The Minister for Commerce in Western Australia recently announced the introduction of the Workers Compensation and Injury Management Amendment Bill 2011 into State Parliament.
The Bill proposes a significant change in the scheme with the abolition of age based limits on workers comp entitlements. (WCxKit)
Under the reforms all workers will have the same entitlements to compensation regardless of their age. At present the scheme discriminates against older workers by limiting the entitlement of injured workers aged 64 or more to only one year of income payments.
The bill will also:
1. Provide a mechanism to ensure seriously injured workers have a common law remedy where their employer is uninsured;
2. Bring significant and much needed improvement to workers comp dispute resolution arrangements; and
3. Address longstanding technical issues.
The improvements delivered through this bill will benefit both workers and employers while maintaining the long term sustainability and fairness of the States workers comp scheme.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact:Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
Obtaining the fair and reasonable resolution of the workers compensation claim often involves an element of negotiations between the work comp adjuster and the employee or the employee's attorney [for the purpose of this blog, the focus will be on negotiations with the employee's attorney]. While a few states still use a permanency rating combined with the average weekly wage to determine the settlement value of a work comp claim, most states/jurisdictions have evolved into a negotiated settlement of the work comp claim.
The primary responsibility of all work comp adjusters is the fair and reasonable settlement of claims. Throughout the course of the claim, the file disposition/settlement should be addressed in every action plan of the adjuster. Every contact with the employee's attorney should include efforts to move the file toward conclusion. (WCxKit)
The settlement negotiations with the employee's attorney start with the first notice of representation by the attorney. The adjuster should acknowledge the attorney's letter of representation with the adjuster's own letter advising the adjuster looks forward to working with the attorney to be sure the employee receives all appropriate medical care and any rehabilitation needed to return the employee to full employment with the employer. The purpose in sending this letter is to establish the adjuster as the one controlling the work comp claim, not the employee's attorney.
The settlement negotiations will be impacted by how the adjuster handles the claim. In the states where the employer selects the medical provider, the work comp adjuster should monitor the medical treatment and make timely inquiries with the medical provider(s) on the employee's ability to return to work either full duty or modified duty.
In the states where the employee selects the medical provider, the adjuster also needs to make timely inquiries about the employee's ability to return to work either full duty or modified duty. If the medical provider is non-cooperative with the adjuster on arranging for the employee to return to work, the adjuster needs to use peer reviews, independent medical examinations and any other tools at her/his disposal to insure the employee returns to work as soon as the employee is able.
The work comp adjuster should be inquiring about the employee's medical recovery with every contact with the treating physician's office or with the employee's attorney. If the injury justifies it, the use of a nurse case manager to monitor and control the medical care should be done. By close monitoring of the progress of the claim, the adjuster will keep the claim from being inflated unnecessarily.
Every step to assist the employee in medical recovery and returning to work will impact the overall disability rating given when the employee reaches maximum medical improvement. By asserting influence on the return to work and the overall disability rating, the adjuster is lowering the initial settlement demand made by the employee's attorney and is lowering the final settlement value.
Once the work comp claim has reached the point where the employee is ready to settle the claim, the adjuster should create a settlement negotiations action plan. Any claim that warrants a settlement offer should have a settlement range that will be a part of the negotiation strategy. The action plan should outline what the adjuster believes the settlement value or settlement range of the claim is and how the adjuster plans to reach that value in the settlement negotiations. If the settlement range is above the adjuster's authority to settle the claim, the adjuster should obtain settlement authority from the appropriate party prior to the start of any settlement negotiations.
A mistake often made by work comp adjusters is to make a settlement offer before any settlement demand is received. While the adjuster may feel her/his settlement evaluation is correct, whatever the amount offered, the employee's attorney will negotiate up from that amount. It is better to let the employee's attorney make his settlement proposal and negotiate down from that amount.
