Workers' compensation (United States)
In the United States, some form of workers compensation is typically compulsory in most states (depending upon the features of the organization), with the notable exception of Texas as of 2018. Regardless of compulsory requirements, businesses may purchase insurance voluntarily, and in the United States policies typically include Part One for compulsory coverage and Part Two for non-compulsory coverage.
By 1949, every state had enacted a workers' compensation program.
The Workers’ Accident Insurance system put into place by Otto von Bismarck in 1881 is often cited as a model for Europe and later the United States. The system was motivated by an "unholy trinity" of tort defenses available to employers, including contributory negligence, assumption of risk, and the fellow servant rule.
In 1855, Georgia and Alabama passed Employer Liability Acts; 26 other states passed similar acts between 1855 and 1907. Early laws permitted injured employees to sue the employer and then prove a negligent act or omission. (A similar scheme was set forth in Britain's 1880 Act.)
The first statewide workers' compensation law was passed in Maryland in 1902, and the first law covering federal employees was passed in 1906. (See: FELA, 1908; FECA, 1916; Kern, 1918.) By 1949, every state had enacted a workers' compensation program.
At the turn of the 20th century workers' compensation laws were voluntary. An elective law made passage easier and some argued that compulsory workers' compensation laws would violate the 14th amendment due process clause of the U.S. Constitution. Since workers' compensation mandated benefits without regard to fault or negligence, many felt that compulsory participation would deprive the employer of property without due process. The issue of due process was resolved by the United States Supreme Court in 1917 in New York Central Railway Co. v. White which held that an employer's due process rights were not impeded by mandatory workers' compensation. After the ruling many states enacted new compulsory workers' compensation laws.
In the United States, most employees who are injured on the job receive medical care responsive to the workplace injury, and, in some cases, payment to compensate for resulting disabilities. Generally, an injury that occurs when an employee is on their way to or from work does not qualify for workers' compensation benefits; however, there are some exceptions if your responsibilities demand that you be in multiple locations, or stay in the course of your employment after work hours.
Insurance policies are available to employers through commercial insurance companies: if the employer is deemed an excessive risk to insure at market rates, it can obtain coverage through an assigned-risk program. In many states, there are public uninsured employer funds to pay benefits to workers employed by companies who illegally fail to purchase insurance.
Various organizations focus resources on providing education and guidance to workers' compensation administrators and adjudicators in various state and national workers' compensation systems. These include the American Bar Association (ABA), the International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions (IAIABC), the National Association of Workers' Compensation Judiciary (NAWCJ), and the Workers Compensation Research Institute.
In the United States, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' 2010 National Compensation Survey, workers' compensation costs represented 1.6% of employer spending overall, although rates varied significantly across industry sectors. For instance, workers' compensation accounted for 4.4% of employer spending in the construction industry, 1.8% in manufacturing and 1.3% in services.
Clinical outcomes for patients with workers' compensation tend to be worse compared to those non-workers' compensation patients among those undergoing upper extremity surgeries, and have found they tend to take longer to return to their jobs and tend to return to work at lower rates. Factors that might explain this outcome include this patient population having strenuous upper extremity physical demands, and a possible financial gain from reporting significant post-operative disability.
As each state within the United States has its own workers' compensation laws, the circumstances under which workers' compensation is available to workers, the amount of benefits that a worker may receive, and the duration of the benefits paid to an injured worker, vary by state. The workers' compensation system is administered on a state-by-state basis, with a state governing board overseeing varying public/private combinations of workers' compensation systems. The names of such governing boards, or "quasi-judicial agencies," vary from state to state, many being designated as "workers' compensation commissions". In North Carolina, the state entity responsible for administering the workers' compensation system is referred to as the North Carolina Industrial Commission
In a majority of states, workers' compensation is solely provided by private insurance companies. Twelve states operate state funds (that serve as models to private insurers and insures state employees), and a handful of states have state-owned monopoly insurance providers. To keep state funds from crowding out private insurers, the state funds may be required to act as assigned-risk programs or insurers of last resort for businesses that cannot obtain coverage from a private insurer. In contrast, private insurers can turn away the worst risks and may also write comprehensive insurance packages covering general liability, natural disasters, and other forms of insurance coverage. Of the twelve state funds, the largest is California's State Compensation Insurance Fund.
