 (page 34).

Most states reported a decrease in the number of workers covered but an increase in covered wages between 2009 and 2010. During the same period, the total amount of benefits paid to injured workers declined in 26 jurisdictions and increased in 25. As a share of payroll, benefits paid to injured workers fell by three cents to $0.99 per $100 of payroll in the nation.

The share of medical benefits for workers’ compensation has increased substantially over the last 40 years. During the 1970s medical benefits nationally accounted for 30 percent of total benefits, whereas in 2010 the share of benefits paid for medical care was almost 50 percent. Experts attribute this trend to the rising cost of health care.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Why Overturning DOMA Is a Win for Employee Rights

Today’s post comes from guest author Jon Rehm from Rehm, Bennett & Moore.

Regardless of your opinion on the issue of gay rights, Wednesday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning the Defense of Marriage Act is a win for workplace fairness.

The constitutional authorization for most federal fair-employment laws is based on the guarantees of equal protection of the law based on the Fifth and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the right of Congress to regulate interstate commerce clause. In his opinion overturning DOMA, Justice Anthony Kennedy found that DOMA violated the Fifth and 14th Amendment rights of gays and lesbians. He reaffirmed the role of the Fifth and 14th Amendments in preventing discrimination.

Kennedy’s opinion is important because in last summer’s blockbuster Supreme Court decision upholding the Affordable Care Act, Chief Justice John Roberts undercut the interstate commerce clause as a justification for passing federal legislation. Conceivably, corporate opponents of workplace fairness laws could point to Roberts’ decision in the Affordable Care Act as a way to argue that federal workplace fairness laws are unconstitutional. However Wednesday’s decision in the DOMA case means that workplace fairness laws still have clear and strong constitutional support.

The DOMA decision is a bright spot in a Supreme Court session that has otherwise been pretty bleak for employees. My opinion is that as a result of recent Supreme Court decisions, more and more fair-employment cases will be brought in state court. The decision in DOMA is still relevant to state law discrimination and retaliation claims. Most states have equal protection clauses in their state constitutions. The reasoning supporting the DOMA decision supports state fair-employment statutes. I believe this is true even for fair employment claims based on retaliation. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg pointed out in her dissent in Nassar, retaliation is a form of discrimination. In other words, if you have been fired in retaliation for filing a workers’ compensation claim, your constitutional rights have been violated. If the Supreme Court had decided DOMA differently, employees would have a weaker argument that a retaliatory discharge violated their equal protection rights.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Diesel Fumes and Lung Cancer

Diesel Fumes Cause Lung Cancer

Today’s post comes from guest author Leonard Jernigan from The Jernigan Law Firm.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of death for men and women in the United States. It’s greater than breast and colon cancer in women and greater than prostate, colon, pancreatic and liver cancer in men. If diagnosed early there is a 70-80% survival rate for 5 years, and a low-dose CT scan of the chest can detect 60-70% of lung cancers at an early stage. Unfortunately, there has been no significant progress in the treatment of lung cancer in 40 years and between 10,000–20,000 occupational lung cancer deaths occur each year in the United States.

One area of concern is the relationship between diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer. In June of 2012 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified diesel engine exhaust as carcinogenic to humans, and studies of underground miners support that statement and also indicate that others who are around diesel fumes may be at an increased risk. Toxic chemicals in diesel gas are nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, benzene, PAHS (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), aldehydes and nitro-PAHS.

Railroad workers, miners, truck drivers, bus operators, longshoremen and others who have been heavily exposed to diesel fumes are obviously at greater risk than those with less exposures, but even minimal exposures may cause harm. In urban areas, like lower Manhattan, there is concern that diesel exposures may be a public health hazard and detection systems have been placed in areas to collect exposure data. As for workers who have experienced intense, short-term duration to diesel fumes, a chemical called 1-hydroxypyrene may be elevated in urine, but the test for this marker is not performed by most commercial laboratories. The Mount Sinai – Irving J. Selikoff Center for Occupational & Environmental Medicine is studying diesel exposure and may be a good resource for future information, as well as the National Clean Diesel Campaign: www.epa.gov/diesel.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Does the Media Comprehend the Tragedy of Mass Worker Death?

Shadows on the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire Memorial

Today’s post comes from guest author Jay Causey from Causey Law Firm.