After the employee's attorney has made his initial settlement demand, the adjuster should evaluate how reasonable or unreasonable the employee's attorney is in his settlement demand. Depending on where the attorney's demand is in relation to the settlement range established by the adjuster, the adjuster's settlement offer should be at least as far below the settlement range's midpoint as the attorney's demand was above the midpoint of the adjuster's settlement range. With this approach the adjuster can raise the settlement offers to match the attorney's drops in settlement demands until the settlement negotiations reach a conclusion within the settlement range established by the adjuster prior to the start of the negotiations.
In some settlement negotiations the employee's attorney will stop negotiating or state they have reached their bottom offer. This is often a ploy to get the adjusters to bid against themselves by getting the adjusters to raise their settlement offer more than once without the attorney lowering demands. The purpose of this tactic is for the attorney to reach a higher settlement figure than the case might justify. Of course this tactic can also be used by the adjuster. The adjuster can advise she/he has reached her/his top settlement offer. The employee's attorney may decide to accept the adjuster's “top offer” or at least lower their settlement demand in an effort to continue the settlement negotiations.
The employee's attorney will have discussed the settlement value of the claim with the employee prior to entering settlement negotiations. A favor tactic of many attorney's is to say they believe the adjuster's offer is too low, but will discuss the matter with the employee and get back with the adjuster. When the attorney calls the adjuster back, the offer is too low, but the employee is anxious to settle and they will consider taking such and such amount, higher than the offer made. Again, this is a settlement tactic to get the adjuster to raise the settlement offer.
The adjuster can use the tactic of telling the employee's attorney that the settlement demand by the attorney is too high, but the adjuster will discuss it with the claims manager, the self-insurer or whoever. When the adjuster recontacts the employee's attorney, the adjuster will advise the attorney that the demand is too high, but in interest of getting the claim settled, the settlement offer is increased to a higher number than the prior offer.
A settlement tactic used by some attorneys when the negotiations are not going the way they want, is to tell the adjuster that the employee has had a relapse or his condition is worsening and send the employee back to the treating physician for medical treatment. The adjuster should resist this effort to force a higher settlement offer. The adjuster should immediately arrange for an independent medical examination of the employee to determine if there is really any deterioration in the employee's condition. If the employee's condition has truly worsened, the adjuster should reevaluate the settlement range. If not, the adjuster should resist this effort to force a higher settlement. (WCxKit)
In summary, regardless of what the employee's attorney says or does, the adjuster is responsible for obtaining a fair and reasonable settlement of the work comp claim. The adjuster should approach the settlement value from the low side at the same pace the employee's attorney approaches the settlement value from the high side. By taking this incremental approach, the work comp adjuster should negotiate a settlement that is fair to both the employee and the employer.
Author Rebecca Shafer, JD, President of Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. is a national expert in the field of workers compensation. She is a writer, speaker and website publisher. Her expertise is working with employers to reduce workers compensation costs, and her clients include airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: RShafer@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is proposing to revise its requirements for pre-shift, supplemental, on-shift, and weekly examinations.
The proposed rule on Examinations of Work Areas in Underground Coal Mines for Violations of Mandatory Health or Safety Standards would require mine operators to take responsibility for conducting complete workplace examinations. They would also have oversight for correcting violations and quarterly reviews with mine examiners of all citations and orders issued in areas where these four categories of examinations are required. (WCxKit)
“Examinations are the first line of defense for miners working in underground coal mines,” said MSHA Administrator Joseph Main. “Mine operators must take ownership for their workers’ health and safety by conducting basic workplace examinations to assure they are in compliance with health and safety standards.”
He stated that at the beginning of a shift, miners are particularly vulnerable to hazards and conditions that may have developed during the prior shift. “The examinations are intended to protect them,” Main adds.
After reviewing accident investigation reports and enforcement data, MSHA concluded that the agency needed to propose changes to existing examination rules. MSHA determined that the same types of violations of mandatory health or safety standards are found by its inspectors in underground coal mines every year. (WCxKit)
“Last year, MSHA inspectors issued 82,126 citations and orders at underground coal mines,” added Main. “These violations should be found and fixed by mine operators, not left for MSHA to find.”