Underreporting of injuries is a significant problem in the workers' compensation system. Workers, fearing retaliation from their employers, may avoid reporting injuries incurred on the job and instead seek treatment privately, bearing the cost themselves or passing these costs on to their health insurance provider – an element in the increasing cost of health insurance nationwide.
Typically, workers can only receive compensation for injuries received while on the job, but in some states there are exceptions: traveling salespersons and similar employees can be covered if they are injured while taking a work-related trip, employees who are sent on special errands can receive compensation for injuries received on those errands. In some cases workers who, though not currently working, suffer injuries while on the premises of the employer can also receive compensation.
In all states except Georgia and Mississippi, it is illegal for an employer to terminate or refuse to hire an employee for having reported a workplace injury or filed a workers' compensation claim. However, it is often not easy to prove discrimination on the basis of the employee's claims history. To abate discrimination of this type, some states have created a "subsequent injury trust fund" which will reimburse insurers for benefits paid to workers who suffer aggravation or recurrence of a compensable injury. It is also suggested that laws should be made to prohibit inclusion of claims history in databases or to make it anonymous. (See privacy laws.)
Although workers' compensation statutes generally make the employer completely immune from any liability (such as for negligence) above the amount provided by the workers' compensation statutory framework, there are exceptions. In some states, like New Jersey, an employer can still be held liable for larger amounts if the employee proves the employer intentionally caused the harm, while in other states, like Pennsylvania, the employer is immune in all circumstances, but other entities involved in causing the injury, like subcontractors or product manufacturers, may still be held liable.
If a workers' compensation claim is denied, for example because an employer or employee fail to follow proper procedures when reporting the injury or if the insurance company does not believe the claim, the injured worker may appeal the denial. In most states, workers compensation claims are handled by administrative law judges, who often act as triers of fact.
According to one 2018 study, 70% of initially-denied claims are ultimately paid.
Some employers and insurance companies vigorously contest employee claims for workers' compensation payments. Injured workers may be able to get help with their claims from state agencies or by retaining a workers' compensation lawyer. Laws in many states limit a claimant's legal expenses to a certain fraction of an award; such "contingency fees" are payable only if the recovery is successful. In some states this fee can be as high as 40% or as little as 11% of the monetary award recovered, if any.
In the vast majority of states, original jurisdiction over workers' compensation disputes has been transferred by statute from the trial courts to special administrative agencies. Within such agencies, disputes are usually handled informally by administrative law judges. Appeals may be taken to an appeals board and from there into the state court system. However, such appeals are difficult and are regarded skeptically by most state appellate courts, because the point of workers' compensation was to reduce litigation. A few states still allow the employee to initiate a lawsuit in a trial court against the employer. For example, Ohio allows appeals to go before a jury.
Texas is unusual in that it allows employers to opt out of the workers' compensation system, with those employers who do not purchase workers' compensation insurance being called non-subscribers. However, those employers are exposed to legal liability in the event of employee injury. The employee must demonstrate that employer negligence caused the injury; if the employer does not subscribe to workers' compensation, the employer loses their common law defense of contributory negligence, assumption of the risk, and the fellow employee doctrine. If successful, the employee can recover their full common law damages, which are more generous than workers' compensation benefits.