On March 25, 1911 a fire broke out at the Triangle Shirtwaist factory in New York City.  In 18 minutes 146 garment workers, mostly young women, were dead.  The hideous circumstances of the tragedy – widely depicted by the media with front-page pictures of the corpses of women who had jumped from the building windows to avoid being burned to death – incited a wave of public revulsion that contributed to New York’s enactment of one of the nation’s first workers’ compensation statutes.  This occurred in the so-called “Progressive” era of American political history – now largely a distant memory – when within the next decade the majority of states followed suit.

One hundred years later, similar tragedies in the world-wide garment industry, which feeds U.S. corporations like WalMart, H&M, and Gap, occur with scant media attention other than the possible effect of such disasters on corporate business operations.  In November of 2012, 112 garment workers died in a fire at a Bangladeshi factory producing WalMart clothing. (A manager had reportedly closed an exit gate after the fire alarm sounded, telling workers nothing was wrong and to just keep working.)  In another Bangladeshi factory on January 26, 2013, a fire killed seven garment workers who could not escape due to a blocked exit.

Rather than expressing outrage over these circumstances, U.S. media, including the New York Times, characterized these incidents not as human tragedies, inexcusably occurring in the 21st century industrial world, but as “blows to the Bangladeshi garment industry.”  The fact is that with the globalization of that industry, these Bangladeshi workers are essentially “our” workers, making the clothes Americans wear, sold to us by U.S. corporate behemoths competing to do this at the lowest price possible they think will be acceptable to the American consumer.  The media is complicit in disconnecting these tragedies from our consciousness as intolerable – just as was the sense of our citizenry after Triangle – by focusing it’s reporting on the economic impact to the garment business and blandly parroting the boilerplate disclaimers of responsibility given them by the industry.

The garment corporations could easily afford to ensure their foreign contractors increase workers’ wages and institute workers’ safety measures with a minimal impact on the final price and their bottom line.

These incidents are almost never reported in a way that puts the question to the American consumer as to whether we’d pay a bit more per unit of clothing to ensure the safety of these workers rather than participate in the race to the lowest possible price.  Labor cost as a component of garment retail price is miniscule – one to two percent.  The garment corporations could easily afford to ensure their foreign contractors increase workers’ wages and institute workers’ safety measures with a minimal impact on the final price and their bottom line.

As it turns out, however, when plans were being developed in 2011 to improve fire safety at Bangladeshi factories, those efforts were quashed by WalMart and Gap, who determined that preventing worker deaths from fire would cost too much: “It is not financially feasible for the brands to make such investment.”

Don’t expect to hear much more about all this from the corporate media.

Source:  www.fair.org

Photo credit: Photo credit: Madison Guy / Foter.com / CC BY-NC-SA

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Making A Difference In Washington – The Medicare Secondary Payer and Workers’ Compensation Settlement Agreement Act

In addition to helping our clients receive the benefits they are entitled to through the courts and other adversarial means, we are prooud to work with our elected officials to produce legislation that will benefit working people. A few days ago, a bill we support, the Medicare Secondary Payer and Workers’ Compensation Settlement Agreement Act, was formally proposed. We encourage you to call and email your representatives and let them know that you support this law.

The press release with additional background follows:

 

Reps. Reichert and Thompson Introduce Bipartisan Medicare Secondary Payer and Workers’ Compensation Settlement Agreement Act

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Reps. Dave Reichert (R-WA) and Mike Thompson (D-CA) introduced the Medicare Secondary Payer and Workers’ Compensation Settlement Agreement Act, H.R. 1982 into the House of Representatives.

The legislation aims to protect injured workers whose workers’ compensation claims overlap with Medicare coverage. Far too often, these claims are subjected to lengthy and cumbersome reviews by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to determine appropriate set-aside amounts to pay for future medical costs in which Medicare may have an interest. The delays associated with this review place unfair burdens upon the injured party.

“This is a common-sense measure to ensure that hard-working Americans are not left in limbo because of inefficient bureaucratic procedures,” said Rep. Reichert. “Injured workers must have the confidence that their heath care claims will be processed in a fair and timely manner. By introducing this bill, Rep. Thompson and I aim to do just that: protect our hard-working citizens by making sure our systems serve them and their families.”

“The last thing injured workers should have to worry about is if needless bureaucracy is going to prevent their medical bills from being paid,” said Thompson. “This bill will make sure hard working families’ medical claims are processed efficiently and quickly, it will reduce bureaucratic headaches for businesses, and it will save taxpayers money. I will continue working with Congressman Reichert to get this bipartisan bill signed into law.”

Background

The Medicare Secondary Payer and Workers’ Compensation Settlement Agreements Act establishes clear and consistent standards for an administrative process that provides reasonable protections for injured workers and Medicare. It would benefit injured workers, employers and insurers by creating a system of certainty, and allows the settlement process to move forward while eliminating millions of dollars in administrative costs that harm workers, employers and insurers.

