Showing posts with label benefits. Show all posts
Showing posts with label benefits. Show all posts

Friday, October 11, 2013

Military death benefits to be restored

The U.S. House voted to provide military families with death benefits delayed by the government shutdown, but prospects for the same action in the Senate remained unclear.


Outrage over a delay in death benefits to families of fallen servicemembers prompted Congress and the Pentagon on Wednesday to hastily restore the payments as the latest unintended fallout from a government shutdown embarrassed leaders on both sides.
The Pentagon reached an agreement with the non-profit Fisher House Foundation to restore for military families $100,000 death benefits that have been stalled by the shutdown, which enters its 10th day today.
The House voted 425-0 to restore the benefit, but prospects for the same action in the Senate remained unclear.
The actions came as Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel flew to Dover Air Force Base, Del., to meet, before television cameras, the remains of four soldiers killed Sunday in a roadside bomb blast in Afghanistan. 
Along with a 19-year-old Marine and a 27-year-old Army specialist who both died Saturday, they are among the first whose families faced delays of the $100,000 death gratuity along with other expenses unless funding was restored or the government reopened.
"I am offended, outraged and embarrassed that the government shutdown had prevented the Department of Defense from fulfilling this sacred responsibility in a timely manner," Hagel said in announcing the contract with Fisher House.
He said the foundation, best known for building family residences at military hospitals, will be reimbursed by the Pentagon after the shutdown ends.
As he made the announcement, Congress worked to restore the delayed payments, which have become a symbol of government paralyzed by opposing political views, unable to provide earned benefits even for those who have given their lives for their country.
The death benefits actions were the latest policy shift in the shutdown. About half of the Defense Department's civilian employees were furloughed, but Hagel ordered nearly all 350,000 back on the job. An estimated 450,000 federal workers are idled at agencies responsible for items as diverse as food inspection and national parks, although all employees are eventually expected to receive full back pay. Other furloughed federal employees are trickling back to work.
Even as the death benefits issue was resolved, a broader threat continues. A total of $6.25 billion in veterans benefits could be delayed to more than 5 million veterans, troops, families and children of deceased military members if the shutdown continues through the end of October, according to Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki.
"I just didn't think you would allow this to happen," Shinseki told members of Congress during testimony Wednesday. "This is not a game."
As Congress grappled with how to keep earned benefits flowing to those who have served in uniform, events became a mix of political theater, recriminations and a litany of dire consequences should the shutdown continue.
Shinseki, a retired four-star general who took the VA helm in 2009, said the budget standoff comes as younger veterans are suffering complex health and behavioral issues after more than a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Members of this latest generation of veterans are enrolling in VA at higher rates than ever before," Shinseki testified. "They, along with the veterans of every preceding generation, will be harmed if the shutdown continues."
As the shutdown continues, House Republicans have passed legislation that would fund individual government departments or specific needs while Democrats argue that the full government should be reopened.
"What's happening now is the House of Representatives — which refuses to reopen the government — is scurrying to pass a little bill to take care of these families," Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said. "It isn't nearly enough, because the embarrassment of this government shutdown goes beyond this grievous situation with these bereaving families."
According to Durbin, 17 servicemembers have died since the shutdown began, including five over the weekend.
House Republicans have approved piecemeal funding bills that would reopen popular government programs and facilities, but only one measure — to ensure the U.S. military is paid during the shutdown — has been approved by the Senate and signed by President Obama.
In an emotional floor debate, House Republicans blamed the Obama administration for the lapse in death benefits. "This is a disgrace. An intentional policy of pain," said Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., a veteran.
"They broke a sacred trust with our U.S. men and women who are on the front lines," said Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., also a veteran.
House Democrats joined with Republicans in support of the measure, but Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Ind., the top Democrat on the Defense Appropriations panel, called on the House to reopen the entire federal government.
Shinseki said 70% of the VA — devoted to providing veterans with health care — remains open because of advanced funding approval. But departments dealing with benefits and the operation of national cemeteries remain unfunded, and money is running out.
About 7,800 benefits workers were placed on furlough this week, and 13,000 more will be sent home later this month, leaving a skeleton crew of about 1,100 if government operations are not fully restored, Shinseki testified.
At that point, he said, monthly checks for compensation, pension, vocational rehabilitation, education and other benefits might not go out as scheduled Nov. 1.
That could affect the 5.18 million veterans, servicemembers, orphaned children and spouses of troops who have lost their lives, he said.
Senate Chaplain Barry Black, a retired Navy rear admiral, used his daily opening prayer in the Senate chamber to criticize lawmakers for the lapse in death benefits, underscoring the emotional tenor of the debate. "Lord, when our federal shutdown delays payments of death benefits to the families of children dying on faraway battlefields, it's time for our lawmakers to say enough is enough."

