The panel included Paul Turello, Director of the Colorado Division of Workers’ Compensation, Dr. Cora Roelofs from the Center for Construction Research and Training, Neil deBlois from Zurich North America, and Frank Rivera from the Massachusetts Port Authority. Each came at the system from a different angle: regulatory, labor, insurance, and employer operations. And while the topics ranged from AI to mental health to climate risk, the underlying theme was consistent.
Workers’ compensation is becoming more complex, not less. And the old ways of managing that complexity are starting to break down.
AI Is Moving Fast, but Trust Is Lagging Behind
The panel opened with a discussion on artificial intelligence, and what stood out immediately was the lack of alignment on what AI should actually do in workers’ comp. Paul Turello framed it in a way that stuck with me. He described AI in the industry as “overtalked and under-resolved on risk.” That tension showed up throughout the discussion. From a regulatory standpoint, the concern is not just efficiency. It is fairness. Turello pointed to new legislation in Colorado focused on preventing AI-driven discrimination and requiring that healthcare decisions include individualized data and human oversight. The concern is that without guardrails, AI could repeat historical patterns of bias in ways that are harder to detect.
Click Link to Access Free PDF Download
“The 6-Step Process To Determine Workers’ Comp Injury Causation”
From the labor perspective, Dr. Roelofs made a different but equally important point. The issue is not resistance to technology. It is a lack of transparency. She described AI as a “black box,” especially in safety applications, where workers are being monitored without a clear understanding of how the data is used or whether it actually improves outcomes. Her point was simple. Workers will accept change when there is clear evidence that it makes them safer. Without that, trust breaks down.
On the insurance side, Neil deBlois took a more practical view. He sees AI primarily as a tool for efficiency, particularly in claims handling. He gave the example of summarizing large medical record files in complex claims, freeing up time for adjusters to focus on more meaningful parts of the claim. But even there, he emphasized the importance of keeping human judgment in place. That contrast was one of the more interesting dynamics of the session. Everyone sees the potential of AI. But there is no shared agreement yet on how far it should go, or where the limits should be.
Access to Care Is Also an Administrative Problem
From a previous session, I wrote about how access to care is becoming more operational and less about simple provider availability. This panel reinforced that idea, but added another layer that I think is often overlooked.
Paul Turello made the point that access to care is not just about whether providers exist or how close they are. It is also about whether the system allows care to happen. He described administrative barriers as one of the biggest issues. Delays caused by authorization processes, unclear denials, and extended investigations can slow down care even when the provider is available and the treatment is appropriate. At one point, he noted that even when guidelines clearly support a treatment, delays still occur. His focus has been on tightening timelines and closing those gaps so that care is not stalled by the system itself.
That is an important distinction. In many cases, the barrier may not be geography, it could be process.
The Aging Workforce Is Changing How Claims Develop
Another major theme was the aging workforce, but the discussion went deeper than the usual talking points.
Frank Rivera shared a perspective that I think reflects what many claims professionals experience over time. Early in his career, he approached claims narrowly, focusing on the specific injury. But over time, that approach breaks down. As he put it, you might start with a back injury, but quickly realize “everything’s wrong,” and the claim becomes much more complex. That shift matters. Older workers often bring comorbidities, longer recovery timelines, and more complicated return-to-work scenarios. Managing those claims requires a broader view, not just of the injury, but of the entire health and work context. At the same time, there is another side to the aging workforce that does not get enough attention.
From a system perspective, Paul Turello noted that experienced workers are often less likely to get injured. But when they do, the severity tends to be higher. That dynamic is changing both frequency and severity trends across the system. And then there is the workforce behind the system itself.
Neil deBlois raised a concern that has been an issue in our industry for a number of years.. A significant portion of the workers’ comp claims workforce is nearing retirement, and there is not a strong pipeline of new talent coming in. His point was direct. “No one grows up and says they want to be in insurance.” That creates a long-term challenge that technology alone is not going to solve.
Mental Health Requires More Than a Program
The discussion on mental health was one of the more grounded parts of the panel. Dr. Roelofs emphasized that while peer support programs and navigation tools are helpful, they do not address the root causes. Issues like unpredictable schedules, lack of paid time off, and unsafe work environments are still driving mental health challenges. In other words, the system is often responding to the symptoms, not the source.
Neil deBlois added another layer by bringing the conversation back to the claims process. He pointed out that human interaction is critical in identifying warning signs that technology may miss. His suggestion was that claims management may need to evolve beyond traditional roles, potentially incorporating more support-oriented functions to help injured workers navigate both recovery and life disruption. That idea aligns with something I have seen repeatedly. When injured workers feel isolated or uncertain, outcomes tend to get worse. Addressing that requires more than just medical management.
The Bigger Picture: A System Under Pressure
If I had to summarize this panel in one takeaway, it would be this. The workers’ compensation system is being pulled in multiple directions at once.
Technology is advancing faster than regulation, and trust can keep up. Workforce demographics are shifting. Access to care is becoming more complex. And mental health is becoming more visible.
What struck me is that none of these issues exist in isolation. They all connect back to how the system functions as a whole. And that may be the real challenge going forward. It is not just about solving individual problems. It is about adapting the system to handle a higher level of complexity without losing the human element that ultimately drives outcomes. That was the thread running through this entire discussion. And it is something I expect we will be hearing a lot more about in the years ahead.
Michael Stack, CEO of Amaxx LLC, is an expert in workers’ compensation cost containment systems and provides education, training, and consulting to help employers reduce their workers’ compensation costs by 20% to 50%. He is co-author of the #1 selling comprehensive training guide “Your Ultimate Guide to Mastering Workers’ Comp Costs: Reduce Costs 20% to 50%.” Stack is the creator of Injury Management Results (IMR) software and founder of Amaxx Workers’ Comp Training Center. WC Mastery Training teaching injury management best practices such as return to work, communication, claims best practices, medical management, and working with vendors. IMR software simplifies the implementation of these best practices for employers and ties results to a Critical Metrics Dashboard.
Contact: mstack@reduceyourworkerscomp.com.
Workers’ Comp Roundup Blog: http://blog.reduceyourworkerscomp.com/
Injury Management Results (IMR) Software: https://imrsoftware.com/
©2025 Amaxx LLC. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law.
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker, attorney, or qualified professional.