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
Robert Harnage, formally of Middletown, Ohio, has been sentenced after an investigation by the Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation (BWC) Special Investigations Department (SID) determined he owned and operated a business, Classic Home Restoration, in Sierra Vista, Arizona, while receiving temporary total disability benefits for a work related injury.
Harnage pleaded guilty to one count of workers compensation fraud, a felony of the fifth degree, and was ordered to pay BWC $67,000 in restitution. (WCxKit)
BWC opened the investigation into Harnage after receiving an anonymous tip and discovered the Arizona Registrar of Contractors had investigated his activities there and found him guilty of operating without a contractors license. This information conflicted with Harnages submission of signed documentation to BWC confirming his understanding that he was prohibited from working or operating a business while receiving temporary total disability benefits.
BWC agents conducted interviews of Harnages customers who confirmed that he actively participated in the day-to-day operations of the business including providing estimates for all jobs, assisting with physical labor and supervising his crew. Agents also identified 149 checks written from customers to Harnage for his work as a contractor and determined he received benefits for which he was ineligible over a three-year period.
Harnage was indicted in September, 2009, but failed to appear and a warrant was issued for his arrest. (WCxKit)
The BWC SID Fugitive Task Force coordinated with the Cochise Sheriff’s Department in Arizona and Harnage was arrested at work.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact:Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
A culture of staff bullying and victimization has taken root at British Airways (BA), a new report by Unite, the largest union in the country, has revealed. Unite is calling for an immediate meeting with the airline to find ways to address the findings.
The confidential survey of nearly 2,000 BA employees conducted in November 2010 reveals nearly three in every four members of BA staff have witnessed or been subject to bullying at one of Britain’s best-known companies. The bulk of the respondents to the survey were cabin crew members, reflecting, Unite says, workforce's fears that they have been deliberately targeted by BA's management, seeking to "break" them and their union in order to drive down terms and conditions. (WCxKit)
Unite warns the survey reveals such an everyday and shocking level of bullying it can only harm the business. The union also believes the extent to which a bullying culture has taken root is a direct result of the war BA's management has been waging against it cabin crew since 2009. In recent months, about 70 cabin crew have been suspended and 18 sacked (with only three subsequently reinstated) as BA continues to quash resistance to employment changes directly affecting cabin crew.
The results are published as Unite is half way through its ballot of some 10,000 cabin crew members over the issues of union busting and the introduction of a cadre of crew on poorer terms without agreement with the workforce.
Key findings of the survey reveal :
1. Almost one in every two workers at British Airways has been bullied.
2. More than 72 percent of staff had either been bullied or witnessed bullying at work.
3. Over 50 percent of staff said they had been bullied by higher managers and 29 percent said they had been bullied by their line manager.
4. Intimidation, unfair criticism and humiliation were cited as the top three forms of bullying.
5. Almost two thirds say the bullying has got worse since it started.
6. More than 90 percent of employees are aware of company policies relating to bullying and harassment.
7. But over six out of 10 people (64.7 percent) did not report the bullying with many saying they saw no point due to the company’s and/or management's approach.
8. 37.4 percent of respondents did report the bullying, but of those two thirds said no action was then taken by the company.
9. Over 85 percent of cases of bullying involved more than one person doing the bullying.
10.More than three quarters of respondents said they knew of more than four colleagues had also been subject to bullying.
11.Almost two thirds of respondents said they had also been abused by passengers, and 9 percent had been physically abused by passengers.
Comments from those completing the survey include:
"Institutionalized bullying by management throughout BA."
"There's a culture of bullying that is coming from top management down."
"Working environment is the worst I've experienced in 22 years."
"Flight crew refused to speak to me or my crew."
"(bullied by) the wall put up at Waterside by BA where colleagues were encouraged to write derogatory comments about crew."
"Bombardment with emails by management telling me how I'll be punished if I take strike action."
"They have divided the workforce and began a massive campaign to bully, intimidate and harass the cabin crew. They are continually belittling us as a workforce."
"Phone calls at home; barrage of emails from management."
Unite’s general secretary Tony Woodley noted, "This survey shows the company’s macho management has pitched colleagues against one another.