Original Source

Let attorneys: Neil O'Toole and John Sbarbaro help you with your case today!
Contact them at the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.
Phone: 303-595-4777
Located in the Denver Metro area.
226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer 
Any content of this blog is intended for informational purposes only.It is not intended to solicit business, provide legal advice from The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. and does not serve as a medium for an attorney-client relationship. Therefore, The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. is not responsible for the information on this blog which may not apply to every reader. Always seek professional counsel if you have any legal matters. Contents within the blog of The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C., logos and other related media are protected by the copyright laws of the United States and other jurisdictions.

Privacy Policy

Friday, July 26, 2013

Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. - Did you know?

  • Workers' compensation is the oldest form of no-fault insurance?

Before workers' compensation law was established, there was little recourse for workers injured on the job. A worker could sue in court, but had to prove negligence. The outcome was uncertain and could take years to resolve. This was costly both to the employer and the worker, often with little benefit to either party.  The evolutionary move toward workers' compensation began during the Industrial Revolution as mechanization brought an increase in work-related injuries.  It was a new legal concept, liability without regard to fault.  First established in Germany in 1856 and adopted soon after by England and most of Western Europe, workers' compensation was enacted in Colorado in 1915. By 1920, all but eight states had workers' compensation laws.  The last state mandated workers' compensation coverage in 1947

Original Source

Contact the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. today if you have a workers' compensation or a Social Security disability case.
Phone: 303-595-4777
We are located in the Denver Metro area.
226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer 
Any content of this blog is intended for informational purposes only.It is not intended to solicit business, provide legal advice from The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. and does not serve as a medium for an attorney-client relationship. Therefore, The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. is not responsible for the information on this blog which may not apply to every reader. Always seek professional counsel if you have any legal matters. Contents within the blog of The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C., logos and other related media are protected by the copyright laws of the United States and other jurisdictions.

Privacy Policy

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

CA WCAB Extends Deadline For Submitting Written Comments To Modifications To Proposed Rules Until August 9

By 
San Francisco, CA (WorkersCompensation.com) - On July 9, 2013, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) announced its intent to modify the text of proposed amendments to its Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules) that had been the subject of a public hearing on April 16. The announcement stated that written comments regarding the proposed modifications would have to be received by the WCAB by 5 p.m. on July 25.
Following this announcement, some members of the workers’ compensation community requested the WCAB to extend the time for submitting written comments. The WCAB agrees that a limited extension of time is reasonable. Therefore, the WCAB will extend the time for submitting written comments by an additional 15 days to Friday, August 9 by 5 p.m. The WCAB will consider only comments it has received by that time.
As previously announced, the proposed modifications to the initially proposed Rules and related documents are posted on the WCAB’s website. The originally proposed new and amended Rules and related documents may also be found at this site.
Additionally, to facilitate further public comments, the WCAB is presently in the process of adding to its website all public comments it has received regarding the proposed Rules amendments. The documents to be posted will include the written comments the WCAB received on or before April 16, a transcript of the April 16, public hearing, and the written comments the WCAB has received in conjunction with the July 9 announcement. The posting of these written comments will be periodically updated until the August 9 closure of the written comment period.
The address for submission of comments by e-mail is WCABRules@dir.ca.gov. The address for submission of comments by mail is: Neil P. Sullivan, Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, P.O. Box 429459, San Francisco, CA 94142-9459. The address for submission of comments by delivery service or personal delivery is: Neil P. Sullivan, Assistant Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Ninth Floor, San Francisco, CA 94102.

The WCAB will consider all written comments regarding the proposed Rules modifications it receives by Friday, August 9 at 5 p.m. It encourages all interested members of the workers’ compensation community to participate in this important process. 


Contact the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. today if you have a workers' compensation or a Social Security disability case.
Phone: 303-595-4777
We are located in the Denver Metro area.
226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer 
Any content of this blog is intended for informational purposes only.It is not intended to solicit business, provide legal advice from The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. and does not serve as a medium for an attorney-client relationship. Therefore, The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. is not responsible for the information on this blog which may not apply to every reader. Always seek professional counsel if you have any legal matters. Contents within the blog of The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C., logos and other related media are protected by the copyright laws of the United States and other jurisdictions.

