Tag Archives: workers’ compensation costs

Responding to Needs of the Aging Workforce

Understanding the Issue

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, over the past decade, workers in the 45 year-old and over category have increased 49% and now make up 44% of the workforce. The age group over 55 has grown to 21% of the workforce. As a glimpse into the future, a 2013 Gallup poll revealed that 37% of working age respondents indicated they expect to work beyond age 65. Gallup reported that only 22% responded the same way in 2003 and only 16% in 1995. Given this projected “aging” of America’s workforce, are America’s employers prepared to effectively address the associated increase workers compensation claims?

As the population pyramids below illustrate, the aging of America is not a short-term issue. Note the diminishing dependency ratio of young to old, from 1980 to 2030 as shown in Figure 1.

Screen Shot 2016-01-16 at 11.37.02 AM

The Future is Now

The time to discuss these trends as a “having potential impact in the future” has actually passed. We need to re-orient our thinking of the aging workforce as a new constant and as “today’s reality”. The medium age of some industries is as high as 55 (agriculture) indicating a need to act.

Screen Shot 2016-01-16 at 11.37.39 AM

Table 1: Percent of workforce over 45 years of age, by industry.

At Aon, we have been studying and quantifying the impact of the aging of America on our clients. Based on our market insight, we have developed prescriptive solutions to support our clients’ needs. As you can see from the table below, the age of the workforce and population within each age band varies significantly and is in part why all employers may not experience a direct impact of this issue. Based on our client research, we believe it is imperative to quantify the impact of this issue, which in turn provides key input and metrics for helping mitigate the problem. As one client put it when shown the injury trend related to an age band of workers and type of injury driving a considerable portion of their loss time injuries, “Are you saying that by prioritizing the identification and potential for shoulder injuries I could get more return on investment from my ergonomics efforts?” The response was a simple but definitive, “yes”.

The Impact on Work-Related Injuries

Over the past three years, Aon casualty specialists have been monitoring the impact of work-related injuries to aging workers by examining workers compensation claim costs of our clients. From this research, we have identified some rather compelling trends.

One of the most concerning trends is the “current” impact on the cost of workers’ compensation. We studied $2.5 billion in workers’ compensation claims from 2007 through 2012 and found a consistently higher average cost for workers’ compensation claims for older claimants across all industry groups. For example, the 45- to 55-year-old claimants in the manufacturing industry group’s average claim cost was 52% higher than 25- to 35-year-old claimants. This trend varied in degree by industry, but only by the pitch of the slope, leaving us to look deeper into the issue and attempt to identify what was driving this cost. This issue has been under study for quite some time.

Heather Grob, Ph.D. and senior economist with Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, published materials on the concern in 2005, stating “that a random sample of Washington workers’ compensation claims from 1987-89 found that workers over age 45 were at risk of longer term disability” (Cheadle et al 1994). The study concluded that older age is the most important and consistent influence on duration of disability. While we are not breaking new ground on identifying the issue, what seems to be missing is the socialization and acceptance of the impact as well as an understanding of what we should be doing about it.

Screen Shot 2016-01-16 at 11.38.11 AM

The Birth of Ageonomics in Workers’ Compensation

In 2011, we at Aon coined the term Ageonomics to address the phenomenon of the aging workforce and the strategies that can help address increased costs and worker safety. Vicki Missar, Aon board-certified ergonomist, defines Ageonomics as the scientific discipline concerned with the interaction among aging humans and other elements of the system within which they work.

Ultimately, Ageonomics is Aon’s professional service that applies theoretical principles to designing age-specific systems to optimize the wellbeing of the aging worker while improving overall system performance. Aon’s Ageonomics practice leverages the differentiated expertise of professionals spanning such disciplines as ergonomics, wellness, benefits and safety to deliver comprehensive and very powerful solutions to the aging workforce challenges most employers are facing.