"BA management’s urgently needs to do a corporate U-turn and sit down with Unite representatives to address this bullying epidemic. That begins with lifting the sanctions imposed on over 6000 cabin crew who took action last year and immediate agreement that a third party will analyze those cases where workers have been disciplined or dismissed, often on the flimsiest of pretexts. (WCxKit)
"The message of this survey has to be, Mr Walsh and the BA board – your war on your workforce is ruining this once great airline. You have the power to end this misery and restore this airline to the place of public affection it once deserved. For your customers, shareholders and workforce, the glaring question now is why you choose not to."
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
Even though the number of workplace deaths last year in Singapore has declined, the number of deaths in the construction sector remained high – with 32 last year, one more than in 2009.
According to statistics from a Workplace Safety and Health Council report, the deaths in the construction sector make up 58 percent of the total number of workplace deaths, which has dropped from 70 in 2009 to 55 last year. (WCxKit)
According to todayonline.com, among all the sectors, construction was the only one where the number of deaths did not fall.
The number of deathsin the sector, in fact, has "stagnated in the past few years" amid improvements shown in other sectors, the report stated.
It added: "This calls for serious action to be taken by construction leaders to improve management of safety at worksites."
The council had, in 2008, gathered leading developers and contractors which pledged to reduce fatalities.
The 19 companies which came onboard put in place plans that resulted in a decline in fatalities in their firms, from 13 in 2009 to seven in 2010.
These companies will embark on two new initiatives this year, including spearheading a peer review group to share best practices for work-from-height or crane activities.
The firms will also incorporate the Design for Safety (DfS) program in their new projects. (WCxKit)
Later this year, the council will unveil the DfS Mark – a recognition scheme for developers who have adopted DfS and will be awarded on project basis upon assessment.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact:Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
Montana’s House of Representatives has given the go-ahead to legislation that would ban illegal immigrants from receiving workers compensation benefits.
According to BusinessInsurance.com, in a 69-31 vote Jan. 19, the Montana House approved H.B. 71, sponsored by Rep. Gordon Vance, R-Bozeman, and passed the bill on to the state Senate. (WCxKit)
Supporters of the legislation indicated it will assist in reducing workers comp rates, but Democratic opponents counter it could encourage unscrupulous employers to hire illegal immigrants because they would not have to acquire workers comp coverage for them.
According to the Associated Press, the Montana State Fund reported to legislative staff that in 2010, it could only locate eight claims out of more than 8,000 that had a suspicious Social Security number that may indicate an illegal immigrant.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
Posted in
Uncategorized |
A company on top of its workers compensation costs implements Account Servicing Instructions (ASIs). Without them managing claims and litigation is nearly impossible.
Also known as account instructions, claim service instructions or account handling instructions, ASI represent the agreement or understanding between the insured and the field adjusters at the insurer’s branch offices that guides the handling of all suits and claims, both litigated and non-litigated.(WCxKit)
These instructions are disseminated to all branch offices across the country.
The ASI includes information about how claims are to be handled in every line of insurance including workers compensation, products liability and automobile insurance. (Third-party administrators who provide claims servicing without insurance also use ASI to guide their adjusters.)
After ASI are negotiated, the insured must familiarize all internal claims handling personnel with the provisions of the ASI and provide them with a written copy to ensure they understand the responsibilities for key areas of claims handling.
In addition to containing policyholder information and details about coverage and dissemination of data (loss runs), ASI can also contain other lesser-known guidelines.
For example, the referral of medical reports to a physician consultant for preparation of a letter to set up an independent medical examination (IME), or a requirement saying subrogation can be waived only upon receipt of a written evaluation and agreement by the company.
The following should be addressed by or incorporated into ASI
for a company to gain more control of its claims and litigations.
1. Settlement Authority
Who has settlement authority? The company or the insurer?
2. Selection of Counsel
Do you select your own legal counsel? What type of legal counsel does your company utilize?
3. Reporting
How often do you receive status reports for open claims from your insurer, 30, 60 or 90 days?