The legislation has widespread support from groups such as the American Insurance Association, the American Bar Association, the National Council of Self-Insurers, Property Casualty, Insurers Association of America, UWC-Strategic Services and the Workers Injury Law and Advocacy Group (WILG).

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

What Is Workers’ Memorial Day About?

Today, April 28th is the day that the unions of the AFL-CIO take action to make workplaces safer for both union and non union workers.  It has become known as Workers’ Memorial Day, a day of remembrance for the people who have lost their lives while on the job. These days it is hard to ignore the tragedies that confront workers internationally such as the recent building collapse in Bangladesh which killed hundreds of garment factory workers or those that occur in our own country – the young police officer killed while on duty by the alleged Boston Marathon Bombers or the first responders killed during the West, Texas fertilizer explosion when they ran to the danger. While these deaths were well publicized because of their notoriety, they represent only a small part of the story as there are thousands more killed each year which few of us hear about.  

According to Bureau of Labor Statistics, 4693 workers were killed on the job in 2011 up from the previously reported 4609. It will be months before a final tally is determined for 2012. 

“Every day in America, 13 people go to work and never come home. Every year in America, nearly 4 million people suffer a workplace injury from which some may never recover. These are preventable tragedies that disable our workers, devastate our families, and damage our economy. American workers are not looking for a handout or a free lunch. They are looking for a good day’s pay for a hard day’s work. They just want to go to work, provide for their families, and get home in one piece.”

– Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, Workers Memorial Day speech April 26, 2011

Let’s pause for a moment and remember those we represent – those who are maimed, injured and killed while performing workplace functions and pray that those injuries and deaths that are preventable will not be included in future statistics.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Report Your Injury Right Away

Today’s post comes from guest author Brody Ockander from Rehm, Bennett & Moore.

Truckers especially need to pay attention to this blog post. Most states require you to provide notice of your work injury to your employer as soon as is practicable. Failing to do so might prevent you from getting workers’ compensation benefits.

Because truckers are always on the go, sometimes they may not remember to report their injuries right away. Instead, maybe the trucker will simply finish the route and decide to get checked out later, completely forgetting to inform the employer. This can become a problem later and potentially could give your employer a reason to deny paying work comp benefits or paying for treatment for your work injury. Unfortunately, this is a fairly common mistake, as pointed out on one of the firm’s websites, www.truckerlawyers.com. 

The moral of the story is if you’re hurt, tell your employer immediately. Communicate via your Qualcomm, call in, radio, email, or do whatever it takes, even if you have to call from the doctor’s office. Even if your injury seems insignificant at first, you’ll still want to give your employer notice. You’ll be better off in the long run.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

From Hand to Mouth – Workers Need to Concerned About Chemical Safety

The inadvertent and dermal conceptual model

Today’s post comes from guest author from Jon Gelman, LLC – Attorney at Law.

A recently published a paper about the inadvertent ingestion of chemicals at work from contact between the mouth and contaminated hands or objects highlights how dangerous exposure could occur at work.  The inadvertent ingestion is a potentially significant source of occupational exposure, and there needs to be a greater focus on assessment of risks from hand-to-mouth contacts and more done to control such risks.

“The latest research is part of a project to develop a predictive model to estimate inadvertent ingestion exposure. To better understand this route of exposure, we developed a new integrated conceptual model for dermal and inadvertent ingestion. It consists of eight compartments (source, air, surface contaminant layer, outer clothing contaminant layer, inner clothing contaminant layer, hands and arms layer, perioral layer, and oral cavity) and nine mass transport processes (emission, deposition, resuspension or evaporation, transfer, removal, redistribution, decontamination, penetration and/or permeation, and swallowing) that describe event-based movement of substances between compartments (e.g. emission, deposition, etc.). We plan to use the conceptual model to guide the development of predictive exposure models for both the dermal and the inadvertent ingestion pathways.”

Gorman Ng M, Semple S, W Cherrie J, et al. The Relationship Between Inadvertent Ingestion and Dermal Exposure Pathways: A New Integrated Conceptual Model and a Database of Dermal and Oral Transfer Efficiencies. Ann Occup Hyg Published Online First: 23 July 2012. doi:10.1093/annhyg/mes041

Cherrie JW, Semple S, Christopher Y, et al. How important is inadvertent ingestion of hazardous substances at work?Ann Occup Hyg 2006;50:693–704.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.