Ageonomics calibrates the absenteeism trends for the aging workforce, regardless of the bucket within which they fall. Aon analyzes the trends, from short-term disability (STD), long-term disability (LTD), workers’ compensation (WC), casual absences (CA) and Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) absences to understand claim volume, average claim duration, average cost per lost day, average cost per claim, total costs and the ultimate cost projections. In addition to the financial output, Aon calibrates the leading absence causes by program type to understand what is driving the aging employee absenteeism. This insight provides clearer diagnosis on which programs are affecting the organization the greatest and which absenteeism causes are being reported with the most frequency. Aon also reviews the internal programs to understand how the framework is aligned with the organization’s aging worker initiatives. Organizations can then develop a targeted, age-specific strategy to help not only prevent or reduce the duration associated with the respective absences, but implement preemptive programs to help keep aging workers healthy and optimize their individual productivity.

Screen Shot 2016-01-16 at 11.38.51 AM

Changes Associated with Aging

The physiological changes associated with aging occur from the moment we are born. Fast forward to age 45 and older, and the body begins to change more significantly. Depending on primary factors such as health, fitness and genetics, all of us age differently. Researchers in Finland (Ilmarinen, et. al. 1997) found a decline in what they called “workability,” with 51 years of age being the most critical point at which workability started to decrease. In addition, researchers noted that workability was shown to have a high predictive value for work disability (e.g. lower workability equals higher disability days). This means that we must now focus on the individual to understand age-related risk factors, modifiable and non-modifiable, to really address the challenges facing the aging workforce.

Physiological Changes That Can Affect Work Performance

With age comes decreased muscle strength, lower dexterity, reduced fitness level and aerobic capacity, poorer visual and auditory acuity and slower cognitive speed and function, to name a few. All of these changes can have a dramatic impact on the aging worker. For example, aging is related to the loss of muscle mass beginning at the age of 50 but becomes more dramatic at the age of 60 (Deschenes 2004). In addition to physical changes, older workers are at increased risk of disease and other ailments. These include the increased risk of obesity associated with aging, diabetes, heart disease, cancer and reduced fitness level, among others. Thus, prevention initiatives are needed to support the aging worker so that an effective, comprehensive strategy is developed. For example, if we know that muscle strength declines with age, organizations need to consider implementing safety, ergonomics and wellness programs to help build individual strength while working to reduce manual lifting, which could potentially result in injury or absence.

In the course of Aon’s Ageonomics diagnostic research, the two leading loss causes of injuries to knees and shoulders stem from strain/sprains and slip/trip/falls that can directly be attributed to reduced mobility and reduced strength, both of which can be related to an older physiology. By understanding the physical changes of an aging human and linking these changes to loss-producing trends in the data, we can develop a thoughtful strategy for increasing workability and reducing age-specific exposures in the workplace.

Screen Shot 2016-01-16 at 11.39.57 AM

Rethinking the Work Environment

After some research and discussions with other benchmarking groups (NCCI and IBI), we can begin to make some educated assumptions surrounding drivers of these increased costs. What is of interest to Aon’s Ageonomics practice is how physical changes can influence solutions to reduce injury risk and prevent absenteeism. With onset of saropenia — loss of muscle mass — comes decreased strength. Many physically demanding jobs do not factor this into the equation when developing production standards or production demands for the workforce. By age-adjusting the demands by a specified factor, for example, we can not only reduce the risk of injury but improve the long-term workability and productivity of the workforce in general.

As part of Aon’s Ageonomics methodology, each safety, ergonomics, benefits, wellness, human-resource program aligns strategies and their resulting activities around the needs of the aging worker. The ultimate objective is to develop strategies geared toward optimizing the performance of the aging worker. This can only be done when each program is assessed and refined for the aging workforce (Table 2). For example, a recent study (Ruahala, et. al. 2007) found a linear trend between increasing workload and increasing sick time among nurses. First, we know that in health care and social assistance, musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) make up 42% of cases and have a rate of 55 cases per 10,000 full-time workers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, this rate was 56% higher than the rate for all private industries and second only to the transportation and warehousing industry. Second, given that 55% of the USA nursing workforce is age 50 or older (NCSBN &The Forum of State Nursing Workforce), conducting an Ageonomics assessment may be an important part of a strategic program to reduce sick leave, workers’ compensation injuries and overall absenteeism. Third, solutions cannot be one-dimensional, i.e., simply purchasing patient-handling equipment and hoping that will remedy the situation. Strategies must encompass the total health and wellbeing of the worker for optimal success, including a thorough review of the programs outlined in Table 2.