4. Reserves
Does the insurer provide a written explanation each time reserves are raised over $10,000 or more? Do reserves set take into consideration the company’s aggressive return-to-work program, probably resulting in lower wage loss?
5. Dedicated Adjuster
How many adjusters are dedicated to processing company files in each office? Are you adjusters "designated" or "dedicated" — there's a big difference, so as you negotiate terms make sure to determine the difference in these two different arrangements. Designated adjusters means you will always have the same adjusters handling your claims, probably one in each office, but they will handle the claims of other companies. Dedicated adjusters will handle ONLY your claims, not claims from any other company.
6. Investigations
How do you request investigations? Are all investigation reports sent to you for review. That's a good start. Specify this in your account instructions. Don't rely on adjusters to review the reports. READ THEM YOURSELF!
7. Structured Settlements & MSA Compliance
Do you consider structured settlements for all cases over $10,000? Do you have a reputable firm to handle all your MSA Compliance needs? Even if you are self-insurance, self-administered you will want an MSA Complaince company on board. Find one that does compliance audits to make sure you are crossing all the t's and dotting all the i's as there are large fines for non-compliance.
8. Subrogation
Are all cases reviewed for subrogation potential? Who closes a file and waives subrogation recovery? Do you want to be consulted before a lien is waived or compromised?
9. Workers Compensation Lost Wages
Do you receive copies of payments being made on each open file? Do you review checks or a list of all payments made for accuracy?(WCxKit) Make sure checks are not automatically deposited into claimant's bank accounts because they will no longer need to sign the fraud endorsement language on the back of the checks. It's there for a reason, and you want to have it seen and signed!
10. Referral to Physician Consultant & Nurse Triage
How are outside vendor services activated and coordinated? Are all medical records sent to the physician consultant before an independent medical examination is conducted? The TPA may have these services, but if not, make sure to consider a full range of services. Nurse Triage provides medical advise upon intake to a trained triage nurse, much like having an EMT available for all injuries. The ROI is about 4 to 1, and there really isn't any downside.
11. Physical Therapy & Occupational Clinics
This is one area you can save money, by having a network in place rather than relying on the adjuster or doctor to make a random referral, you can work with a PT operation that focuses on return to work. The right network will be local or might even come onsite to treat your employees. If you have a spare room, you might consider having onsite PT or even an onsite occupational clinic. If you have this type of facility, make sure to mention it in your account instructions or the adjuster might not know.
Even Federal Agencies can benefit from some of these services, so make sure to explore all options.
Eleven questions to ask when setting up your account service instructions that will save you money #WorkersComp.
Author Rebecca Shafer, JD, President of Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. is a national expert in the field of workers compensation. She is a writer, speaker and website publisher. Her expertise is working with employers to reduce workers compensation costs, and her clients include airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: RShafer@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
©2010 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
The University of Notre Dame has been fined $77,500 for ignoring industry standards that could have prevented the death of a football team videographer who died last year after the hydraulic lift he was using toppled in strong winds, the Indiana Occupational Health and Safety Administration reported.
The fine marks the culmination of the agencys investigation into the death of student Declan Sullivan. The accident was labeled a preventable workplace fatality. (WCxKit)
"Notre Dame did not establish and maintain conditions of work that were reasonably safe for its employees," the agency remarked in a statement.
Sullivan, a 20-year-old film and marketing student from Illinois, was working as a paid employee of the schools athletic department on Oct. 27, when he went up in an aerial scissor lift to document the football teams practice.
The National Weather Service had issued a wind advisory for the day, and gusts reached 51 mph about the time of Sullivans fall. The lift carrying Sullivan crashed through a fence and landed on a street. (WCxKit)
After Sullivans death, Notre Dame officials were criticized for failing to take responsibility for the incident and for appearing to put the teams interests ahead of the student videographer.
