Move
to drop workers comp hearings blocked, for nowBy SHERRY HALBROOK
A plan to skip hearings for some workers compensation claims was put on hold at the last minute after PEF members and others testified against it in February.
However, the proposal could resurface later this year.
PEF Executive Board member Carol Olszewski presented PEF’s testimony to the Senate Labor Committee at a February 24 hearing in Albany, just two days before the proposed Managed Adjudication Path (MAP) change would have taken effect.
Under MAP, the judges would have been directed to issue “proposed decisions” on several types of claims without holding a hearing or speaking directly to the injured workers or their employers.
The affected workers and employers in these cases would have had just 30 days to object to the proposed decisions. If they did not object, the decisions would become final and could not be appealed.
PEF opposed MAP on issues of due process, fairness and delays to adjudication, as well as increased workload for PEF members.
Most importantly, the union argued, “The right of the parties to a day in court should not be compromised for the sake of (perceived) convenience.”
Olszewski, Melissa Richburg and Robert Anderson – all compensation claims referees (judges) at the state Workers Compensation Board (WCB) – were among many witnesses who testified against the proposed change, which was supported only by the testimony of WCB Chairman Robert Beloten.
The judges are among more than 500 WCB employees represented by PEF.
Senator: We make laws
State Sen. George Onorato, who chairs the Labor Committee, issued a statement February 26 hailing Beloten’s decision to withdraw MAP for the time being.
“I commend him (Beloten) for paying heed to the many witnesses who testified against the program ..., and who agree MAP would violate their due process rights under the Workers Compensation Law. It’s encouraging to hear (Beloten) plans to share his ideas to improve the conciliation process with representatives of injured workers and employers. However, any change to the conciliation law can only be made by the Legislature, through a process that allows public debate and consideration of the views of all stakeholders. As with prior reforms to the Workers Compensation Law, the board cannot simply go forward with new procedures that violate state law.”
MAP to disappointment
“While, at first glance, MAP may look like a reasonable tool for streamlining adjudication, .... This program will have a detrimental impact on due process and, ultimately, we believe the program will backlog the entire process,” Olszewski testified.
“Hearings (of workers compensation cases) are an essential part of resolving many claims. They allow workers and (workers compensation insurance) carriers to appear before a neutral party, have a fair hearing, and reach an equitable resolution, whether it is through the issuance of a decision or the forging of an agreement.
“Injured workers, who are not savvy in the workings of the system or workers compensation terminology, are more often likely to receive a proposed desk decision and fail to respond,” she said. “These proposed decisions are often in lengthy legalistic language, which may not be clear to individuals without representation.
“Moreover, claimants may not respond in a short 30-day time frame due to hardships created by their injuries or difficulty with the English language.
Other objections to MAP raised by PEF included:
• Reduced incentive for timely payments to claimants;
• Increased steps in adjudication;
• Reduced efficiency and effectiveness in communications;
• Reduced efficiency in judges’ workflow; and
• Lack of joint labor-management notice and opportunity for cooperation in developing and implementing the MAP proposal.
Since the hearing and sudden withdrawal of MAP in February, PEF has heard the WCB may try to reintroduce the plan in May without asking for any amendments to the existing law. PEF would oppose that.