Showing posts with label Margaret Spense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Margaret Spense. Show all posts

Friday, May 15, 2009

National Return to Work Week - Part 5

A few things I took away from Thursday's virtual conferences:

Doctors: Employers should carefully chose the physician to initially send injured employees. A physician must understand the employer willingness to provide light light duty. Have the physician visit the facility. Also visit the physician's office to determine the accessibility of employers to the doctors.

Employers need to be able to respectfully talk to the treating physician, so that they can ask questions, and discuss concerns. However, an employer must learn how and when it is best to communicate with the doctor. Your employee is not the only person the doctor is treating. As such, the doctor may be overloaded, and your phone call may not be a priority at the time.

From the defense lawyer side: A proactive, effective return to work program will reduce the settlement amount. An effective return to work program does allow an insure insurance carrier to minimize the time spent on a claim, which is a substantial benefit for everyone.

An employer needs to make an attempt to resolve issues before firing an injured employee. A disgruntled, now fired, employee who feels they may be wronged can cause yet more problems than merely a workers compensation claim, and larger settlement. Retaliation claims may be filed with both the workers compensation system and OSHA, ADA, or Wage and Hour claims may be filed. If the company has less than stellar hiring practices and policies there may be other claims an employee can make. Defending these claims, valid or not, is expensive.

Documentation is imperative. Improper or sloppy documentation can demonstrate to a workers comp or liability judge that the employer doesn't have the proper systems in place, doesn't care, and obviously the employer has some culpability and should be held responsible. The employer must be able to defend by documentation claims filed against them, or the judge will side with the employee. Once a claim against an employer is successful, additional claims may be filed by other employees.

Best Practices:

  • Plan in place for procedures needed for incidents – everything from who investigates the incident, to making sure the WC carrier and HR are properly notified.
  • Have employees sign off each week that they were not injured, and did not witness an injury, or if they were or knew of someone who was - how it occurred. That way, in this time of lay-offs, an employer has the documentation necessary to defend a workers compensation claim filed after the lay-off occurred.

Best Practices for Return to Work:

  • Return to Work must start at the top of the organization to be successful.

  • Return to Work benefits the employee, the employer, the insurer, the adjuster – the entire system!

  • Policies need to be in place to facilitate the return injured employees to return as soon as possible to productive meaningful work within their restrictions.

  • Stop seeing injured employees as damaged good that need to be discarded.

  • Anticipate what the injured work is likely to do, and prepare for it in your policies.

  • If you explain your expectations to your employees through-out, they are far more likely to follow those expectations.

  • Also train your supervisors on the expectations of the return to work policy.

  • If at all possible have the injured worker stay in their pre-injury production area during light duty. Many tasks can be carved out of the normal work day that meet the restrictions of the injured worker. Similar tasks can be carved out of others stations to keep the employee active.

  • Burying your head in the sand as far as workplace injuries and return to work does nothing but open yourself to future litigation!

See more here: http://nationalreturntoworkweek.org/events/

Thursday, May 14, 2009

National Return to Work Week Part 4 – The Injured Worker

Yesterday's series of webcasts dealt with return to work from the injured worker's perspective. When a worker becomes injured they may be pulled in multiple directions:
  • The employer wants them back at work as soon as possible, and may have a different idea of asap than the injured worker's doctor.
  • Family members wonder what will happen now that a bread winner is injured. They may be the one who pushes for a lawyer.
  • Supervisors can make or break a safety/WC comp program. If the injured employee doesn't like working for a specific supervisor, they will be far more reluctant to return to that department.
  • Coworkers can become irritated with an employee because they are now doing extra work.
  • The employer can also bring in their 'experience' with similar injuries. Employers tend to be motivated to recover due to the fact they own the business and can't afford to take off. Employees do not have the same motivation.
If we as WC professionals have trouble understanding the laws, how much tougher would it be for the injured worker?

This general lack of understanding the process breeds suspicion. When an employer has no, or very limited light duty, and mandates the employee must be 100% recovered to return, the suspicion on the workers part becomes greater as they feel the employer is trying to get rid of them. If the worker doesn't recover as quickly as the employer expects it also breeds the suspicion the employee is malingering. The result is there is now suspicion on both sides that the other party isn't doing their part.

The workers compensation process is made yet tougher with the physician process. Depending on the state, workers may have an unfamiliar doctor chosen for them. Depending on the work load, the doctor may not give the worker much time in diagnosing the injury. The doctor says they can go back to work with certain restrictions. However, the doctor may not have been given a list of essential duties of the job, thus may not fully understand how the job tasks can effect the injury. This breeds suspicion that the doctor is on the employers side, and just pushing them back to work.

The employer may offer light duty, without fully understanding the restrictions. The light duty may require the injured worker to do something that is against the restrictions. When the employee refuses, it just reinforces the suspicion that the employee is malingering and playing the system.

The workers compensation provider also adds to the misunderstanding and suspicion. Tests, and procedures may take weeks to get approved. Both sides are now unhappy with the delays and may blame the “other side”.

All sides agree that the workers compensation system is not user friendly. Employers and Insurers may wrongly deny benefits causing yet more delays in treatment. The system encourages both parties to settle thus disposing of the 'problems' as quickly as possible. The system rewards those that play the system by essentially offering them money to settle and go away. For those that truly are injured to the point of not being able to work, the system can just get more confusing when they apply for Social Security Disability Insurance.

How do you cut through all of this misunderstanding, suspicion, and get the employee back to work as soon as reasonably possible? Check out the webcasts (available on demand) to find out more. Here: Nation Return to Work Week - Free Webcasts.