Author Robert Elliott, executive vice president, Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. has worked successfully for 20 years with many industries to reduce Workers Compensation costs, including airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact:Info@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
All good risk managers understand the importance of preventing injuries through a strong safety program. From the employers perspective, the buy-in of the employees into the safety program should be a given, as the employer sees the safety program as protecting the employees from injury. However, the employees, especially the ones who have never been hurt on the job, may view the safety program requirements as hindrances in their performance of their work.
To encourage employee participation in their safety programs, employers often add what they see as incentives for the employee's to participate. For example, the employer may offer gift cards to local businesses with the size of the gift cards tied to the number of days the employer has gone without a report of a work comp claim. While some employees will view the gift cards as bonus compensation, it may have the unintended consequence of causing an employee with an injury to not report the injury due to peer pressure. If the injury develops complications due to the lack of timely medical care, the injury gets reported late and the cost of the medical benefits is higher than it would have otherwise been. (WCxKit)
Incentives can be used to create employee interest in the safety program and motivate employees (and managers and supervisors) to act and work in a safe manner. But, if the incentives become the focus of the safety program and actual safety is not the focus, then the incentives become interference in obtaining a true safe working environment.
Instead of the emphasis of the safety program being on the incentives, the emphasis should be on training the employee how to work safely. Educating the employee in the proper performance of their job will have a bigger impact on the overall safety record of the employer than an incentive program. If the employees do not know how to work safely, the incentive program will fail.
A tactic taken by some employers is to tie performance bonuses for managers and supervisors to the number of injuries reported at a work site. If the managers and supervisors are more interested in the bonus then they are their actual safety performance, they can go outside the lines of propriety by pressuring employees to not report claims or by delaying the reporting of claims until their bonus is paid. Any incentive program from managers and supervisors must have built-in safeguards to be sure all claims, big and small, are reported timely.
The safety program needs to be constructed where the employees are motivated to act in a safe manner and to promote safety with their fellow employees without anyone feeling there will be retribution for reporting an injury. If the employees feel there is retribution or retaliation for reporting an injury, the number of reported injuries may declined slightly, but the actual number of injuries does not decline.
When safety programs are tied to return to work programs, with only lost time claims being counted by the employer in awarding safety incentives or bonuses, there can be an abuse of the return to work program. There are situations where the employee following an injury is unable to perform any meaningful work for the employer. If the employee is returned to work anyway and sets in the cafeteria or break room all day doing nothing, it will have the unintended consequence of demoralizing other employees who see the injured employee as receiving preferential treatment.
Some employers have tried tying safety programs to progressive discipline where injured workers are reprimanded for unsafe acts that result in an injury to themselves or others. The problem of using progressive discipline is it usually has three or four steps including a written warning, probation, suspension and termination. Only the most careless of employees will have three or four safety violations or at-fault injury claims where they can be terminated for repeated violations of the safety program. While the progressive discipline approach can reduce safety violations, it can also create a morale problem, especially if the employee does not feel he/she acted in an unsafe manner.
For safety programs to be effective there needs to be:
1. A screening program to prevent the hiring of people who are prone to accidents or who have a lax attitude toward safety
2. A drug testing program that includes pre-hire testing, post-accident testing, random testing and for just-cause testing
3. A culture of safety before profits or production within the company
4. An integration of the safety program into the company's quality control program
5. A way to quantify risk and measure the results of changes with the work process (WCxKit)
To prevent problems within the safety program, employers need to keep the focus of the safety program on training the employees, not on incentives for either the employees or the supervisors/managers. Incentives should be used only as a way of obtaining the employees interest in the safety program. Properly educating the employees on how to work safely will have a much greater impact on worker safety than any incentive program.
Author Rebecca Shafer, JD, President of Amaxx Risks Solutions, Inc. is a national expert in the field of workers compensation. She is a writer, speaker, and website publisher. Her expertise is working with employers to reduce workers compensation costs, and her clients include airlines, healthcare, printing/publishing, pharmaceuticals, retail, hospitality, and manufacturing. See www.LowerWC.com for more information. Contact: RShafer@ReduceYourWorkersComp.com or 860-553-6604.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers comp issues.
©2011 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact Info@WorkersCompKit.com.