Privacy Policy

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Six Questions Every Teen Should Ask About Their Summer Job

By 
Augusta, ME (WorkersCompensation.com) - The US Department of Labor estimates that millions of young people under the age of 24 are likely to join the labor force this summer. Some will find their first part-time job while others will land something more permanent. 
In the excitement of a new job, though, it's important to remember that young, inexperienced workers are twice as likely to be injured on the job as their more experienced co-workers. According to the Centers for Disease Control, every year more than 50,000 youth are so badly injured at work that they need emergency medical treatment. And that figure doesn't include the numerous cuts, bruises, and strains that don't require a trip to the hospital. 
Why are these figures so high? Most experts point to inexperience and a lack of thorough job training. "It's pretty well established that inexperience can lead to injury," said Karl Siegfried, Assistant Vice President for Loss Control and Safety at workers' compensation insurer MEMIC. "Too often young workers want to impress their new boss and try to show that they can do things that they have never done before. That's where trouble can start. The good news is that there are proven ways to avoid the injuries that can result from inexperience." 
Siegfried said that formal on-the-job training is among the best ways to learn about job hazards as well as the safest methods for accomplishing the work.  Siegfried said that young workers and their parents should have an understanding of the safety risks associated with a new job. Most problems can be addressed by asking your employer a few simple questions before you get started: 
1)    What are the hazards in this job?   It's tough to keep yourself safe if you don't know what you should be keeping yourself safe from. Once you understand the hazards in your workplace, you can ensure that you're receiving proper training on managing them. 
2)    How much job safety training will I have?   Employers are required by law to provide job hazard training that's easy to follow. If you ever feel like you need a process explained further, don't hesitate or feel embarrassed to ask - it's always worth the extra time and an injury is far worse than any momentary embarrassment! 
3)    Will I need to use safety gear, and if so, how?   Employers may also be required by law to provide protective gear at no cost to you. Whether that means safety glasses, ear plugs, or something else, make sure you can take every necessary precaution. If safety equipment is available to you, make sure you know how to use or wear it correctly. 
4)    If I have health and safety concerns, who do I ask?   Whether it's your supervisor or a designated workplace safety coordinator, it's important for you to know who has the answers to your safety questions. Don't be afraid to speak up if you feel unsafe at any time during your workday. 
5)    What do I do in an emergency?   Be sure to review your workplace's emergency protocol. Where is the nearest fire exit to your workstation? Do you have a designated meeting spot once you're out of immediate danger? Ask whether your employer holds regular emergency drills. 
6)    What should I do if I get hurt at work?  It's important to report any injury you sustain in your workplace. Regardless of the injury's severity, your workplace safety contact will be able to help you with applying first aid and filling out any necessary paperwork. 
As your partner in workplace safety, MEMIC is committed to creating a work environment that's healthy and accessible for every employee, no matter their age or level of experience. With these questions, employees can build a foundation of safety knowledge that helps to reinforce everyday well being.

Contact the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. today if you have a workers' compensation or a Social Security disability case.
Phone: 303-595-4777
We are located in the Denver Metro area.
226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer 
Any content of this blog is intended for informational purposes only.It is not intended to solicit business, provide legal advice from The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. and does not serve as a medium for an attorney-client relationship. Therefore, The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. is not responsible for the information on this blog which may not apply to every reader. Always seek professional counsel if you have any legal matters. Contents within the blog of The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C., logos and other related media are protected by the copyright laws of the United States and other jurisdictions.