In 1995, 44% of Texas employers were non-subscribers, while in 2001 the percentage was estimated to be 35%. The industry advocacy group Texas Association of Business Nonsubscription claims that non-subscribing employers have had greater satisfaction ratings and reduced expenses when compared to employers enrolled in the workers' compensation system. A research survey by Texas's Research and Oversight Council on Workers' Compensation found that 68% of non-subscribing employers and 60% of subscribing employers—a majority in both cases—were satisfied with their experiences in the system, and that satisfaction with non-subscription increased with the size of the firm; but it stated that further research was needed to gauge satisfaction among employees and to determine the adequacy of compensation under non-subscription compared to subscription. In recent years, the Texas Supreme Court has been limiting employer duties to maintain employee safety, limiting the remedies received by injured workers.
In recent years, workers' compensation programs in West Virginia and Nevada were successfully privatised, through mutualisation, in part to resolve situations in which the programs in those states had significantly underfunded their liabilities. Only four states rely on entirely state-run programs for workers' compensation: North Dakota, Ohio, Washington, and Wyoming. Many other states maintain state-run funds but also allow private insurance companies to insure employers and their employees, as well.
The federal government has its own workers' compensation program, subject to its own requirements and statutory parameters for federal employees. The federal government pays its workers' compensation obligations for its own employees through regular appropriations.
Alternate statutory compensation
Employees of common carriers by rail have a statutory remedy under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. sec. 51, which provides that a carrier "shall be liable" to an employee who is injured by the negligence of the employer. To enforce his compensation rights, the employee may file suit in United States district court or in a state court. The FELA remedy is based on tort principles of ordinary negligence and differs significantly from most state workers' compensation benefit schedules.
Seafarers employed on United States vessels who are injured because of the owner's or the operator's negligence can sue their employers under the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. App. 688., essentially a remedy very similar to the FELA one.
Dock workers and other maritime workers, who are not seafarers working aboard navigating vessels, are covered by the Federal Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, known as US L&H.
Workers' compensation fraud
The topic of workers' compensation fraud is highly controversial, with claimant supporters arguing that fraud by claimants is rare—as low as one-third of one percent, others focusing on the widely reported National Insurance Crime Bureau statistic that workers' compensation fraud accounts for $7.2 billion in unnecessary costs, and government entities acknowledging that "there is no generally accepted method or standard for measuring the extent of workers' compensation fraud ... as a consequence, there are widely divergent opinions about the size of the problem and the relative importance of the issue."
The most common forms of workers' compensation fraud by workers are:
- Remote injury. Workers get injured away from work, but say they were hurt on the job so that their workers' compensation policy will cover the medical bills.
- Inflating injuries. A worker has a fairly minor job injury, but lies about the magnitude of the injury in order to collect more workers' compensation money and stay away from work longer.
- Faking injuries. Workers fabricate an injury that never took place, and claim it for workers' compensation benefits.
- Old injury. A worker with an old injury that never quite healed claims it as a recent work injury in order to get medical care covered.
- Malingering. A worker stays home by pretending the disability is ongoing when it is actually healed.
- Failure to Disclose. A worker knowingly, or unknowingly, makes a false statement or representation about their injury.
The most common forms of workers' compensation fraud by employers are:
- Underreporting payroll. An employer reports that workers are paid less than they actually are in order to lower their premiums.
- Inflating experience. An employer claims workers are more experienced than they actually are in order to make them seem less risky and therefore less expensive to cover.
- Evasion. An employer fails to obtain workers' compensation for their employees when it is required by law. Workers are often deceived into thinking they are covered when they are not.
- Through the introduction of "opt-out plans" that are governed by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act, or ERISA, which is regulated by the Labor Department. The "opt-out plans"provide lower and fewer payments, make it more difficult to qualify for benefits, control access to doctors and limit independent appeals of benefits decisions.
- "Workers' Rights: Comp System Fails to Offer Adequate Benefits - National Employment Law Project". National Employment Law Project. 2018-06-01. Retrieved 2018-11-25.
- "Is Workers Compensation Insurance Required in all states". www.employers.com. Archived from the original on 2018-11-24. Retrieved 2018-11-24. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Workers Compensation and Employers Liability Policy | Insurance Glossary Definition | IRMI.com". www.irmi.com. Retrieved 2018-11-24.
