Articles Posted in Worker Comp Generally

One of the most difficult decisions faced by an injured worker in PA is how to decide who to hire as their worker’s compensation attorney. Many sites, or publications, have a list of attorneys they tout. Maybe they are called “Super” attorneys or “Awesome” lawyers, or some other cleaver marketing name. What standards do they use? Are they objective? Is there really merit in being named? Who knows. Now, however, there is an objective, regulated selection process authorized by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

As we mentioned before, Pennsylvania has created a Workers’ Compensation Law Certification process. First, an attorney is screened to be certain he or she possesses the requisite experience to sit for the examination (a minimum of five years practicing in workers’ comp is required). Specific cases must be provided, including briefs and written arguments. The attorney must certify that at least half of his or her practice is devoted to PA workers’ comp matters. Only then is the attorney even allowed to sit for the examination test.

This test was given for the first time in March, 2013. The grueling four hour assessment covered every aspect of PA workers’ compensation law, thoroughly testing each applicant’s knowledge of the workers’ comp system. Both multiple choice and essay questions were involved.

Mediation is a growing area in Pennsylvania workers’ comp. As we have previously discussed, a mediation is when an independent party, in this context usually a Workers’ Compensation Judge [WCJ] (other than the assigned WCJ), meets with the parties in an informal setting in an effort to resolve the differences between the parties. The ultimate goal is to achieve a settlement to the case (usually done by “Compromise & Release Agreement”).

Since we at Brilliant & Neiman LLC work with injured workers every day, having constant contact with the Pennsylvania workers’ compensation system, we are well-versed in most aspects of how the system functions from day to day. We are proud that our knowledge and experience will be used by the PA Bureau of Workers’ Compensation, as the Bureau adjusts the system to change with the times.

Since the start of “Mandatory Mediation,” added to the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act in the 1996 amendments to the Act, the system has been relatively stagnant. Recently, the Bureau has sought a small working group to evaluate the mediation system and see what, if any, changes could be beneficial to the mediation process.

Our blog generally contains information regarding workers’ compensation in Pennsylvania, since that is the only type of case we handle. It is interesting, however, for our readers to learn about how the workers’ compensation systems in other States compare to that in PA. To that end, we are proud to present a guest blog from Alex Berman, Esquire, who practices workers’ compensation law in MI:

Guest Blog Post: Beware The Labor Market Survey

I want to thank Glenn Neiman for the opportunity to write today’s blog post. It’s always a pleasure to speak with an attorney who has devoted his practice to helping people who are injured at work.

Sometimes, one thing naturally follows another. Day follows night. Spring follows Winter. The relationship between the two things makes sense. Then we enter politics, and, as usual, logic and reason seem to trail behind.

We mentioned in previous postings that both the Pennsylvania insurance industry, and the Chamber of Commerce, has been heavily lobbying PA representatives and senators for reform to the Pennsylvania workers’ compensation system. Specific proposals and issues have been raised. One could reasonably draw from this angst that PA workers’ compensation insurance rates were steadily rising out of control. Indeed, one would imagine, given the effects of inflation, that the rates must be significantly increasing beyond normal inflationary levels.

It is most curious, then, that the Insurance Commissioner in Pennsylvania, Mike Consedine, recently proclaimed that workers’ comp insurance rates would actually DECREASE 4.01 percent as of April 1, 2013. For those imagining that this decrease must have followed some enormous increase, Commissioner Consedine noted that this “is the second workers’ compensation decrease in a row.”

One of the important jobs we have, as attorneys who represent injured workers in Pennsylvania, is to educate our clients about the PA workers’ compensation system. It is vital to us that our clients fully understand their rights and responsibilities under the PA Workers’ Compensation Act, and the appellate cases which have interpreted the Act. Sometimes one of the biggest obstacles we face is the mass of disinformation floating out there.

For example, recently there was an article on a local Philadelphia news affiliate about how those on unemployment compensation and workers’ compensation benefits would be saving money due to the development of new debit cards, which would have fewer fees.