Screen Shot 2016-01-16 at 11.40.39 AM

last

 

Rethinking Wellness As the U.S. workplace continues to age, it is critical to rethink wellness programs. Berry et. al. (2010)5 state in the Harvard Business Review:

“Wellness programs have often been viewed as a nice extra, not a strategic imperative. Newer evidence tells a different story. With tax incentives and grants available under recent federal health care legislation, U.S. companies can use wellness programs to chip away at their enormous health care costs, which are only rising with an aging workforce.”

The article points out six pillars of an effective wellness program that can help significantly lower healthcare costs. As part of Aon’s Ageonomics practice, we analyze these pillars, including leadership, program quality, accessibility and communication of not only wellness but safety, ergonomics and other programs, to understand gaps for aging workers. By reviewing age-specific data and wellness program statistics, we can probe deeper and ultimately develop strategies to better align these programs for the aging worker. Researchers at Harvard found that participants in wellness programs are absent less often and perform better at work than their nonparticipant counterparts. Thus, structuring a wellness program around aging workers can become a way for organizations to not only retain aging workers but ensure their workability does not decline to levels that result in disabilities and workers’ compensation claims.

Conclusions

As with any workplace program, measuring success includes not only healthcare costs, but workers’ compensation costs, safety program incident rates, absenteeism and turnover rates, among other indicators. It becomes essential to align traditional silo programs and produce a synergistic, thoughtful approach to optimize any program touching an aging worker. For a copy of the full Aon white paper on which this article is based, click here.

How to Optimize Nurse Case Management in Workers' Comp

Traditionally, in workers’ comp, nurse case management (NCM) services have been widely espoused yet misunderstood and underutilized. The reasons for underutilization are many. Tension between NCM and claims adjusters is one. Even though overburdened, adjusters often overlook the opportunity to refer to NCM.

Also to blame is the NCM process itself. In spite of professional certification for NCM, the process is poorly defined for those outside the nursing profession. More importantly, NCM has difficulty measuring and reporting proof of value.

Underlying issues

Continuing to do business as usual is not acceptable. NCM needs to address several issues to qualify as legitimate contributors. First, NCM needs to articulate its value. To do that, NCM must computerize and standardize its process and measure and report outcomes, just like any other business in today’s world.

Too often, computerization for NCM is relegated to adding nurses’ notes to the claim system. However, such notes cannot be analyzed to measure outcomes based on specific nursing initiatives. 

In most situations, an individual NCM interprets an issue, decides on an action and delivers the response. The organization’s medical management is thereby a subjective interpretation rather than a definable, quantifiable product. 

Granted, the NCM is a trained professional. But when the product is unstructured, variables in delivery cannot be measured or appreciated. A process that is different every time can never be adequately defined.

It's crucial to establish organizational standards about what conditions in claims require referral to NCM—without exception. This will remove the myriad decisions made or not made by claims adjusters to involve the NCM. The referral can be automated through electronic claims monitoring and notification. NCM takes action on the issue according to organizational protocol, and the claims adjustor is notified.

Measure

When the conditions in claims that lead to intervention by NCM are computerized and standardized, the effects can be measured. Apples can legitimately be compared with apples, not to oranges and tennis balls. Similar conditions in claims are noted and approached the same way every time, so the results can be validly measured.

Results in claims such as indemnity costs, time from DOI to claim closure or overall claim cost can be compared before and after NCM standardization. Comparisons can be made across different date ranges for similar injuries going forward to measure continued effectiveness and hone the process.

Measuring outcomes is the most essential aspect of the process. Value is disregarded unless it is defined, measured and reported.

For non-NCMs, the dots in medical management must be connected to see the picture. Describe what was done, why it was done and how it was done the same way for similar situations and in context with the organization's standards. Then report the outcome value. Establish a continuing value communication process.

