Tag Archives: immigration

Why Immigration Policy Changes Will Probably Impact Workers Compensation

Today’s post comes from guest author Jon Rehm, from Rehm, Bennett & Moore.

In theory, the changes to immigration policy proposed by President Trump shouldn’t impact workers compensation in Nebraska. Workers compensation laws are state laws and Nebraska, like most states, awards workers compensation benefits regardless of immigration status.

But theory is one things and reality is another.

Mike Elk of Payday Report recently ran an article detailing that workplace deaths among Latinos were the highest in 2015 than they had been since 2007. This spike was attributed in part to aggressive immigration enforcement by the Obama administration which immigrant advocates believed made workers afraid to speak out about working conditions over fear of deportation.

During the Obama administration tougher immigration policies were at least coupled with tougher and even innovative workplace safety enforcement by OSHA. In the Trump era, workplace safety enforcement is expected to be curtailed and new OSHA rules are poised to be rolled back.

Immigration and workers compensation is often thought of in the context of Mexicans and central Americans working in industries like meatpacking and construction. This is a misconception, the meatpacking industry in Nebraska and elsewhere employs an uncounted but significant number of Somali workers. Somalis are one of seven nationalities banned from entering the United States under President Trump’s order. Ironically Somalis were recruited heavily into meatpacking work after raids during the Bush administration lead to the deportation of Latino meatpacking workers. Somalis had refugee status so there were few questions about their immigration status or eligibility to work legally. Under the new executive order, their immigration status is less secure and they may be less likely to speak out about working conditions.

A smaller but growing number of Cubans are coming to Nebraska for meatpacking work as well. Like Somalis, Cubans are deemed to be refugees so their ability to work lawfully is not a question for employers. However in the waning days of Obama administration, President Obama ended automatic refugee status for Cubans in an effort to normalize relationship with the Castro regime. There was little public outcry over this order like there was for the so-called Muslim Ban. However because of an executive order, Cuban nationals working in Nebraska may be less inclined to speak out about working conditions or claim workers compensation benefits due to newfound uncertainty over their immigration status.

Careful What You Wish For: Denying Worker’s Compensation for Undocumented Workers

Today’s post comes from guest author Charlie Domer from The Domer Law Firm.

In Washington State, undocumented workers are allowed to receive workers’ compensation benefits if injured in the course of employment. Many issues unique to this circumstance arise in such claims, including difficulties in documenting date-of-injury wages and job offers made during the course of a claim that require proof of eligibility for legal employment used as a tool by employers to truncate receipt of benefits by workers injured while in their employ.

Immigration reform is a continual and vexing issue in Washington. While politicians, lobbyists, and service organizations grapple with potential resolutions, there is no disputing the existence of illegal immigrants working for employers in our country. And when there are employees working, work injuries happen.  This may be especially true with the undocumented population who may be more susceptible to significant injuries because many perform more dangerous or hazardous jobs that other may not accept. For further information, see Do Immigrants Work in Riskier Jobs? and the CDC’s report on work-related injury deaths among Hispanics.

…excluding illegal immigrants from worker’s compensation coverage could create a financial incentive for employers to keep hiring illegal immigrants.

When injured, are these undocumented workers eligible for worker’s compensation? Some harshly argue that these workers should receive no benefits, as they are not working legally in the country. However, one of the underlying pillars of worker’s compensation is that the expense of workplace injuries (covered by insurance) should be placed on the employers who profit from the workers’ labors. Additionally, excluding illegal immigrants from worker’s compensation coverage could create a financial incentive for employers to keep hiring illegal immigrants—a practice that is against federal law.

The worker’s compensation laws in our country do not have a definitive answer to this question—though the trend is toward coverage of undocumented workers. Many states do Continue reading Careful What You Wish For: Denying Worker’s Compensation for Undocumented Workers

Texas Stories: Symptom of Bigger Workers’ Comp Debates

Today’s post comes from guest author Rod Rehm and Emily Wray Stander from Rehm, Bennett & Moore.

We have been listening with interest to a recent National Public Radio (NPR) series about construction workers and businesses in Texas. The series about this industry confronts many of the issues that are being debated by society these days, whether in the judicial, executive or legislative branches.

To add some context, these topics include employing immigrant workers; paying a living wage; calling an employee an independent contractor; and ensuring workplace safety, workers’ compensation, and payroll taxes are all done, practices that specifically are not happening in Texas, according to the stories. A notable quote from the first piece is “Texas is the only state in the nation without mandatory workers’ compensation, meaning hospitals and taxpayers usually end up shouldering the cost when uncovered construction workers are hurt.” And we think the information from the second piece is quite telling that the business owner “asked that NPR not use his last name because the IRS might take an interest in his business, designs and builds landscapes in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.” Because he treats his crew as “self-employed contractors,” meaning that the IRS would likely see his interpretations of tax law as illegal. From the story: “This is a key distinction. If Trent were to classify his workers as employees, he’d have to pay taxes, Social Security, unemployment and overtime. But by saying his workers are actually independent contractors – in essence, business owners – he’s off the hook.”

We think listening to these two pieces, at less than 15 minutes total, is a good opportunity to experience an applied illustration of what happens to the vulnerable when such protections as workers’ compensation are effectively dismantled for profit-taking and political reasons. Respected colleague Jon Gelman in New Jersey recently wrote a blog post that focuses on the first NPR report and “how bad it is for workers who get injured in Texas.”

Although things are allegedly always more extreme in Texas, attacks on the vulnerable aren’t limited to that state, unfortunately. Ms. Cathy Stanton, president of the Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy Group (WILG), and a respected colleague from Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano in New York, recently wrote an extremely useful article about “Emerging Trends in Legislative Attacks on Injured & Ill Workers.”

In Nebraska, the anti-worker, pro-business Nebraskans for Workers’ Compensation Equity and Fairness group is backing LB 584 that would dramatically limit protections that workers have when it comes to being injured through a concept called evidence-based medicine/utilization review. In addition to our firm writing numerous blog posts about this legislation, EBM/UR is #8 in Ms. Stanton’s list of “trends throughout the country which would negatively impact existing Workers’ Compensation benefits.” And according to this article, politicians in Tennessee are looking to gain some brownie points with business and insurance by overhauling the workers’ compensation courts to the detriment of injured workers. Iowa workers and attorneys have to contend with #6 on the list, restricting doctor choice, while a bill in Nebraska’s legislature is in the works to do the same if passed.

We agree with what Ms. Stanton writes: “All workers need to be aware of these trends because the likelihood of legislation being introduced in their state against their interests is strong. Employee immunity has remained untouched, but workers’ benefits are consistently under attack as a result of the collective lobbying efforts of the insurance industry and large corporations.   Unfortunately the great compromise is turning out to be one sided as workers are forced to endure multiple obstacles and hurdles to be entitled to fewer and more restricted benefits.”

So we would encourage you to join us in educating yourselves about how workers’ compensation “reform” can lead to stories like NPR’s cautionary tales about the construction industry in Texas and to explore what’s going on in your state legislature. Finally, get involved in your state’s political process to advocate for workers!