- eh.net Fishback Archived 19 June 2017 at the Wayback Machine Includes extended data tables.
- "Workers' Compensation History: The Great Tradeoff!". Insurance Journal. 2015-03-19. Retrieved 2018-11-24.
- Haupt, Mary Kati (2016). "Workers' Compensation Law & the Remedial Waiver". Barry Law Review. 21 (2).
- Guyton, Gregory (1999). "A Brief History of Workers' Compensation". The Iowa Orthopaedic Journal. 19: 106–110. PMC 1888620. PMID 10847524.
- Google Scholar
re: THE EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY CASES, 207 U.S. 463 (1908)
- lawphil.net Archived 3 June 2010 at the Wayback Machine
"The Employers' Liability Act of Alabama, first enacted in 1855 (Civil Code 1907, Ch. 80, sec. 3910), is a substantial, if not an exact copy, of the English Act of 1880."
- The Federal Employers Liability Law of 1906 Archived 16 September 2009 at Wikiwix
The 1906 law was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court; re-worked by Congress in 1908
- eh.net Fishback Archived 19 June 2017 at the Wayback Machine Includes extended data tables.
- "New York Cent. R.R. v. White, 243 U.S. 188, 198, 37 S.Ct. 247, 250, 61 L.Ed. 667 (1917)". Google Scholar.
- Goldgerg, Stephanie (3 January 2016). "Responsibility for employees injured while traveling for work can be murky". Business Insurance. Business Insurance Holdings. Archived from the original on 14 May 2017. Retrieved 5 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions". IAIABC. Archived from the original on 7 September 2008. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "The National Association of Workers' Compensation Judiciary, Inc". nawcj.org. Archived from the original on 16 September 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Workers Compensation Research Institute". WCRI. Archived from the original on 20 April 2017. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "The Construction Chart Book: The US Construction Industry and Its Workers, Fifth Ed" (PDF). CPWR. Archived (PDF) from the original on 8 April 2014. Retrieved 18 June 2013. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- Gruson, KI; Huang, K; Wanich, T; Depalma, AA (February 2013). "Workers' compensation and outcomes of upper extremity surgery". The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 21 (2): 67–77. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-21-02-67. PMID 23378370.
- "Workers' Compensation Laws and Benefits by State". ExpertLaw.com. ExpertLaw. Archived from the original on 8 July 2017. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "North Carolina Industrial Commission". State of North Carolina. Archived from the original on 1 May 2017. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- Carr, Sean P. (17 May 2010). "State Workers' Comp Funds Wary of Shrinking Premiums" (PDF). BestWeek (20). Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 May 2018. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "State Funds". IRMI. International Risk Management Institute, Inc. Archived from the original on 2 April 2016. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Workers Compensation Insurance". Insurance Information Institute. Insurance Information Institute, Inc. 2014-01-12. Retrieved 6 May 2017.
- Dworsky, Michael. "The Impact on Workers' Compensation Insurance Markets of Allowing the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act to Expire" (PDF). NCCI. NCCI Holdings, Inc. Retrieved 6 May 2017.
- Dong; et al. "Injury Underreporting Among Small Establishments in the Construction Industry" (PDF). American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 2011. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 May 2016. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- Lipscomb, Hector J. (25 Oct 2012). "Safety, incentives, and the reporting of work-related injuries among union carpenters: "You're pretty much screwed if you get hurt at work"". American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 56 (4): 388–389. doi:10.1002/ajim.22128. PMID 23109103.
- Bradt, Gene P. (1980). "An Examination of the Arising out of and the in the Course Of Requirements under the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Law". William Mitchell Law Review. 6: 533. Retrieved 26 May 2018.
