????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????? March 21, 2008
Did you know...?????????
Legislative Updates for Kansas and Missouri:
Kansas Legislation Update:? Chances for Premium Rates, Bilateral Injury Legislation Diminishing
Kansas lawmakers are nearing the end of a legislative session with apparently little chance of passing proposals to overturn a 2007 Kansas Supreme Court decision on bilateral injuries or holding legislative hearings on workers? compensation premium rates.? The issues aren?t new having been taken up in previous sessions, but apparently will have to wait for another session to be resolved.
House Resolution No. 6014 calls for legislative hearings on
workers? compensation premium rates and urges that Insurance Commissioner Sandy
Praeger ?be invited to appear at such hearings and present information or
justification that served as the basis for the 2008 approved rate increases for
workers' compensation premiums.??
It also calls on the commissioner to ?exercise greater oversight and increased
diligence in reviewing and acting upon any future requests that would increase
workers' compensation premium rates.?
The resolution states that Kansas will see a 5.5% increase in rates (the actual
increase is 5.6%), while rates in other states are decreasing. ?Kansas ranks 44th among the 50 states in premium costs. ?This year, rates are dropping by
10% in Missouri, 8.8% in Colorado, 3.9% in Nebraska, and by 0.3% in Iowa.? NCCI?s calculations for Kansas show a 5.6% increase in loss costs, of which only 1.8%
is accounted for by changes in the medical fee schedule.?
The other major issue in workers? compensation at present is the treatment of
bilateral injuries under a Kansas Supreme Court decision.? In March 2007, the
court issued a ruling in Casco v. Armour Swift-Eckrich that reversed an
earlier precedent, abandoning the ?parallel injury rule? that originated from
its 1931 decision in Honn v. Elliott.? Experts reported that the Casco
case would result in ?an immediate and significant reduction? in the disability
compensation for bilateral upper-extremity and lower-extremity claims.? In
summary the ruling means that if an injured worker loses a hand and a foot in
an accident, the worker is to be compensated on the basis of the loss of those
two body parts rather than receiving total disability for body as a whole.? Two
bills, House Bill 2848 by the House Committee on Commerce and Labor and HB 2937
by the House Committee on Federal and State Affairs, would deal with the
decision.? A fiscal note prepared for HB 2848 says the legislation would
broaden the definition of ?permanent partial general disability? to include
?permanent loss or loss of use of both eyes, hands, arms, shoulders, feet, legs
or any combination.?? The note reports the Insurance Department ?states this
could lower expenditures for the Workers' Compensation Fund administered by the
agency.? As a result, the costs would shift back from the second-injury fund to
employers.? The fiscal note for HB 2937 states that measure would broaden the
definition of permanent partial general disability similar to HB 2848, and that
the department states that ?this could lower expenditures for the Workers'
Compensation Fund."
April 2 is the last day for lawmakers to consider bills "not in the house
of origin? and no bills can be considered after Apri1 12, except for omnibus
measures and bills vetoed by the governor.? Since the measures dealing with the
Casco decision haven?t had a floor vote, they appear unlikely to pass.
To read more about the bills mentioned above please visit:?? http://www.kslegislature.org/.
Missouri Legislation Update:? Missouri legislators will return from their spring break after Easter to resume efforts to overturn a controversial Missouri Supreme Court decision and to stabilize the Second Injury Fund.
The high court's Schoemehl decision allowed dependents of deceased workers to continue collecting benefits based on the worker?s injuries even when the worker dies of causes not related to those injuries. The court last week heard oral arguments in three cases related to that decision.? The Legislature is moving through the legislation that would deal not only with the Schoemehl ruling but also with the larger problem of stabilizing the Second Injury Fund.?
Senate Bill 901 by Sen. John Loudon,
R-Chesterfield, which would strike down the Schoemehl ruling, passed in the
Senate unanimously on Feb. 28 but has not been heard by a House committee.?
Loudon also introduced SB 1164, aimed at preventing the Second Injury Fund?s
potential insolvency. ?
SB 1164 Summary - ?Under the act, all rights to un-accrued compensation for permanent total disability shall cease upon the death of the injured employee. ?Unpaid un-accrued compensation for permanent partial disability will continue to be paid to dependents. ?Rights to receive permanent total disability shall terminate when the employee is eligible to receive full Social Security retirement benefits or other retirement benefits. ?If the employee begins receiving such benefits before the compensable injury occurs, the employee may receive permanent total disability for two years offset by 50% of the weekly retirement benefit. ??Currently, when an injured employee receives permanent total disability and is returned to his or her regular work or equivalent, payments are suspended during the time the employee is able to work. This act requires such compensation to terminate at the time the employee is able to compete for employment in the open labor market or returns to work.
Disabilities previously used in calculating an earlier award or settlement of a second injury fund claim for permanent partial disability shall not be used in later claims of the same type. ?However, such previous disabilities may be used in a claim against the fund for permanent total disability.
Compensation for permanent partial disability shall not be paid from the second injury fund when another state has jurisdiction over the injury. ?Similarly, when an employer fails to insure or self-insure, the second injury fund shall not cover any costs when another state has jurisdiction over the injury.
Under current law, claims against the second injury fund shall be filed within 2 years after the date of the injury or within 1 year after the claim is filed against the employer or insurer, whichever is later. Under the act, such claims must be filed within 2 years after the date the original claim is filed against the employer. Claim for medical fees or expenses must be filed within 2 years of the last date of medical treatment or service.
The act removes a provision requiring any advances from the workers? compensation fund to the second injury fund to be reimbursed within one year.
To read more about the bills mentioned above please visit:? http://www.moga.state.mo.us/.
To learn more about services OHS-COMPCARE has to offer, contact our Client Services Team at (816) 561-2105 option 1 or by e-mail at customerservice@ohscompcare.com.? You can also visit us at www.ohscompcare.com.
*Please feel free to forward this information to any member of management in your company who would benefit from it.*
OHS-COMPCARE has eight (8) area clinical facilities:
|
Blue Springs Clinical Facility |
Independence Clinical Facility |
Johnson County Clinical Facility |
St. Joseph Clinical Facility |
|
801 NW St. Mary?s Drive |
19000 E. Eastland Center Crt, St. 200 |
10415 Lackman Road |
904 Edmond Street |
|
Blue Springs, MO 64104 |
Independence, MO 64055 |
Lenexa, KS 66219 |
St. Joseph, MO 64501 |
|
816-224-9121 |
816-478-9299 |
913-495-9905 |
816-233-7702 |
|
|
After Hours Available |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
KCMO/Broadway Clinical Facility |
KCMO/Front Street Clinical Facility |
Wyandotte County Clinical Facility |
Grandview Clinical Facility |
|
1650 Broadway |
6501 East Commerce, Suite 110 |
1333 Meadowlark Lane, Suite 200 |
13830 S Us Highway 71 |
|
Kansas City, MO 64108 |
Kansas City, MO 64120 |
Kansas City, KS? 66102 |
Grandview, MO 64030 |
|
816-842-2020 |
816-483-5550 |
913-596-2774 |
816-761-4664 |