Workers’ compensation and the disease
COVID-19 is presenting some interesting and perplexing issues for workers’ compensation. Among them are:
- Claims adjusters and Nurse Case Managers are far more familiar with injury claims than disease claims. Occupational disease claims are fuzzy, and work-relatedness is often difficult to determine. A broken arm on the shop floor is ever so much more cut and dried. Yesterday, Governor Gavin Newsom made this moot for California by signing an Executive Order that will make it easier for essential workers who contract COVID-19 to obtain workers’ compensations benefits. His order is in effect for 60 days and is retroactive to 19 March. Note Bene – his order establishes a rebuttable presumption and covers all workers deemed essential during the crisis; e.g., grocery workers, among others, as well as first responders and all health care workers. A rebuttable presumption means an essential worker who contracts COVID-19 does not have to prove work-relatedness. The burden is on the employer to prove the disease could not have been caused by work. California is one of a number of states that have taken action addressing workers’ compensation coverage for essential workers.
- But not all states have taken action in the same way. In fact, approaches vary considerably. Two issues treated differently among the states are: first, whether to establish a rebuttable presumption as described above; and, second, just who is essential. Some states say that while a number of occupations have been determined to be “essential” during COVID-19 (see Grocery Workers, above), only first responders and health care workers are essential enough to qualify for workers’ compensation if they come down with the disease. Labor unions say this is an issue of fairness, but since when has workers’ compensation been equally fair in all states? Consider loss of function awards, which vary tremendously across the nation.
- NCCI has jumped into the COVID 19 what if debate and projected various loss cost scenarios for the workers’ compensation insurance industry. All scenarios show increased losses, and some of the them are downright grim. In the worst case, 50% of all workers are infected and 60% of all claims are paid, in which case losses increase $81.5 billion, or 250% more than current total loss costs. Ouch! In the best case NCCI presents, there is no rebuttable presumption, only first responders and health care workers are eligible for workers’ compensation benefits, only 5% of them become infected, and only 60% of the claims are paid, which results in an increase in loss costs of $2 billion. The best case scenario is is not going to happen. See 1, above.
- And what about the poor employers and insurers who are going to foot the bill? Specifically, what about experience modification? One can almost say COVID-19 comes under the heading: An Act Of God. But the claims are going to be paid, so how does a confused insurer account for that in the premium it’s going to drop on the head of John Q. Employer with a loud and painful thud?
Update on Long Term Care Facilities
I’ve addressed LTCFs here, here and here, pointing out that there is no coordinated national reporting of LTCF COVID-19 cases or deaths. “One would think this cries out for federal data tracking conducted in a consistent manner across the nation.” Doesn’t seem to have happened yet.
The logical entity to track this is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and maybe it is. But, then again, maybe it isn’t, because it won’t say. Yesterday, two Senate Democrats — Ron Wyden of Oregon and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania — called on the Trump administration to close this gap and commit to a timeline to release the information.
“There have been no signs that the Trump administration has an effective plan to address the tragedy that is taking place in America’s nursing homes,” they said in a joint statement.
It’s logical to assume that a disproportionate number of deaths would occur in LTCFs. The vulnerable elderly, many, perhaps most, with a number of comorbid underlying conditions, are packed together and present a breeding ground for the virus. Early on, this should have been apparent to the CDC. Why its talented scientists didn’t dive into this from Day 1 is beyond me.
We’ll continue to follow this.
Are We Learning From History, Or Repeating It?
Throughout history, infectious diseases have crippled societies. They have stymied progress and, in the best cases delayed, in the worst reversed, economic development and prosperity.
How have societies handled infectious disease pandemics throughout history, and are our actions in the midst of COVID-19 any better?
It’s true that our science puts us a quantum leap ahead of historical societies in terms of searching for therapies and a vaccine. Oh, the vaccine will happen, but between now and then are we dealing with our current infectious disease problem better than our ancestors?
Actually, no. Societies have long known that when a killing disease strikes on a grand scale the best thing to do is stay far away from other people. Quite literally, head for the hills. Trouble was, that wasn’t always possible due to urban densities and economic privation. Today, densely packed areas, especially cities, are the immediate hot spots, the poor and African Americans are disproportionately infected, and our mitigation efforts are the same as time immemorial.
Tomorrow, we’ll take a look at the history of pandemics, their societal effects and how we can learn from them as we move through and, we fervently hope, leave behind the scourge of COVID-19.