NCM constituencies should be informed in advance of the process and outcome measurements. Define in advance how problems and issues are identified and handled and how results will be measured. Then proceed consistently.

Recognized NCM value

Even as things now stand, NCM's value is being recognized. American Airlines recently reported it is adding NCM to their staff and will refer all lost time claims. The company cited a pilot project where nurse interventions were documented and measured, proving their value in getting injured workers back to work. 

Christopher Flatt, workers’ compensation Center of Excellence leader for Marsh Inc., wrote in WorkCompWire (http://www.workcompwire.com/), “One option that employers should consider as part of an integrated approach to controlling workers’ compensation costs is formalized nurse case management. Taking actions to drive down medical expenses is an essential component to controlling workers’ compensation costs.”1

Industry research and corporate or professional wisdom regarding risky situations can supply the standardized indicators for referral to NCM. American Airlines uses the standard that all lost time claims should be referred to NCM. But there are many, sometimes more subtle, indicators of risk and cost in claims that can be identified early through computerized monitoring and referred for NCM intervention.

Another example of developing standard indicators for referral is based on industry research that shows certain comorbidities, such as diabetes, can increase claim duration and cost. These claims should also be referred to NCM. Yet another example is steering away from inappropriate medical providers who can profoundly increase costs. 

As a long-ago nurse and a longer-time medical systems designer and developer, I believe the solution lies in appropriate computerized system design. The elements need to be simple to implement, easy to use and consistently applied. Only then can NCM offer proof of value.

1 Christopher Flatt: The Case for Formalized Nurse Case Management

SB 863 Update: Is the California Workers’ Compensation System Better Than it Was One Year Ago?

The passage of SB 863 in California came with a promise of higher benefits for injured workers and lower costs for employers.  Just over one year later, where does this promise stand?There has been improvement, but there is still a long way to go.

I recently attended and spoke at the California Workers’ Compensation & Risk Conference in Dana Point, California, where, as expected, the major focus was SB 863.  Just over one year ago, employers and labor came together at the end of the legislative term to pass a bill designed to improve benefits for workers and reduce costs for employers.

I moderated the opening session, which was a diverse panel featuring representatives from employers, carriers, injured workers, and medical providers. My first question to the panel set the tone for the rest of the session, and for the rest of the conference. That question was: “From your viewpoint, is the California workers’ compensation system better off now than it was a year ago?”

Before you can gauge the success of SB 863, you must remember where we started.  Permanent disability (PD) benefits to injured workers had been cut significantly under prior reforms, so injured workers were unhappy with the system. Employers were equally unhappy, as workers’ compensation costs in California had been increasing steadily for years.

With a system that both injured workers and employers were very dissatisfied with, something had to be done.

SB 863 provided an immediate increase in permanent disability benefits for accidents occurring after 10/10/2013.  PD is being increased by a total of 30%, phased in over two years. There is also a $120 million fund to compensate certain workers who are unable to return to their pre-injury job because of physical restrictions.

The savings for employers are to come over time.  The largest of the savings under SB 863 are to come from changing the processes for liens and medical disputes. Thus far, these changes are receiving mixed reviews.

On the plus side, liens have fallen significantly since a fee for filing them was implemented Jan. 1. Some of the drop can be attributed to the fact that medical providers filed all the liens they could before the fee took effect. However, there clearly has been a significant drop in new liens filed.

The filing fee is being challenged, though, by a lawsuit that seeks to have it declared unconstitutional, and some of the anticipated savings from SB 863 are likely to be eroded if the courts don’t uphold the fee.

The bill also restructured the medical dispute resolution process, with the introduction of the Independent Medical Review (IMR). The IMR process was modeled after successful programs in states such as Texas. It is designed to have physicians, not judges, deciding disputed medical issues. It is also designed to expedite resolution so appropriate treatment is provided to injured workers in a timely manner. The IMR process clearly remains a work in progress. First, 10 months after implementation, the process is still operating under emergency rules. Until the final rules are in place, those participating in the process will face uncertainty. Second, it appears there is significant gaming of the IMR process. Approximately 16,000 requests were filed in both August and September of this year alone, significantly more than anticipated.  In one month, there were more disputes filed than in an entire year for the same process under group health.  Employers alone bear the costs of the IMR process, so those filing all these requests may be attempting to cripple the system at absolutely no cost to themselves.

