Revised reforms drag on in California; I-1082 divides workers comp community in Washington State

In the 1960s, a popular interoffice cartoon depicted a beleaguered bureaucrat with an S-shaped piece of paper, a pen dripping with what might be either ink or blood, and the caption, “You mean you want the revised revision of the original revised revision revised?”*

That just might summarize the feelings of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and others who have been through the wringer with a series of revised reforms of California’s workers comp system, beginning during the era of Schwarzenegger’s predecessor.

Washington state is another West Coast hotbed of workers comp issues this election cycle, but as regular readers here can attest, we have often discussed the Governator and the California system.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported today that “One of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s crowning achievements, the overhaul of workers’ compensation, is in danger of unraveling as employers begin to face rising costs even though disabled workers now get less in benefits.

“One sign of trouble is the state Department of Insurance hearing scheduled for today at which the group representing workers’ compensation insurers will argue that they need a 27.7 percent rate increase.”

Crowning achievement tarnished

In an Oct. 10 article, the San Diego Union-Tribune said, “Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner will have to decide on the proposal before the end of the year. He rejected a similar request last year, saying that the insurers had to show that they were cutting down on their costs before charging more for their insurance.

“Schwarzenegger and other critics note that medical costs have risen only 2 percent in the past year, while loss expenses dropped from $7.8 billion to $7.3 billion. “Where is the money being spent? This question must be answered before employers are asked to pay more,” Schwarzenegger asked in August, when the board initially floated an initial proposal for a 29.6 percent increase. The board has since trimmed the request to 27.7 percent after discovering that some insurer expenses had declined more than expected this year.”

Permanent disability awards reduced by half

The Chronicle piece says that advocates for injured workers contend that the people who most need this sort of coverage are taking a hit “by rule changes that have cut average awards for permanent disability in half since 2005.”

Another problem, says BusinessInsurance.com, involves the often-secretive process of arbitration. It’s a huge red flag anytime consumers have to sign onto deals that preclude access to courts in favor of arbitration. In this case, though, there’s an added layer: the possibility of forcing involved parties to submit to laws outside the state of California.

A.B. 2490

Concerning the bill known as A.B. 2490, an Oct. 11 post at the industry trade site reports:

A California lawmaker said Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger sided with insurers in vetoing legislation that would have required workers compensation insurers to submit dispute-resolution clauses to the state’s insurance commissioner for approval.

A.B. 2490 also would have required workers comp dispute-resolution clauses to specify that California law applies in coverage disagreements involving California employers.

The bill, sponsored by Assemblyman Dave Jones, D-Sacramento, additionally sought to mandate that policyholders and insurers with contracts containing such clauses, including arbitration language, settle any California disagreements in a venue within the state.

Deregulation looked good–at first

By way of background, the Chronicle says that Schwarzenegger inherited a system in crisis when he took over in 2003.  “Deregulation of the system in 1995 had ushered in years of price cutting that, at first, benefited employers with lower rates but eventually boomeranged when 29 insurance firms went bankrupt between 2000 and 2004.”

With fewer companies writing policies–that is, with less competition–prices took off.

Two reform bills passed under former Governor Gray Davis, the Democrat who lost to Schwarzenegger in a recall election,  reduced medical costs by restricting “the power of doctors to prescribe unnecessary or excessive treatments,” says the Chronicle. The bill Schwarzenegger signed shortly after taking office resulted in more cost controls and changes in the awards for permanent disability ratings.

Falling costs, judicial response

Costs have fallen, but the disability changes have fueled a dogged opposition coupled with a judicial backlash against veto power that has sent three cases to the Supreme Court.

We’ll be following the results of today’s hearing.

I-1082 hotly debated in Washington State

In Washington State, the initiative known as I-1082 (which we addressed here), is a polarizing measure that proponents say will result in a de facto raise for workers and opponents say will hurt education, small business and –eventually–the workers themselves.

According to an Oct. 10 piece in the Kitsap Penninsula Business Journal, the measure would not only end a state monopoly on issuing workers comp insurance but also would end “Washington’s unique status as the only state in the nation that forces workers to pay a portion of workers’ comp.”

‘Business community’ support

Calling the measure, which goes to the electorate in November, one that is backed by the “business community,” the Journal says that although “some employers voluntarily pay their employees’ share of workers’ comp taxes already, others do not, opting to deduct the workers’ portion from every paycheck. These workers [therefore] will receive a pay raise when I-1082 passes.”

The article also provides a link to an “online calculator” described as being able to show workers what their potential raises might be.

Measure would ‘pit injured against insurance industry’

In an Oct. 10 guest opinion piece in The Seattle Times, a state senator and a state representative penned a vigorous rebuttal that begins thusly:

This November, voters will determine the outcome of an initiative that would add costs to every university, community and technical college in the state, force small businesses to pay $315 million extra next year and every year after that, and pit people who get injured at work against the insurance industry.

That’s Initiative 1082, a shining example of how the citizen’s initiative process has been co-opted by special interests.

