Florida, Montana pass major revisions to workers’ comp law
Montana wants to shed rep as “highest-premium state,” but realizes too many workers get hurt
m
Last time we ended with workers’ comp news about an undocumented worker in Florida, who won benefits and ignited a controversy among the legislators, who presumably write the laws.
Governor Scott signs ‘catch-all’ bill
Today we lead off with Florida, which has recently made several changes to its workers’ comp laws.
According to a July 11 piece in Claims Journal:
A variety of changes to Florida’s workers’ compensation law went into effect July 1.
Gov. Rick Scott signed into law CS/HB 1087, a catch-all insurance bill that includes changes relating to workers’ compensation policy cancellations, premium audits and prepaid benefit cards.
One change allows injured workers to receive their monetary benefits in the form of a prepaid card. Under the previous law, benefits were only payable by check or direct deposit into an injured worker’s bank account.
Pre-paid card comes with restrictions
I assume this refers to lost-wages benefits or some sort of long-term disability award. Otherwise, I would expect the carrier to pay the provider directly for cost of treatment(s), after approval of billing codes. Whatever the case, it doesn’t like an improvement to me. Consider the following passage from the article: “If injured workers choose the prepaid card option, they must have at least one means of accessing their weekly benefits without incurring any fees. They must also have the ability to make point-of-sale purchases without incurring fees from the financial institution issuing the card.”
What was wrong with checks and direct deposits?
Other changes include calendar-year, assessment rate mods
At any rate, several other changes take effect with the new law, including:
- moving Special Disability Trust Fund assessments from a fiscal year to a calendar year basis;
- the assessment rate on assessable mutual, electrical cooperative self-insurance funds and individual self-insurers is 1.46 percent of their net written premiums from July 1 through December 31–January 1, 2012, the assessment rate drops to 1.44 percent;
- employer premium audits are no longer required unless mandated by the insurance policy; otherwise audits can be requested by regulators or those insured;
- the new law provides that for effective date of a cancellation is either the date requested by the insured or the date of the written request if no date is specified;
- insurers may send a notice of renewal premium or nonrenewal of a policy only to the location that administers the policy–touted as a cost-cutting measure, eliminating redundant certified-mail notices to all named insureds.
High-cost, high-risk Montana shoots for improvement
Montana is another state with a troubled workers’ comp system and has been mulling systemic revisions for quite some time; we covered one angle in February. A parallel to Florida may be the emergence of cash settlements, perhaps leaving the injured worker to seek treatment and pay providers on their own. According to a July 11 account from KRTV.com:
Among the changes:
- Injured workers are now able to settle claims for a cash sum rather than undergoing treatment with insurance.
- Severely injured employees will have to illustrate that they still need care after five years.
- There are now treatment guidelines for doctors who see injured workers.
- Employers will see about a 20% decrease in their rates.
‘Reforms’ may take years to evaluate
A July 10 editorial in the Helena Independent Record says this:
The changes went into effect the first of this month, but it will be five years or more before we know with any certainty whether the Legislature’s revisions to the state’s workers’ compensation laws will result in the lower premiums every business owner wants while still taking proper care of people hurt on the job who genuinely need long-term insurance coverage.
Officials with the Montana State Fund believe the changes will make insuring Montana’s workers less expensive — and lowered their rates an average of some 20 percent on July 1 to account for the new regs.
“We’re betting on the outcome because we so desperately needed to reduce costs to deal with the perception that Montana had an unfriendly workers’ compensation environment for employers,” Laurence Hubbard, CEO of the Montana State Fund, said in an interview this week.
For many years business leaders have bemoaned Montana’s highest-in-the-nation workers comp insurance rates, claiming the high rates not only stifled growth among businesses here, but discouraged anyone else from setting up shop in Montana. Those high premium costs were driven by a number of factors, and everyone who touched the system in some way could share in the blame. Medical payments for hurt workers were found to be higher here than the national average — the same injury in Montana costs insurers more than in many other states. Accident frequency is higher in Montana than it should be, even when accounting for the number of more dangerous jobs here. And Montana had too many cases of “permanent, partial” disabilities, people who are close to full health after several years but who remain in the workers compensation system for years longer.
Accident frequency should be Number-One Priority
Of course, no state wants to be ranked as highest-in-workers’ comp-premiums–which we reported when Montana swapped places with Alaska–and none of the citizens of any state want to subsidize scammers who game the system. What should be most alarming in the preceding passage, though, is this: “Accident frequency is higher in Montana than it should be. . . .”
Unfortunately, each state has its own rules and regs, and oftentimes the best route for an injured worker is to hire a trained, experienced workers’ comp attorney.
We can help you find an attorney
Frequently enough, a worker’s compensation case may be so complex as to demand legal representation. However, sometimes what seems like a cut-and-dried situation to an injured worker may result in a smaller award than envisioned–or even a denial. Have you, a friend or a loved one been injured on the job? Whether you’re merely seeking answers about your rights or believe a lawsuit may be necessary, be sure to seek counsel with attorneys trained and experienced in workers’ compensation. Here’s some resources:
