Today’s post comes from guest author Leila A. Early from The Jernigan Law Firm.
British Petroleum (BP) supervisors Donald J. Vidrine and Robert Kaluza were indicted on manslaughter charges in the deaths of 11 fellow workers in connection with the 2009 Deepwater Horizon explosion in the Gulf of Mexico. David Rainey, a BP deepwater explorer, was charged with obstruction of Congress and lying about the size of the spill. These indictments were in addition to a record $4.5 billion in criminal fines that BP agreed to pay for the disaster, which will be paid out over 5 years.
Mr. Vidrine and Mr. Kaluza were negligent in their supervision of key safety tests performed on the drilling rig, and they failed to phone engineers on shore to alert them of problems in the drilling operation. These charges carry maximum penalties of 10 years in prison on each “seaman’s manslaughter” count, 8 years in prison on each involuntary manslaughter count and a year in prison on a Clean Water Act count. Mr. Rainey obstructed Congressional inquiries and made false statements by underestimating the flow rate to 5,000 barrels a day even as millions were gushing into the Gulf. He faces a maximum of 10 years in prison.
By charging individuals, the government was signaling a return to the practice of prosecuting officers and managers, and not just their companies, in industrial accidents where reckless and wanton conduct is involved. The practice of charging individuals was more prevalent in the 1980s and 1990s but has recently been a rare occurrence, with company fines being the only penalty sought. Some wonder if the $4.5 billion criminal settlement is enough to penalize a corporation after 11 people were killed, and that if a culture of disregard for safety exits in a corporation that is “too big to fail” then the only way to stop that culture is to send those who knew about it to jail. We shall see.
Today’s post comes from guest author Leonard Jernigan from The Jernigan Law Firm.
Mental health problems are an issue for every firm, across the nation, that represents injured and disabled people, whether with personal injury cases, workers’ compensation or Social Security claims. The delays inherent in the system – particularly the increased delays due to government belt-tightening – take a toll on our clients and, by extension, on all of us.
In addition to the links provided by Mr. Jernigan there are resources available for people in psychological need in your local community. If you or someone you know needs assistance with their fight in their case or claim, please feel free to contact Causey Law Firm for help.
Several years ago I had declined to represent an injured truck driver until his wife called me and said she found a suicide note and asked me to reconsider. I did and was able to help him. I believe there is a connection between suicide and workers’ compensation. Clearly the pain of an injury, coupled with the stress of not being able to return to work can cause tremendous psychological strain.
The Washington Department of Labor and Industries reports that a Pierce County couple will pay nearly $23,000 in restitution and fines after pleading guilty to charges that they continued to employ workers in their Spanaway, WA towing business after the state had prohibited them from doing so. In 2011, the Department of Labor & Industries revoked the certificate of industrial insurance for A1 Towing Service after owners Sandra and Billie Rouse failed to pay for workers’ compensation insurance for their employees.
L&I’s Fraud Prevention and Compliance Program assessed $24.6 million in unpaid employer premiums plus penalties in fiscal year 2012.
According to court documents, the Rouses allegedly told a revenue agent they were continuing to operate the business without employees. However, an L&I investigator determined that several employees were continuing to work for the business. While observing the business over a period of time, the investigator saw employees using company trucks to pick up and deliver various vehicles, including vehicles at the scene of accidents.
The Rouses both appeared in Pierce County Superior Court last week and entered guilty pleas to a Class C felony for engaging in business after the certificate of coverage had been revoked. In addition to the restitution and fines, Billie Rouse was sentenced to a 30-day jail term which was converted to 240 hours of community service.
L&I’s Fraud Prevention and Compliance Program assessed $24.6 million in unpaid employer premiums plus penalties in fiscal year 2012. The program brings in nearly $9.30 for every dollar spent to fight fraud. More information is available at www.Lni.wa.gov/Main/Fraud.
As of January 1, 2012, a significant change in Washington’s workers’ compensation laws created Claims Resolution Structured Settlement Agreements, or CRSSAs. The CRSSA provides an opportunity to resolve the claims of injured workers age 55 and over through structured settlements, an option intended to reduce overall claim costs for the Department of Labor and Industries, potentially leading to lower workers’ compensation premiums for both businesses and workers, while providing an alternative for injured workers who feel “stuck” in the Department’s system and wish to pursue retirement or alternative work goals outside their claims. – See more detail in our prior post on this subject here.
The Office of the Attorney General provides legal oversight to the Department and assists in the crafting of structured settlement agreements, including the agreement contracts. The Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals, a separate State agency tasked with resolving disputed issues in workers’ compensation claims, among other things, has been given the responsibility to review CRSSAs and, thumbs-up or thumbs-down, approve or deny them.
The CRSSA program is immense, involves three separate State agencies, and the laws that created the program were crafted as a concept with each agency left to determine their specific role and policies with the hopeful expectation that those roles and policies would efficiently mesh and result in a flushing out of the most expensive claims in the workers’ compensation system – total disability pension cases. A claim that results in a disability pension is expensive for the Department of Labor and Industries not only because it has to fund a lifetime pension, often with survivor benefits for the injured worker’s spouse, but also because of the Herculean effort put into avoiding placement on the pension rolls in all but the most clear-cut cases.
Since the inception of the CRSSA program, 60 cases have been through an approved structured settlement review by the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals. Of those, 31 have been rejected and 29 have been approved.
Vocational services provided to injured workers facing placement on the pension rolls if retraining services are not successful can be costly. No stone is left unturned in the search for a retraining plan that will result in a finding of employability instead of total disability. In one recent case, a vocational counselor put in a not-insignificant amount of time to try to document our client’s ability to return to work as a Disc Jockey – not because of the sweet tones in his voice, his love of radio, his prior work experience or an aptitude for performing the job, but because he had been the voice on the radio during a short time while in the military during the Vietnam War (and, because he had no education or work experience in light-duty work over the past 40+ years of his work life). More common is a determination that an injured worker can return to work as a Parking Lot Attendant. Our current discussions within the law firm lead us to believe that there have been more injured workers found employable as Parking Lot Attendants by the Department of Labor and Industries than there are positions at every parking lot across the state. Although I do not have data to support that assertion, it is, by far, the most common outcome of vocational evaluations in our case load. No stone unturned.
There is no blueprint for a standard approach – each claim is unique and each settlement agreement proposal is reviewed individually based on the facts in the claim and the circumstances of the injured worker.
Since the inception of the CRSSA program, 60 cases have been through an approved structured settlement review by the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals. Of those, 31 have been rejected and 29 have been approved. I believe there are now 22 cases remaining in the pipeline that have not yet received a review determination. A bottleneck effect has occurred with our cases since last fall, when the Office of the Attorney General put the brakes on the process while evaluating several agreements denied authorization to proceed by the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals. As each agreement is submitted for review, those approved and denied are thoroughly analyzed to determine which elements led to approval and which led to denials in an attempt to clarify the requirements of the Board. Adjustments to pending contracts are made with each new item learned, refining the process each time. Until recently, this analysis was done behind closed doors, with little to no discussion of the process with us. The effect for the injured workers we represent who have been awaiting a settlement in their claim has been MONTHS of delay, initially with no details as to why. After incessant phone calls and complaints, the lines of communication opened a bit and all parties are now working more collaboratively to craft contracts that will pass muster and, hopefully, be approved by the Board.
The Attorneys General assigned to work on CRSSAs are making their best guesses to determine what the assigned Judges at the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals want to see in a structured settlement. There is no blueprint for a standard approach – each claim is unique and each settlement agreement proposal is reviewed individually based on the facts in the claim and the circumstances of the injured worker. Because of the very short timeframe given to the Board by the statutes that created CRSSAs, which dictates an approval or denial within 14 days of filing, there is no time for any meaningful discussion between the parties and the Judge. Thumbs-up or Thumbs-Down, that’s it. If denied, the application can be altered and resubmitted to try to gain approval – not usually by changing the terms of the agreement but typically by updating the documentation of how that agreement will be implemented and how it will be in the “best interest of the worker” – the Board’s required role is to provide this oversight, this judgment of the overall agreement and whether or not it is in the worker’s best interest, usually without ever setting sight on the worker.
The wrinkles have not yet been ironed out, yet already legislation has been introduced this year to amend last year’s statutes to open up the program to any worker over the age of 40. House Bill 1097 and Senate Bill 5127, which initially would have removed the age restriction for CRSSAs entirely, have now been amended to lower the age limit from 55 to 40. These bills have not yet passed but are a sign of how itchy the powers that be are to change the century-old system of workers’ compensation coverage in this State. That said, I have a few clients that are not yet aged into the current CRSSA system that are watching this legislation carefully, hoping that they can take advantage of the option to cut their ties with the State in exchange for a cash payout.
A structured settlement is not right for everyone in every case. If you are interested in exploring this option under your own claim, please feel free to contact Causey Law Firm for assistance.
Today’s post comes from guest author Barbara Tilker from Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano. Causey Law Firm can assist you with your application for Social Security disability benefits if you are in the Puget Sound region.
Filing for Social Security Disability (SSD) can be a lengthy process. Every case is different, and some are processed faster than others. However, we’ve found that it takes the Social Security Administration (SSA) between four (4) to six (6) months to make an initial decision. If that decision is unfavorable (and about 70% of initial decisions are denials), it can take between eight (8) to twelve (12) months to have a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) scheduled. A year to a year-and-a-half wait is not uncommon.
You should file as soon as you know that you will be out of work for at least twelve (12) straight months OR if your condition is expected to result in death.
Due to the lengthy process, you should file for SSD as soon as possible. You should file as soon as you know that you will be out of work for at least twelve (12) straight months OR if your condition is expected to result in death. If you will not be out of work that long, you should not apply for SSD, unless your condition is expected to result in death. You should talk to y our doctor to see how long he/she expects you to be unable to work. Your doctor’s support is incredibly important to your case – something we’ll talk more about in the future – so talk to him/her before making the decision to apply.
In order to make sure that you get the maximum amount of benefits you’re entitled to, your application must be filed within 17 full months from the time that you become disabled and unable to work. If you’ve already been out of work for a year or more, consider putting in an application right away to prevent any loss of benefits you would otherwise be entitled to.
Once you’ve spoken to your doctor and made the decision to apply, contact our office to schedule an appointment.
Today’s post comes from guest author Jon Gelman from Jon Gelman, LLC – Attorney at Law.
Recently release statistics from the US Geological Survey brings some hope to reducing asbestos disease in the US. Historically, as the production of asbestos fiber lowers, so does the incidence of asbestos related disease, which is a latent medical condition that takes 10 to 30 years to manifest itself.
Asbestos this has been used for decades in the United States in militray and civilian environments in various forms including construction material and insulation. It appears in commercial and military buildings and equipment, as well as residential and consumer appliances. Asbestos has been causally connected to a rare and fatal cancer, mesothelioma. Asbestos has also been linked to various other cancers including: lung cancer, a well as a pulmonary condition, asbestosis.
Even though the United States Geological Survey has reported that there is a reduction in the amount of us asbestos now still being consumed in the United States. Asbestos remains in place in many buildings and types of equipment.It continues as a serious health issue. When asbestos “in place” becomes disturbed by demolition, renovation and other types of construction there is a potential for human illness. Therefore, safety proportions must be taken for those who continue to be exposed including workers and even bystanders.
United States has not yet banned the use of asbestos fiber. While restrictions remain in place for its use, low dosage and minor exposures, can leed to serious illness and fatalities.
“All asbestos imported and used in the United States was chrysotile, solely sourced from Brazil. This is the first year in more than 100 years that chrysotile was not imported from Canada. There was no chrysotile produced in Canada in 2012 so domestic consumers sought other sources for their supply. The increase in the average value of all imported chrysotile was because only high-valued chrysotile was imported from Brazil; there were no imports of lower valued chrysotile from other countries in 2012. Based on current trends, U.S. asbestos consumption is likely to remain near the 1,000-ton level, as it has in the past 4 year.”
Today’s post comes from guest author Jon Gelman from Jon Gelman, LLC – Attorney at Law.
This is a timely post as I just received notice that the Department of Labor and Industries investigated a fraud case against an employer in Lake Stevens, WA that did not cover his employees for workers’ compensation. This was not the first time the Department had contact with this employer for this same issue, either. This time, charges were filed and the employer was sentenced to sixty days in jail, converted to house arrest.
Roofers, of all workers, need their workers’ compensation coverage!
Today I received an urgent call from attorney representing a client in New Jersey who fell from a roof. Before she told me the job description of the injured worker, now in a coma, I correctly anticipated that it was probably a roofer who had fallen from a roof, yet again.
This scenario has played out in workers’ compensation claims for decades. How the accident happened is usually an argument with the employer. The employer claims that the employee was either intoxicated or not following safety precautions. My instinct always tell me that this is probably incorrect, since roofers tend to lose their balance and fall for many other reasons, including “gravity.” Some reason a deprivation of oxygen and/or exposure to toxic neurological irritants contained in the roofing materials, and weather related events that make roofs slippery.
Today’s post comes from guest author Jon Gelman from Jon Gelman, LLC – Attorney at Law.
A pending RICO case against Wal-Mart, Claims Management, Inc. (CMI) and others, where the plaintiff alleged that the employer, working in concert with other defendants “dictated and interfered unlawfully” with employees who were entitle to medical treatment flowing from occupational accidents. has been settledfor $8 Million. (Settlment Documents).
The parties made a Joint Statment on November 13, 2012 announcing the Court’s approval:
he United States District Court for the District of Colorado, Judge Robert N. Blackburn, has granted final approval to the settlement of a class action suit agains
JOSEPHINE GIANZERO and JENNIFER JENSEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v.WAL-MART STORES, INC., a Delaware corporation; CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC., an Arkansas corporation; AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE CO., a New York corporation; CONCENTRA HEALTH SERVICES, INC., a Nevada corporation; and JOHN DOES 1-10, whose true names are unknown, Defendants. Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00656-REB-BNB (USDCT Colorado)
….
