Work Comp Policy
BalanceBy Jerry R. Newman, Esq., with Kopka Pinkus Dolin & Eads
The Michigan Legislature has enacted major changes to the Workers’ Compensation Act which were recently signed by the Governor. Read more
June 29 - Illinois Workers’ Compensation Reform Legislative Update 2011
By Guy Maras, Esq., with Hennessy and Roach, P.C.
On June 28, 2011 Gov. Quinn signed into law the 2011 Amendments to the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act, including:
* Require the use of American Medical Association standards when determining workers’ level of impairment from injuries.
* Apply standards of judicial conduct to arbitrators that are the same as those used for as for the Illinois Supreme Court justices and require them to take additional training
* Allow creation of a provider network of doctors. Injured employees could pick their doctors, but only from this predetermined pool. An injured worker would still be able to visit a doctor outside of the network but could not get a second opinion from a doctor of his or her choice.
To view highlights of amendments
To download a PDF of admendments
May 24 - Indiana Legislature Enacts New Law Affecting the Worker’s Comp Act
By Jennifer D. Meyer, Esq., with Kopka Pinkus Dolin & Eads
On May 9, 2011, the Indiana General Assembly enacted S.B. 576, which amends the Worker’s Compensation Act, effective July 1, 2011. This was the only bill of several which were introduced pertaining to the Indiana Worker’s Compensation system that became law in this session of the General Assembly.
The law amends various sections of the Worker’s Compensation Act ranging from changes in title of Worker’s Compensation Board-appointed positions to adding new sections to the code; however, the newly enacted legislation has a significant impact upon the filing of provider fee claims. Read more...
Final - 2011 Work Comp Legislation updates
Indiana Work Comp Code
CHAPTER 1. WORKER'S COMPENSATION BOARD
CHAPTER 2. WORKER'S COMPENSATION: APPLICATION, RIGHTS, AND REMEDIES
CHAPTER 3. WORKER'S COMPENSATION: NOTICE OF INJURY; TREATMENT; COMPENSATION SCHEDULE; PAYMENTS
CHAPTER 4. WORKER'S COMPENSATION: ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURES
CHAPTER 5. WORKER'S COMPENSATION: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CHAPTER 6. WORKER'S COMPENSATION: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 7. WORKER'S OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES COMPENSATION
CHAPTER 8. REPRESENTATION BEFORE WORKER'S COMPENSATION BOARD
CHAPTER 9. EMPLOYER LIABILITY
CHAPTER 10. BAN ON EMPLOYER WAIVER OF LIABILITY
CHAPTER 11. RESIDUAL ASBESTOS INJURY FUND
CHAPTER 12. VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION
Indiana Administrative Code
ARTICLE 1. WORKER'S COMPENSATION
Employee Health Information Privacy
New developments in science and technology are on a collision course with the rights of U.S. workers. At the same time that health care costs have become an enormous concern to employers, new technologies and scientific developments are giving employers easy access to a multitude of information about their employees’ health -- and likely future medical expenses. Despite some limited protections from the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, this health-related information is finding its way into employment decisions -- in hiring, promotions and down-sizing.RICO Statute
A large percentage of potential RICO claims are undermined by the following considerations:
A RICO claim cannot exist in the absence of criminal activity. The simplest way to put this concept is: no crime - no RICO violation. This rule applies even in the context of civil RICO claims. Every RICO claim must be based upon a violation of one of the crimes listed in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). The RICO Act refers to such criminal activity as racketeering activity. RICO claims cannot be based upon breach of contract, broken promises, negligence, defective product design, failed business transactions, or any number of other factual scenarios that may give rise to other claims under the common law. This being said, a RICO claim can be based upon violations of the criminal mail and wire fraud statutes. The mail and wire fraud statutes are very broad. Some creative lawyers have succeeded in arguing that the mail and wire fraud statutes have been violated by fact patterns that superficially appear to give rise only to claims of negligence, breach of contract, and other actions giving rise to common law rights. If a RICO claim is based only upon violations of the mail or wire fraud statutes, however, courts are likely to subject the claims to stricter scrutiny. Courts look more favorably upon RICO claims based upon true criminal behavior, such as bribery, kickbacks, extortion, obstruction of justice, and clearly criminal schemes that are advanced by the use of the mails and wires. Read More
Occupational Safety Health Act
To assure safe and healthful working conditions for working men and women; by authorizing enforcement of the standards developed under the Act; by assisting and encouraging the States in their efforts to assure safe and healthful working conditions; by providing for research, information, education, and training in the field of occupational safety and health; and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970." Read More
After Foiled Attempt to Deny Benefits, Wal-Mart entitled to Subrogation Credit
According to Kentucky law, an injured worker can pursue a simultaneous civil action against a third party and a workers' compensation claim against his employer, but the employer has a right to subrogation against the proceeds recovered in the civil action that duplicate the workers' compensation benefits. Read More
Lifting Restriction Doesn't Support ADA, Rehab Act Claims
What is happening with the Lifting Restriction?
A simple lifting restriction that prevents an employee from performing some of his duties but does not preclude him from working a broad range of jobs does not create a disability under the ADA or Rehabilitation Act. Read More
Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) News Alert
Brought to you by Progressive Business Compliance
www.genome.gov
What’s Happening? Who must comply with Gina?
On May 21, 2008, Former President George W. Bush signed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) of 2008 into law. GINA includes two distinct titles. Title I addresses the use of genetic information in health insurance. Title II of GINA prohibits employers from collecting genetic information from employees, and using this information to make decisions regarding employment.
GINA applies to private and state and local government employers with 15 or more employees. Joint labor-management training programs, employment agencies, labor unions, as well as Congress and federal executive branch agencies must also comply with GINA requirements. Read More
EEOC Issues Final GINA Regulations By Adria Martinelli and Julie Athey
After several delays, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has issued final regulations that interpret and implement the nondiscrimination requirements of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). For the most part, the final regulations don't differ substantially from the ones proposed by the agency nearly two years ago. However, they do provide specific examples of what employers must do (and refrain from doing) to comply. Read More
If a medical provider discloses genetic information to the employer in spite of that warning, the disclosure will be deemed inadvertent and not in violation of GINA. To download the GINA regulations click here
Mandatory Medicare Reporting Overview
EEOC - GINA Law, ADA and other national statutes can be found on-line