- See, e.g., "Kmart Corp. v. WCAB (Fitzsimmons), 561 Pa. 111, 748 A. 2d 660 (2000)". Google Scholar. Retrieved 26 May 2018.
- Sawyers, Bryan (2012). "The Inconvenient Worker–Can Mississippi's Public Policy Exceptions to the Employment-At-Will Doctrine be Expanded to Encompass the Exercise of Workers' Compensation Rights?" (PDF). Mississippi Law Journal. 81 (6): 1563–1596. Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 March 2015. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Millison v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 101 N.J. 161, 174, 501 A.2d 505 (1985)". Google Scholar. Retrieved 31 August 2017.
- "Pennsylvania Workers Compensation Act". PA.gov. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Archived from the original on 31 August 2017. Retrieved 31 August 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "If Your Claim is Denied". State of Nevada Department of Business & Industry. State of Nevada. Archived from the original on 1 December 2017. Retrieved 23 November 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Employees' Guide to Appealing A Workers' Compensation Claim Denial". Labor Commission. State of Utah. Archived from the original on 1 December 2017. Retrieved 23 November 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- B., Torrey, David (2012). "Master or Chancellor? The Workers' Compensation Judge and Adjudicatory Power". Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary. 32 (1). ISSN 0735-0821.
- "Nearly 70 Percent of Denied Workers' Comp Claims Are Paid". Risk & Insurance. 2018-06-25. Retrieved 2018-11-24.
- "Workers' Compensation Overview". Legal Aid at Work. Archived from the original on 31 August 2017. Retrieved 31 August 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Social Security Programs in the United States" by DIANE Publishing Company, p.34 books.google.com
- See Ohio Rev. Code Section 4123.512.
- "California Constitution, Art. XIV, Sec. 4". California Legislative Information. State of California. Archived from the original on 2 February 2017. Retrieved 5 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- O'Brien, David W. (Oct 1993). California Workers' Compensation Claims & Benefits (9 Spi ed.). Michie Butterworth. ISBN 978-0250472246.
- "A Study of Nonsubscription to the Texas Workers' Compensation System". Texas Department of Insurance. State of Texas. Archived from the original on 5 March 2017. Retrieved 6 May 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Texas Labor Code Sec. 406.033(a)". Archived from the original on 1 July 2012. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Texas Association of Business Nonsubscription". txbiz.org. Archived from the original on 29 July 2010. Retrieved 4 May 2018. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Workers' Compensation Law - State by State Comparison". NFIB. 9 June 2017. Archived from the original on 1 December 2017. Retrieved 21 November 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Workers' Compensation Fraud". Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office. Archived from the original on 21 February 2014. Retrieved 7 February 2014. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- Cullen, Lisa. "The Myth of Workers' Compensation Fraud". Public Broadcasting System (PBS). Archived from the original on 19 February 2014. Retrieved 7 February 2014. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- "Risk Control" (PDF). Travelers Indemnity Company. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2 November 2014. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- McBirnie, Thomas J. "Report On The Workers' Compensation Anti-Fraud Program". California Commission on Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation. Archived from the original on 16 March 2014. Retrieved 7 February 2014. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- Quiggle, James. "Worker's Compensation Fraud". Coalition Against Insurance Fraud. Archived from the original on 15 January 2013. Retrieved 27 February 2013. Cite uses deprecated parameter
- Wertz, Keith (2000). Managing Worker's Compensation: A Guide to Injury Reduction. CRC press. p. 207.
- Spellman, Frank (2016). Occupational Safety and Health Simplified for the Industrial Workplace. London, U.K.: Bernan Press. p. 57. ISBN 978-1-59888-809-6.
- Oliphant, Keith (2012). Employers' Liability and Workers' Compensation. Walter de Gruyter. p. 482.
- "Labor Secretary Calls Workers' Comp Opt-Out Plans A 'Pathway To Poverty'". NPR.org. Archived from the original on 27 March 2016. Retrieved 27 March 2016. Cite uses deprecated parameter