In some ways, I-1082 is dangerously simple. It would end Washington’s public nonprofit workers’ compensation system by allowing private insurance carriers to cover workers’ comp in our state. But when you explore the fine print, it becomes obvious that I-1082 benefits the few at the expense of our state’s business owners and working families.

Perhaps needless to say, this, too, is a piece of legislation that we’ll be following.

*(NOTE: Here’s a link to the cartoon, on page 148, where it is described as a 1970′s era artifact collected from Tennessee; however the author remembers seeing it after it was passed around in the Fort Worth Regional Office of the U.S. Postal Department, where his father worked in the 1960s.)
***********************************************************************************************************************
Frequently enough, a workmen’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:

Workers compensation basics

Injury on the job

Filing a claim



Need Help with your Workers Comp Claim?

Fill out the short form below and a local Workers Comp attorney will review your case for FREE!
Don't wait -- Get help winning your workers comp case today!




Schwarzenegger smacked down again; 9/11 workers get improved settlement; Oklahoma reform passes

Schwarzenegger furloughs headed to Supreme Court

As a follow-up to our March 22 post, “California furloughs of workers comp attorneys ruled ‘illegal’, “ we see a June 13 piece in the San Francisco Chronicle reporting that yet another court has found that “[a]bout 7,900 state workers’ compensation employees were furloughed illegally by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last year and are entitled to $25 million in back pay . . . .”

The March ruling was from a different appellate panel, which “found Schwarzenegger acted illegally when he furloughed about 500 lawyers and hearing officers employed by the same insurance fund.”

The June 11 ruling applies to all employees of the fund, which “sells workers’ compensation insurance to employers and uses their payments to run its operations.”

According to the Silicon Valley MercuryNews,The furloughs were part of an cost-cutting move by the governor last year, when he ordered nearly 200,000 state employees to take two days off each month without pay.”

However, the issue does not appear to be over. Both outlets report that the state Supreme Court has agreed to review the furlough issue.

Fired manager plans WC fund for construction insustry

Another brawl over workers comp funds is shaping up in Minnesota, where, says a June 14 StarTribune.com report, “The founder and former head of Minnesota’s largest workers compensation self-insurance fund is launching a new, competing insurance program for the construction industry.

“David Bjorklund said The Builders Group (TBG), the Eagan-based fund he founded in 1997, has lost its way, citing its recent $30,000 state fine for falsifying safety-related scores and a drop in its financial reserves.”

According to the article, Bjorklund was fired as manager by the fund’s board, 11 years after he created the fund. He says he was a whistle-blower and that speaking out is what got him fired. Subsequently, he and other ex-employees helped the state during an investigation of the fund.

“Last week, he said, he met with several concerned fund members to outline the new venture. His goal is to line up charter members for a new ‘captive’ insurance company owned and controlled by the membership.” Such firms “are a bit like self-insurance funds, but members don’t bear ‘joint and several’ liability for losses, Bjorklund said. The venture, yet to be submitted to insurance regulators or given a name, would operate under the umbrella of a large insurer, though Bjorklund said he would administer it.”

Settlement for 9/11 workers extends benefits, caps legal fees

Yet another captive insurance fund made news recently, as part of the revised, $712 million settlement between New York City and thousands of 9/11 rescue workers.  According to a June 10 piece in Bloomberg BusinessWeek, “Lawyers for 10,000 workers claiming illnesses from rescue, recovery and debris removal after the Sept. 11 World Trade Center attack have agreed with New York City on a $712.5 million compensation fund to settle the cases.”The city and its WTC Captive Insurance Co., set up with $1 billion from [FEMA], joined with plaintiffs’ attorneys to present the agreement today to U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein in Manhattan.”

According to Reuters, the revision includes a larger payout to the workers but less to the attorneys: “In March a federal judge rejected an initial settlement of up to $657.5 million, saying it needed to be more transparent and that too much of the money — about one third — would be spent on lawyers’ fees.”

The settlement caps attorney fees at 25 per cent, which lowers “their previous cut by more than $50 million. The WTC Captive Insurance Company has agreed to pay up to an additional $55 million to the workers as part of the revised settlement.”

BusinessWeek says the judge termed the agreement “a very good deal,” and  “signed an order dismissing the lawsuit, and set a June 23 public hearing for claimants and their attorneys to raise any objections. At least 95 percent of the plaintiffs must consent to the agreement for it to become legally binding.”

Oklahoma finally passes WC reform package

Elsewhere, reform is the name of the game in Oklahoma, where Gov. Brad Henry has signed legislation aimed at upgrading the workers comp system. According to a May 28 report from TulsaWorld.com, “The key features include a reorganization of the workers compensation courts and a tightening of definitions and benefit eligibility.

“Supporters say the reforms will save businesses more than $60 million a year.”

A June 12 piece at NewsOK.com explains that the legislative reform comprises four separate bills and that its passage removes one ballot proposal from November elections.