The issues facing the IMR and lien processes illustrate what many see as the major impediment to delivering cost savings for employers in California: There are special interest groups that do not want the system to become more efficient and self-executing, because they make a great deal of money off the chaos.

In her speech at the conference, Christine Baker, director of the California Department of Industrial Relations, expressed concern about “significant gaming.” While this gaming is not unique to California, from my national viewpoint its impact on the workers’ compensation system is more profound in California than in other states.

The biggest challenge is that the workers’ comp system in California is flawed by design. No other state has issues with medical liens in workers’ compensation. Bills are reduced to fee schedule with no further disputes seeking additional payment. Treatment that is not authorized is subject to litigation over necessity. If the employer prevails, “no” means “no.”  In California, “no” means “file a lien and litigate further.”

Another issue facing California employers is continuous trauma (CT) claims, which can be filed for a 1% aggravation of a pre-existing condition. The legislature recently fixed this problem for the National Football League by passing a bill specifically limiting CT claims by professional athletes, but CT claims in California continue to be a significant cost driver for other employers, and their frequency has more than doubled over the last 10 years.  It is common in California for injured workers to file both CT and specific injury claims for the same body part.  In no other state are CT claims as prevalent and embedded into the workers’ compensation system as they are in California.

In addition, allocated loss adjustment expenses (ALAE) covering items such as bill review, utilization review, and litigation costs are higher in California than other states, and these costs are increasing at an alarming rate.

The gaming of the system significantly increases the costs for employers and delays the delivery of benefits to injured workers.  The main stakeholders in workers’ compensation, the employers and workers, need to work together so that benefits can be delivered faster and at lower cost.  SB 863 was a step in this direction, but there is more work to be done. The people who worked together to make SB 863 a reality need to continue to work together to preserve the savings elements designed into the bill.  If they can do this, perhaps California can finally achieve some stability in its workers’ compensation marketplace, which would benefit both employers and injured workers.

Implementing International Medical Providers Into The U.S. Workers' Compensation System, Part 4

This is Part 4 of a multi-part series on legal barriers to implementing international providers into Medical Provider Networks for workers' compensation. Previous articles in the series can be found here: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3. Subsequent articles in the series will be forthcoming soon.

Workers Compensation And The Legal Barriers To Medical Tourism
The parallels to health care costs rising and workers' compensation medical costs are no coincidence, since workers' compensation is a subset of the health care system.

The average workers' compensation medical cost per loss time claim (in which the worker has lost more than seven days from work) in 2008, as previously stated in this series, was $26,000, which is a 6% increase from 2007. In addition, medical costs in 2008 were 58% of all total claims.62 63 Approximately 40% of workers' compensation costs are associated with medical and rehabilitative treatment. In the 1980's and 1990's, medical costs for workers' compensation fluctuated, and in the last decade rose again, and in 2002, totaled $41.7 billion annually.64

As with health care, states have experimented with different ways to reduce workers' compensation costs. Former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger made workers' compensation reform a part of his legislative program.65 Some of the same strategies applied to health care have been tried with workers' compensation: utilization management of workers' compensation medical services, restricted networks of designated physicians, case management, mandatory treatment guidelines, and hospital payment regulations.66 The introduction of DRG's for hospital payments and ICD-9 and CPT codes for provider payments for health care in the 1980's, also impacted workers' compensation, as insurance companies began to use them.

This has led some to believe that there is a place for medical tourism in workers' compensation.

Merrell: “… Can you see a role of medical tourism in workers' compensation injury?”

Ludwick: “I could, if it were a long-term issue. Many workers' comp issues are emergent, so that would take out the medical tourism aspect. However, if it was a long-range issue, I could see us involving workmen's comp issues into that, or problems.”

