Senate President Jackson’s bill would line the pockets of attorneys at the expense of injured workers
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, April 25, 2019
MEDIA CONTACT: Julie Rabinowitz, Director of Policy and Communication, 207-292-2722 ext. 102, Julie@mainepbp.com
AUGUSTA — Maine People Before Politics has updated its analysis of almost 20 Workers’ Compensation bills pending in the Legislature to include LDs 1623, 1624 and 1625, released this week.
“The three bills released this week continue the attempts to roll back the significant reforms of 1992 that have brought simplicity, certainty and stability to the system that helps injured workers,” stated Julie Rabinowitz, Director of Policy and Communication for Maine People Before Politics. “All three of these bills are sponsored by Senate President Troy Jackson. In particular, his bill LD 1623 would repeal the sliding scale for attorney’s fees, enriching attorneys at the expense of injured workers. These reforms would hurt the Maine people.”
In a recent Portland Press Herald article on the attempts to roll back the reforms that saved Maine’s Workers’ Comp system from the brink of collapse, John Rohde, executive director of the Maine Workers’ Compensation Board, noted that the Board is “assessing what sort of impact the proposed reforms would have on insurance costs in the state” and that this analysis would be completed in the next two weeks in time for the Legislature to act.
“Maine People Before Politics has serious concerns about the data and methodology of any analysis produced by the board in such a short time frame. The Workers’ Comp Board itself does not collect data from carriers. It has some data, and the Maine Bureau of Insurance has some additional data, but only the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI), a U.S. insurance rating and data collection bureau specializing in Workers’ Compensation, collects the data from insurance carriers—the data necessary to model various changes to the system and project the effect on rates. Furthermore, the Workers’ Comp Board does not employ an actuarial, a professional skilled in assessing risk and projecting its effect on insurance. Simply put, the board lacks the data and expertise to provide reliable, objective information to the Legislature on the effects of these 20 different, radical bills,” Rabinowitz said.
She added, “Maine has a strong Workers’ Compensation system. MPBP has offered meaningful policy recommendations that would benefit workers and do not impose substantial or retroactive costs on the system. We remain sympathetic to the plight of injured workers, but remind policymakers that good policy is balanced and ensures the widest protection for all Maine workers.”
MPBP’s analysis on LDs 1623, 1624, and 1625 is provided below and an updated analysis is available on the MPBP website.
UPDATE April 25, 2019:
LD 1623: This bill changes the regulations governing attorney’s fees in Workers’ Comp cases. There is no compelling reason to amend the statutes as called for in Sections 1 and 2 of the bill because if an injured worker cannot afford a private attorney, Maine is the only state to provide an advocate system: the Worker Advocate Program provides free legal representation to injured workers without attorneys. If an injured worker chooses to hire a private attorney, nothing prohibits the individual from doing so. The remaining sections of the bill repeal the current sliding-fee scale. This would allow attorneys to charge injured workers whatever they want. This bill hurts injured workers and benefits attorneys, who are already being compensated for their work under the existing sliding scale. Recommendation: Ought Not To Pass
LD 1624: This bill limits the ability of an employer to terminate or discipline a worker who has filed a Workers’ Compensation claim. Under the current law, if a worker has filed a Workers’ Comp claim, an employer can discipline or terminate an employee for demonstrating a pattern of unsafe work, for not using safety equipment, or for other reasons that may have a tangential relation to a workplace injury but does not stem from the act of filing a Workers’ Comp claim. If a worker has a demonstrated history of not working safely, that employee is not only at risk of reinjuring him- or herself, but potentially other employees. This bill would prevent an employer from terminating or even disciplining the employee, putting other employees at risk. Recommendation: Ought Not To Pass.
LD 1625: This bill eliminates the 520-week cap on partial disability benefits. Maine had a cap until the 1970s. The repeal of the cap was one of the major cost drivers leading to the Workers’ Comp crisis in Maine. Recognizing this, in the 1980s, the caps began to be put back in place to try to address the spiraling costs. In 1992, a formula was set for a cap with the maximum established at 520 weeks. Maine is at 520 weeks currently, and current law allows two remedies through which an injured worker can receive benefits beyond 520 weeks, including for financial hardship. Removing the cap would have a substantial effect on costs and lead to unpredictable effects on the system. Recommendation: Ought Not To Pass
###