The article said that, “About 150,000 people – or a bit more than 40-percent of Pennsylvanians who get workers comp or unemployment benefits – get them through debit cards.”

Granted, the decision is not from a Court in Pennsylvania, but, instead, one in Australia. At the same time though, a Court finding that a worker injured while having sex is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits, is one which cries out to be explored. And, the result is not as bizarre as one might think.

As we have previously addressed, employees in PA are either “stationary” or “travelling,” depending on whether they have a fixed place of employment. A travelling employee, one who is without a fixed place of employment, has greater latitude for a finding that an injury is within the scope and course of his or her employment.

In the Australian case, according to the article, the unidentified female employee was on a business trip in 2007. While engaged in sexual relations in her hotel room, “a glass light fitting was torn from its mount above the bed and landed on her face.” The injury resulted in her being disabled from performing her job.

Back in July, we warned about potential legislation which is being pushed by the Pennsylvania Chamber of Commerce, and PA insurance carriers, to reform the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation System. We discussed several areas which we anticipate will be targeted. Proposed legislation is likely to appear in early 2013.

One area we did not mention seems to be getting more traction. That is the process of Utilization Review (UR), the tool either party can use to have a determination made as to whether the medical treatment at issue is reasonable and necessary. As the process now stands, on appeal from an initial UR, a Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) considers the UR determination made by the Utilization Review Organization (URO). The WCJ is not bound by the determination made by the URO. This makes sense, since other evidence is required to determine whether treatment is reasonable or necessary, predominantly the testimony of the injured worker.

The proposal being raised by the insurance industry and the Chamber of Commerce appears to be that the WCJ would be bound by the determination of the URO, effectively making the UR reviewer the ultimate finder of fact, a role the PA Workers’ Compensation Act strictly leaves to the WCJ. Moreover, since the UR reviewer only assesses records, and never actually examines the injured worker personally, the injured worker would effectively be removed from the entire evaluation. This result would be ludicrous, given that whether the treatment relieves symptoms or provides greater function to the injured worker is, and should be, a critical element to determine whether medical treatment is truly reasonable and necessary.

As mentioned here previously, Glenn C. Neiman, Partner at Brilliant & Neiman LLC, was featured in a seminar yesterday in Center City Philadelphia. The seminar was presented by renowned CLE provider Lawline. While Lawline typically specializes in internet CLE programs, this presentation was live (as well as webcast). The program, discussing updates in PA workers’ comp law as well as trends in Pennsylvania workers’ compensation, was done with Lawline’s program attorney, Kyle Robinson, in an interview format. The program will shortly be added to Lawline’s online course catalog, where attorneys from around the Country will have access.

Lawline.com has announced its speakers for the seminar the organization will be holding in Philadelphia on December 13, 2012. Discussing current trends in Pennsylvania workers’ compensation, and providing an update on decisions from PA Courts on such issues, will be Brilliant & Neiman LLC partner, Glenn Neiman. This will be the third speaking engagement for Mr. Neiman with Lawline.com, a well-respected continuing legal education provider. As was done in the previous seminar, Lawline.com’s program attorney, Kyle Robinson, will do an interview-style presentation with Mr. Neiman. The prior effort, from July 2011, was extremely well-received, garnering a 97% recommendation from seminar participants

The holiday season means many things to many people. To most of us, it means creating lasting memories with friends and family. It means the joys of exchanging gifts and good will. And, of course, it means eating too much of the wonderful food which surrounds us during the holiday season.

To others, it means a chance to trap an unsuspecting injured worker. One investigative firm sent out an e-mail to its potential customers, noting that “Black Friday is the weekend to hire a P.I. for surveillance.” We all tend to overdo things during the holiday season, whether it is shopping or eating. Often, we pay the price for either the next day.

Unfortunately, however, a surveillance tape only shows that day. A Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) will not see the injured worker in bed for the next three days because he or she was trying to live a somewhat normal life for a day. Many in the insurance industry feel that if a worker is disabled, he or she must be bed-ridden. They fail to realize the toll a work injury takes, not only on the injured worker, but on his or her entire family.

Contact Information