Lazzaro: “I would support that. I don't know the incidence, for example, of some of the orthopedic procedures that are non-emergent, such as knee or hip replacement, which would fall under workmen's comp. But theoretically, a case could be made for that …”

Merrell: “I was thinking about it in terms of the chronic back injury and the repetitive action injuries and hernia that are in the workers' compensation area. An acute injury on the job would probably not be at issue, but a work-associated problem with a potentially surgical solution might be a matter for medical tourism.”67

The savings from medical tourism mentioned in Part 1 of this series are even more relevant to workers' compensation. As Lazzaro and Merrell discussed above, knee and hip replacement, as well as chronic back and repetitive action injuries and hernia are just some of the work-related injuries that can benefit from medical tourism. Table 1 lists three of the most common procedures performed and the costs of each in the U.S. and three countries that cater to medical tourists.68

Cost Comparison of Common Procedures
*Retail and insurer costs are mid-point between high and low ranges.
**U.S. rates include one day hospitalization; international rates include airfare, hospital and hotel.69

Given the data presented here, one could conclude that implementing medical tourism into workers' compensation is a logical solution to rising medical costs for workers' compensation, and should be seriously considered. However, there are legal barriers to accomplishing this.

One of the most obvious legal barriers to implementing medical tourism into workers' compensation are the provisions of State workers' compensation laws that establish who can provide medical care to injured workers. In four of the largest workers' compensation states — California, Florida, New York and Texas — medical providers must be licensed by the state to practice medicine.70 71 72 73 Florida's statutes have a provision to allow certain foreign-trained physicians to practice in the state, but do not mention treatment outside of the state.74

On the other hand, two states, Oregon and Washington State, both have statutes or rules that allow workers to choose an attending doctor or physician in another country. Oregon's labor code states, “… The worker also may choose an attending doctor or physician in another country or in any other state or territory or possession of the United States with the prior approval of the insurer or self-insured employer.”75

The WA State Department of Labor and Industries has a page on their website that allows workers to find an attending practitioner in the U.S., Canada, Mexico and Other countries. The webpage allows the worker to search for a U.S. physician by entering a zip code, miles, doctor or provider type, and specialty.76 Workers seeking physicians in Canada, Mexico and Other countries, such as England, Germany, Honduras, New Zealand, the Philippines, Spain, Thailand and Ukraine, are directed to .pdf files that list selected doctors and their specialties and contact information.77

Among some of the other barriers to medical tourism is the result of entrenched interest groups wishing to avoid competition with low-cost providers78 79 and outdated federal and state laws intended to protect consumers, but which only increase costs and reduce convenience.80 81 Additionally, state and federal regulations restrict public providers from outsourcing certain expensive medical procedures.82 83 Federal laws inhibit collaboration84, and state licensing laws prevent certain medical tasks being performed by providers in other countries.85 86 Foreign physicians lack the authority to order tests, initiate therapies and to prescribe drugs that U.S. pharmacies are able to dispense.87 88

Restrictions on the practice of medicine have been removed, and many still exist. Some laws, for example, make it illegal for a physician to consult with a patient online without an initial face-to-face meeting; it is illegal for a physician who is outside the state and who has examined the patient in person to continue treating via the Internet after the patient goes home; and, it is illegal (in most states) for a physician outside that state to consult by phone with the patient residing in that state if the physician is not licensed to practice there.89 90

Other barriers or potential barriers, which are extremely important ones, also exist that must be addressed before medical tourism is accepted for workers' compensation. Issues regarding medical malpractice and liability laws overseas, patient privacy and medical record laws (including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996), the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the impact of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 have to be dealt with before medical tourism is a viable option not only for non-compensation patients, but for compensation patients as well. Some of these issues will be spelled out in the next article in this series.

62 Barry Llewellyn, (2009, September). Workers' Compensation Medical Cost Issues. Casualty Loss Reserve Seminar (presented at the meeting of the Casualty Actuary Society (CAS), Chicago, Illinois, September 14, 2009).

