Business Interests Sure to Attack Benefit Bill

Monday, April 28, 2008 | 0

--By Julius Young

California State Sen. Don Perata is introducing another bill to increase compensation to workers who sustain permanent disabilities.

As sure as the swallows return to San Capistrano, you can be sure that entrenched California business interests will issue press releases attacking the PD increase bill. Ultimately, the opposition's premise is that SB 899 "is working" and that comp costs have been lowered, providing a boost to the state's economy.

Of course, there is some truth to that, in that comp premiums have fallen, though carrier profits remain at high historical levels.

They'll also argue that any change is "premature" and that further study is needed. And they'll probably argue that change should be made via administrative regulations (as the DWC has promised, but not delivered), rather than legislatively. That's an argument they might not be making if there was a Democratic governor in the statehouse.

But before the blizzard of arguments on the cost of a PD increase, let's get real. Too often in comp the workers are lost in studies that fail to recognize the plight of individuals. So lets look at some examples of actual workers rather than statistics. Where to start? Check out this website: http://www.denialofcare.org/horrorphotos.htm

These are disabled worker "horror stories" collected by attorneys for injured workers.

Even if one were to assume that a handful of these stories are slanted, discountable or somehow inaccurate, the sheer number of these stories is troubling. These stories put a face on the notion that the system appears to compensate permanent disabilities in an inadequate fashion. I suspect that intellectually honest representatives for employers would-in their heart of hearts-recongize the inadequacy of benefits for these particular workers.

So-a challenge to the enlightened employers (and insurers) in the employer community. What's an intellectually honest response to the inadequacy of benefits? Yes, we know that you believe (and may have been correct to some degree) that the system was out of control and had to be tamed. Tell us something we don't know.

Are workers such as these pictured as "horror stories" simply casualties of reforms for the "greater good" of salvaging the state's economy? Should there be some effort to balance the needs of such individuals with the need for the state's economy to remain competitive? To employers:read the horror stories, look at the pictures and then answer this. Are you comfortable with a system which compensates some of your workers in this fashion, knowing that less than half of insurance premiums are going to payouts for injured worker benefits? I recognize that in many quarters altruism is seen as naive and old fashioned. But I'll still ask the questions.

A day will come under a different governor when these arguments will receive a more comprehensive sounding. Employers: is it time to start thinking about what a response might be? Saying no forever will not be
an answer.

Stay tuned.

Julius Young is an applicants' attorney in Oakland. This column was reprinted from his blog, http://workerscompzone.com, with his permission.