Analysis

Topic: Workers' Compensation Law Changes in Benefit Eligibility
Sponsor: Representative Wayne Kuipers
Committee: Employment Relations, Training and Safety
Date Introduced: June 21, 2000
Date of Analysis: July 24, 2000

Position: The Department of Consumer and Industry Services supports this bill in principle (see HB 5916).

Problem/Background:
During 2000, the supreme court issued several opinions regarding the interpretation of the Workers' Disability Compensation Act relating to reasonable employment (favored work), and mental disabilities. This bill was introduced to address the concerns of the employer community as a result of these opinions by the court.

Description of Bill:
HB 5914 would amend section 301(2) to exclude compensable mental disabilities that arise out of employee relations matters at work such as, disciplinary actions, terminations from employment, suspensions from work, and other supervisory activities.

HB 5914 would also amend section 301(5)(a) to establish a "reasonable period of time" that employers would have to keep a reasonable employment or favored work job offer open. After passage of this time period the injured worker would forfeit their weekly wage loss benefits permanently.

HB 5914 would also forfeit the injured worker's weekly wage loss benefits if the worker voluntarily quit the reasonable employment or was terminated for "just cause" during the first 100 weeks after performing reasonable employment.

Arguments For:
The pro arguments are from the business community in reaction to the recent opinions of the supreme court. They argue that they can not keep a job offer open indefinitely for the injured worker, and would have to hire someone else for the position. They support permanent forfeiture of weekly wage loss benefits when the worker is discharge for just cause or voluntarily quits work. They also have argued that mental disabilities arising out of employee relations matters are too subjective and should not be compensable.

The business community has also complained that when an injured worker is performing favored work during the first 100 weeks, they can not discharge the worker without having to pay workers' compensation benefits. This has resulted in a double standard being imposed on the employers, and favors injured workers over non-injured workers at the same employer.

Arguments Against:
The con position would be from labor and trial lawyers. Their argument regarding the mental disabilities amendment would be that all work-related mental disabilities should be compensable or the injured worker will have no remedy of recovery for their condition.

They believe that a worker who quits work voluntarily or is fired for just cause should be entitled to weekly wage loss benefits as long as the injured worker is disabled. The worker is at a disadvantage in the labor market as a result of their physical or mental restrictions.

Supporters/Opponents:
Supporters- business community
Opponents- labor and trial lawyers

Fiscal Information: There would be no fiscal liability on the department.

Economic Impact: There would be no economic impact on the department except for workers' compensation claims filed by department employees.

Administrative Rules Impact: There would not be a need to promulgate administrative rules for these statutory changes.