63 Dennis C. Mealy, (2009, May). State of the Workers' Compensation Line. (Presented at the meeting of the Annual Issues Symposium at the National Council on Compensation Insurance, Boca Raton, Florida, May 7, 2009). Figures shown in the 2009 report for 2008 were adjusted in later years, so that in the latest report, the average medical claim cost per lost-time claims in 2008 was $255,000, as shown in Figure 1 of Part 1 of this series.

64 Facts in Brief, “Workers' Compensation Medical Care: Controlling Costs”, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, (2002).

65 California Healthcare Foundation, “Schwarzenegger Signs Workers' Compensation Reform Bill,” California Healthline, (April 20, 2004), accessed February 22, 2011.

66 University of Massachusetts, Worcester, (2002).

67 Ronald C. Merrell, et al., Roundtable Discussion, Medical Tourism, Telemedicine and e-Health, (January/February 2008), 16.

68 Herrick, Table 1, The Cost of Medical Procedures in Selected Countries (in U.S. dollars), 11.

69 Ibid, 11.

70 CA Labor Code, § 3209.3 (a) (2010).

71 FL Statutes, Title XXXI, Chap. 440.13, (1)(q) (2010).

72 NY Workers' Compensation Laws, Art. 2, § 13-b (2010).

73 TX Labor Code, Title 5, Subtitle A, Chap. 401, Subchapter B, § 401.011 (17) (2005).

74 FL Statutes, Title XXXII, Chap. 458.3124).

75 Oregon Labor Codes §656.245 (2)(a).

76 WA Dept. of Labor and Industries website, (2012).

77 Ibid, see http://www.lni.wa.gov/ClaimsIns/Claims/FindaDoc/FadMexico.pdf, http://www.lni.wa.gov/ClaimsIns/Claims/FindaDoc/FadCanada.pdf, http://www.lni.wa.gov/ClaimsIns/Claims/FindaDoc/FadOtherCountries.pdf

78 Herrick, 23.

79 Longe, 21.

80 Herrick, 23.

81 Longe, 21.

82 Herrick, 23.

83 Longe, 21.

84 Ibid, 21.

85 Herrick, 24.

86 Longe, 22.

87 Herrick, 24.

88 Longe, 21.

89 Herrick, 24.

90 Longe, 22.

The State Of Workers' Compensation

There are three major concerns and opportunities that must be considered. First, is the impact of SB 863, the major reform legislation bill passed late in this year’s session of the legislature. Second is the continued increase in loss cost on prior years’ claims. Lastly, will the weak economy improve enough to start bringing new workers into the workplace and what impact will that have on Workers’ Compensation costs?

SB 863 holds the promise of lower claims costs, improved efficiency in claims processing procedures, and ultimately rate relief for California employers. At issue is the time frame for writing new regulations that will implement the new law. They are scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2013 which may lead to rushed procedures and unintended consequences. Also major parts of the law will be challenged in court. The Independent Medical Review procedures raise the issue of right to appeal. The injured employee attorneys have already indicated they will challenge this portion on constitutional grounds. Time will tell what the ultimate impact of the new legislation will be on the system, but immediate reduced costs are not expected.

Unfortunately, increasing premiums and rates will almost certainly continue into 2013. The Workers’ Compensation carriers are spending 138 cents for every dollar of premium. The overly competitive marketplace coupled with medical cost inflation has led to large developments in claims settlements beyond case reserves. The collapse of the economy has also led to decreased premiums, while claims have increased.

It will take at least 24 months for this cost bubble to work its way through the system. The most recent actuarial review of past years’ claims cost indicates that rates are over 9% lower than they should be. While the Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau governing board, in a purely political move, decided to recommend no increase in rates to the Department Of Insurance, underlying costs continue to increase.

Finally, as the economy slowly recovers and payrolls increase, we will see hiring pick up. While it seems like this would lead to lower loss ratios as premiums go up, just the opposite is true. As you add employees in general, they will be less skilled, need more training and will be less able to work safely immediately. Increasing workforces will lead to increased accident rates and increased loss ratios.

The carriers will always compete for very clean, well-managed and low loss ratio accounts, so now is the time to redouble efforts with safety programs, training and claims management.