Read more about RICO claims and Workers’ Compensation
A partial summary judgment motion was denied by Judge Robert E. Blackburn in a pending Colorado case against Wal-Mart where the plaintiff alleged that the employer, working in concert with other defendants “dictated and …
1961-1968.] The Class Action Complaint was filed on March 24, 2009. Gianzero v Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. , et al., US DCT (D. Colorado) No. 09-cv-00656 REB BNB. Wal-Mart’s workers’ compensation has been critically reviewed …
The claim, on behalf of 7,000 Colorado Wal-Mart workers charges conspiracy with: Claims Management Inc., American Home Assurance Co. and Concentra Health Services Inc., to control medical treatment, who may have …
Concentra was denied a protective order in a pending Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq. claim filed in Federal Court in Colorado. The plaintiffs allege that Wal-Mart …
Today’s post comes from guest author Jon Gelman from Jon Gelman, LLC – Attorney at Law.
For the first time in more than a decade, the seasonal flu is becoming a pandemic that is causing major business disruptions, and illness and death in the workplace. Despite urgent calls from public health officials and declarations of states of emergency, the flu continues to aversely effect businesses and employees throughout the country.
The laxity amongst employers and employees in getting flu vaccinations, a lack of paid sick days, a shortage of medicine to treat the flu and consequences occurring because of poorly designed vaccination programs, may stretch the nations workers’ compensation system to new limits.
CDC recommends a yearly flu vaccine as the first and most important step in protecting against flu viruses.
While there are many different flu viruses, a flu vaccine protects against the three viruses that research suggests will be most common. (See upcoming season’s Vaccine Virus Selection for this season’s vaccine composition.)
Everyone 6 months of age and older should get a flu vaccine as soon as thecurrent season’s vaccines are available.
Vaccination of high risk persons is especially important to decrease their risk of severe flu illness.
Vaccination also is important for health care workers, and other people who live with or care for high risk people to keep from spreading flu to high risk people.
Children younger than 6 months are at high risk of serious flu illness, but are too young to be vaccinated. People who care for them should be vaccinated instead.
If you are sick with flu-like illness, CDC recommends that you stay home for at least 24 hours after your fever is gone except to get medical care or for other necessities. (Your fever should be gone without the use of a fever-reducing medicine.)
While sick, limit contact with others as much as possible to keep from infecting them.
Cover your nose and mouth with a tissue when you cough or sneeze. Throw the tissue in the trash after you use it.
Wash your hands often with soap and water. If soap and water are not available, use an alcohol-based hand rub.
Avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth. Germs spread this way.
Clean and disinfect surfaces and objects that may be contaminated with germs like the flu.
If you get the flu, antiviral drugs can treat your illness.
Antiviral drugs are different from antibiotics. They are prescription medicines (pills, liquid or an inhaled powder) and are not available over-the-counter.
Antiviral drugs can make illness milder and shorten the time you are sick. They may also prevent serious flu complications. For people with high risk factors [702 KB, 2 pages], treatment with an antiviral drug can mean the difference between having a milder illness versus a very serious illness that could result in a hospital stay.
Studies show that flu antiviral drugs work best for treatment when they are started within 2 days of getting sick, but starting them later can still be helpful, especially if the sick person has a high-risk health or is very sick from the flu. Follow your doctor’s instructions for taking this drug.
Flu-like symptoms include fever, cough, sore throat, runny or stuffy nose, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue. Some people also may have vomiting and diarrhea. People may be infected with the flu, and have respiratory symptoms without a fever.
Read more sbout the “flu” and workers’ compensation:
Laboratory Workers and Contacts Warned of Accidental Flu Pandemic. Safety in the laboratory workplace is of critical concern as many research laboratory employees suffer from exotic diseases that become workers’ …
As the US flu vaccination program rolls out, the numbers are also growing for those who have reported adverse consequences from the H1N1 vaccine. The victims and their families are also lining up for benefits available in …
The OSGA directive closely follows the prevention guidance issue by The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to prevent the spread of H1N1 flu. The purpose of the compliance directive is “to ensure uniform procedures when …
The 2009 influenza pandemic (flu) has created a new framework of acts and regulations to respond the World Health Organization’s (WHO) phase 6 pandemic alert. Governmentally imposed employment disruptions resulting …
The Department of Labor and Industries has adopted changes to the Washington Administrative Code regarding the:
credentialing,
approval,
removal, and
regulation of independent medical examination (IME) providers.
The rules are effective February 25, 2013.
These rules establish clear guidelines that a medical provider must follow to become an approved IME examiner. They also set the standards for IME examiners and firms to continue to receive referrals for IMEs. Rules governing the termination, suspension and discipline of IME providers and IME firms are also outlined.
Detailed information relating to this rule is provided in the CR-103 filing documents. View the CR-103 and the adopted language here.
[257 KB, 2 pages]