“The two bills signed by the governor Friday were part of four measures legislators approved after months of negotiations with business, medical and legal representatives. Henry earlier this week signed Senate Bill 1973, which allows the state Supreme Court to review workers’ compensation claims like any other civil case and requires that the claimant be in attendance unless all parties agree, and HB 1611, which requires workers’ compensation claims adjusters to have six hours of education on the state workers’ compensation act.”

A twenty-two point, bulleted list of changes in the reform measures are spelled out at InsuranceJournal.com.

***********************************************************************************************************************
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:

Workers compensation basics

Injury on the job

Choosing an attorney



Need Help with your Workers Comp Claim?

Fill out the short form below and a local Workers Comp attorney will review your case for FREE!
Don't wait -- Get help winning your workers comp case today!




California furloughs of workers comp attorneys ruled ‘illegal’

He may not be a terminator in real life, but that Gov. Shwarzenegger is a rip-snorter for putting state workers on furlough–so much so that now there’s seven separate lawsuits challenging the legality of the tactic, which the San Francisco Chronicle reports has affected nearly a quarter-million state employees.

Wow, if the Chronicle is correct (apparently they’re rounding up numbers, to 238,000), then all state employees are affected: according to the California State Controller’s Web site, the State Employee Demographics page shows a total of 237,731 employees, including part-time, intermittent and indeterminate workers.

Schwarzenegger says the furloughs are a cost-cutting measure for state coffers that have been ravaged by the Great Recession. Unemployment reached a record level in January, and California is one of five states sharing $1.5 billion in aid, for the areas hardest hit by foreclosures.

Whatever the total count turns out to be, the furloughs certainly involve several thousand employees of a state workers comp fund, a quasi-public agency that has one set of rules for line workers and another for execs.

Furloughs of 7,400 already ruled on, last year

We first mentioned the furloughs back in September, when a superior court ruled “that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger illegally furloughed 7,400 employees of the State Compensation Insurance Fund this year. . . .”

The governor’s actions have been upheld in some courts, but according to a March 20 San Francisco Chronicle piece, “An Alameda County judge ruled in December that Schwarzenegger illegally furloughed more than 50,000 employees in 68 agencies, [although] other judges have upheld the governor’s actions.”

But on Friday, Schwarzenegger took another hit when a three-judge appellate panel ruled that he “had no right to furlough about 475 lawyers who work for the State Compensation Insurance Fund.

“The Court of Appeal said the attorneys are protected by a provision of state insurance law that makes fund employees ‘exempt from any hiring freezes and staff cutbacks otherwise required by law,’ according to the Silicon Valley Mercury News.

The Chronicle had this: “The ruling by the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco applies to about 500 attorneys and hearing officers who work for the State Compensation Insurance Fund. It is likely to affect a separate case, pending before another division of the court, that involves more than 7,000 clerical workers, support staff and other employees of the insurance fund.

“Other laws apply to most of the 238,000 state employees the governor furloughed for two days a month from February through June 2009, and for three days a month since then.”

Governor asks Supreme Court to intercede

A very interesting aspect of the seven suits is that Schwarzenegger has requested intervention from the state supreme court, which the Sacramento Bee earlier this month described as move that stunned labor unions: “Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s request Tuesday for the California Supreme Court to take over seven key furlough lawsuits caught state employee unions off guard.

“Schwarzenegger wants to legally leapfrog two appellate courts now considering those cases and go straight to the state’s highest legal authority, sort of like skipping the playoffs and going straight to the Super Bowl.”

And, of course, the sheer size of the numbers grabs your attention–this from the Chronicle’s account: “At stake is more than $1 billion in back pay, plus interest, that the state would owe the workers if they won their cases.”

But here’s what really interesting, again (with our emphasis added) from the Chronicle:

“The governor’s Supreme Court request did not include suits by employees of the insurance fund, which is authorized by state law to make its own staffing decisions. Schwarzenegger’s press secretary, Aaron McLear, was noncommittal about an appeal of Friday’s ruling, saying only that the administration was reviewing its options.

“Patrick Whelan, lawyer for the union representing the insurance fund attorneys, said the ruling doesn’t apply directly to most furloughed state employees but is still encouraging.

” ‘It shows the governor’s authority is not as broad as he believes,’  he said.

*****************************************************************************************************************

Whether you’re an injured employee or an aggrieved employer, if you’re facing legal problems regarding workplace injuries, be sure to seek counsel with attorneys trained and experienced in workers’ compensation. Here’s some resources:

Workers compensation basics

Denial of benefits

Choosing an attorney


Filed under: Workers Compensation — Tags: , , , , , — Mike Hinshaw @ 9:48 am

Need Help with your Workers Comp Claim?

Fill out the short form below and a local Workers Comp attorney will review your case for FREE!
Don't wait -- Get help winning your workers comp case today!










 LeadRival LP BBB Business Review


Online Marketing for Lawyers


Attorneys:   Join Our Network