Time is running out for Governor Crist to veto an eleventh-hour bill that would cap the amount of money injured workers can pay their attorneys to fight denied worker compensation claims. That the legislature didn’t also cap what insurance companies can spend has labor groups and trial attorneys crying foul and calling for a veto. House Bill 903 resurrects a 2003 bill that resulted in workers’ attorneys being paid as little as $8.00 per hour, which the Supreme Court ruled last year was unfair to workers.

Rich Templin, spokesman for the AFL-CIO, says workers are suffering from denied claims.

"They’re losing their houses; they’re losing their families; their losing their ability to provide health care for their kids, and they did nothing wrong. All they did was go to work and get hurt. But, because the insurance company wants to maximize its profit, these people are paying the price."

Supporters of the legislation, led by the Florida Chambers of Commerce, argue that this is the only way to reduce costs, and without caps on attorney’s fees, Florida worker compensation insurance premiums would again be among the highest in the nation. The state’s trial attorneys say many injured workers have been denied claims and have been unable to find counsel because the fees are too low.

Templin says the new bill caps worker's attorney fees at $1,500.

"No attorney is going to take that case, so that person is up against some of the biggest, most powerful insurance lawyers in the country. The insurance company hasn't been capped; it can still spend however much on legal representation as it wants while the workers get nothing. "

Fee caps remove the incentive for insurance companies to "do the right thing" by providing the coverage for injured workers that businesses are paying for, adds Templin.

"Insurance companies are routinely denying claims, even stuff that should be covered - that’s completely valid and completely fair - because there's no recourse for the worker. There is no way for them to get legal representation."

A recent study by the Department of Worker’s Compensation found litigation has declined since the restrictions imposed in 2003, while the number of denied claims has steadily increased.

For more information, visit www.fldfs.com/wc/pdf/SB-50A-Compensability.pdf.




get more stories like this via email

Advocates and stakeholders have solutions for the Virginia Employment Commission to get through its backlog of unemployment appeal cases.

According to the commission, during the first year of the pandemic, unemployment claims reached historic levels.

In 2020, more than 1 million claims were filed. Although the number of claims filed has declined since then, appeals are still facing longer processing time.

The agency's issues stem from underfunding, short staffing, and lacking technology, according to a 2021 report from the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission.

Pat Levy-Lavelle, senior intake attorney at the Legal Aid Justice Center, said one way to fix the issue is hiring more staff for first-level appeals. However, pandemic-era decisions are having a ripple effect now.

"Earlier in the pandemic, the former Secretary of Labor for Virginia basically said we had focused on folks to answer the telephones, and we forgot about staffing up in terms of having enough hearing officers," Levy-Lavelle recounted.

He added while work has begun to get more people in, there have been some hiring challenges.

Other recommendations are the commission having notices written so they are easier to understand. But, Levy-Lavelle feels having stakeholders come together to review recommendations to determine their necessity, will be a good first step to improving the agency.

Recently, a bill came to a vote in the House of Delegates to cut down the number of days a person has to file an appeal on unemployment claims. Although the bill failed, some are worried strategies to aid the employment commission are not heading in the right direction.

Flannery O'Rourke, staff attorney at the Virginia Poverty Law Center, described the challenges with implementing policy recommendations.

"Any kind of legislative fix, I think, is more complicated to implement," O'Rourke contended "I think we will still see if the governor's proposed budget amendment to fund current appeals staff will go through, and there's also the governor's proposed budget amendment that will help improve the claimant self-service system."

O'Rourke added stakeholder and legislative action needs to be taken quickly. With the commission still struggling to meet current needs, she hopes things will be resolved in a timely manner, so it can better assist people with appeals.

A Utah lawmaker has proposed a bill which could impose stricter restrictions and regulations for public employees.

Passage of House Bill 241, sponsored by Rep. Jordan Teuscher, R-South Jordan, would mean union stewards and leaders would not be allowed paid time to engage in union work. It would also prohibit a public employer from deducting union dues from a public employee's wages and prohibit public money or public property to be used for union organizing or administration.

Shelley Bilbrey, court clerk for Salt Lake City for almost two decades, has been a member of her union for the last 16 years and has been a union steward the last eight. She said in her opinion, the provisions mean Utah labor unions are in for the fight of their lives.

"A union member cannot do any union business whatsoever in a public building," Bilbrey explained. "That, right there, pretty much puts a kibosh on the union."

Teuscher has said it is an issue of using taxpayer money to process payroll deduction for union dues. Bilbrey countered she is shocked and confused because public employees have other deductions being taken out of their paycheck, and she does not see how union deduction fees are different.

Bilbrey added the measures proposed in the bill would heavily complicate helping union members. Bilbrey explained she joined her union to have a voice. As a union steward, Bilbrey emphasized she has a specific number of hours covered to handle union issues. If the bill were passed, Bilbrey stressed union issues would have to be resolved on one's own time.

"I don't know how to figure out how we would go around that," Bilbrey admitted. "What am I supposed to say to someone? 'Oh yeah, hey, meet me at Denny's.' "

Bilbrey added being part of a union is all about leveling the playing field and about giving individuals a voice at the workplace. She sees the bill not only as perplexing, but as an attack on public employees and Utah unions.

Researchers have said rural communities face a host of unique challenges, and access to paid leave is one of them. Advocates hope the needs of rural families are part of the debate, as discussion ramps up for a statewide program in Minnesota.

Gov. Tim Walz has included a paid family- and medical-leave program in his proposed budget.

Leota Goodney, activist and retired accounting firm operator from Northfield, said creating pathways for such a benefit could be helpful to small businesses in rural areas. She said it is a struggle everywhere, but is more profound in Greater Minnesota, where smaller firms and the self-employed are considered key drivers of local economies.

"There are not large employers like there are in the urban areas, and many of the large employers in the urban areas already offer some kind of paid family leave," Goodney pointed out.

A report by the think tank New America said only 61 % of women in rural communities have paid time off of any kind to care for a new child or an ill loved one.

The Walz plan calls for nearly $670 million to get the program started, with a less than 1% payroll tax to maintain funding. The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce argued it would place too much financial stress on small businesses.

The organization estimates the plan would cost Minnesota businesses $1 billion, but Goodney countered having employers and their staff pitch in is a small sacrifice in establishing a benefit which can help recruit workers for rural areas.

"I definitely think that it makes living more attractive in rural areas," Goodney asserted. "This is a way to keep people from leaving rural areas to go somewhere else where they can actually make a living."

Nearly a dozen states have adopted paid-leave laws. Minnesota's plan would cover up to 12 weeks of medical leave and up to 12 weeks of family leave.

The state has a $17 billion surplus and Democrats feel optimistic about pushing proposals such as paid leave through because of their majorities. It remains unclear what will be in the final spending plans with several priorities announced in recent weeks.