Privacy Policy


Monday, July 22, 2013

Fitness-For-Duty Exams in Workers' Compensation

By  
The words “fitness for duty” do not appear in the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act, but the issue is of paramount importance to employers and employees in many workers’ compensation cases.  In New Jersey the need for a fitness exam is often compelling because medical and temporary disability benefits end at maximal medical improvement often without any comment from the treating physician about whether the employee can return to work.  When workers’ compensation benefits end, the focus often turns next to whether the employee can return to work and perform the essential job functions.  This is not for the Judge of Compensation to decide in New Jersey.
When can an employer require a fitness-for-duty examination in a workers’ compensation setting?
Practitioners must differentiate between employees who are out of work and employees who are working.  When an employee seeks to return to work following a workers’ compensation absence and there are restrictions imposed by the treating doctor, a fitness-for-duty exam is appropriate.  In fact, New Jersey physicians often seek guidance from FCEs, functional capacity examinations.  In contrast, when an employee with a workers’ compensation claim is working, an employer cannot request a fitness exam absent a business reason. A medical evaluation of an employee can be required by an employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act and under state disability law. The ADA standard is “job related and consistent with business necessity.” 42 U.S.C. 12112(d)(4).  In other words, the employer must have a legitimate reason to require an existing employee who is working to attend a fitness exam.  Examples might be if the employee is expressing difficulty or pain on the job, is limping while working, or is asking for accommodations.
It is important to appreciate differences between the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act and laws in other states.  Many states have a requirement for vocational rehabilitation.  New Jersey does not.  Awards for partial permanent disability in New Jersey are not generally dependent on how long an employee has been out of work but on the level of functional loss in the injured body member.  New Jersey compensation law does not provide job protection, except against retaliation for filing a workers’ compensation claim.  Temporary disability benefits and medical benefits end at maximal medical improvement in New Jersey.  Whether the employee returns to work may not matter all that much as far as the outcome of a workers’ compensation claim but it matters to the employee and employer for obvious reasons.
Workers’ compensation cases suddenly merge into labor law at the return to work stage.  It is outside the power of a Judge of Compensation to order an employer to return an employee to work.  However, employees have rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination that impact on return-to-work status.  Many workers’ compensation claimants are covered under the ADA and NJLAD but these laws do not automatically mean the employee must be reinstated.  An employee with a disability must be able to perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation.
How then do employers decide whether an employee who has been out of work with a serious injury is fit for duty?
Medical and legal guidance is crucial.  From a medical vantage point, employers can reach out to treating doctors, occupational physicians or physiatrists for advice on fitness for duty.  As mentioned above, FCEs are a wonderful tool that provide objective and scientific information about ability to perform essential functions. For this reason, treating doctors routinely ask for FCEs before giving opinions on restrictions and ability to perform job duties. From a legal standpoint, it is important to consider the application of disability and leave laws that may apply.
            Here are some common traps that employers fall into in fitness assessments:
            * The Ambivalent Treating Doctor Syndrome
 Quite often the treating doctor imposes serious job restrictions that carry on for many months.  There may be severe restrictions against lifting, bending, reaching and performing other physical functions. Light duty may be offered. After maximal medical improvement is reached and compensation benefits end, the employee will often contact the employer to return to work. When the employer expresses concerns about the medical restrictions, a short note may suddenly appear from the treating doctorremoving all restrictions.  This stunning turn of events leaves employers shaking their heads.
            * The “Wing It” Return-To-Work Note
 New Jersey is blessed with highly skilled surgeons in the workers’ compensation arena.  However, surgeons are not always the best choice when it comes to deciding whether the employee can do a particularly difficult job.  A good fitness-for-duty examination requires time, information and medical expertise.  The job description must be read and considered, and the physician must speak with the employee about job duties.  In addition, FCEs should be analyzed to see that the testing reflects the actual job duties to be performed. Cryptic medical notes following a serious surgery stating, “Bill may return to work full duty” without analysis or any indication that job description has been analyzed are more often than not “wing-it” notes.  There are risks to the employee who is returned to a job that he or she cannot safely perform, and a well-intentioned “wing-it” note can do more harm than good.
            * Reflexively Turning to Treating Doctors
When it comes to assessing fitness for duty, the best choice is generally an occupational physician or physiatrist who specializes in this area of medicine and has an understanding of reasonable accommodation requirements. These experts often have training in biomechanics and are willing to expend the time it takes to fully appreciate the job duties and consider possible accommodations. There is simply no substitute for thorough analysis. The idea that fitness assessment is as simple as scribbling on a note pad could not be further from the truth.  Yet all practitioners continue to see treating doctors hurriedly write “full duty” without any analysis at all of the job requirements or previous restrictions.
            * Asking the Comp Adjuster Whether the Employer Must Reinstate
 This is also a very common mistake that employers make in New Jersey.  The reason this happens is that many employers erroneously think that return-to-work issues are decided in comp court.  Almost every adjuster has been asked more than once for advice from an employer on whether the employer can terminate or must reinstate.  This is a complex medical/legal inquiry with significant labor law implications that should be put to house counsel or outside counsel for guidance.
Developing a return-to-work team is the best solution. There is an important role on this team for counsel, HR managers, claims professionals, supervisors, nurse case managers, and medical experts.  It is a fact of life that many employees post-injury cannot return to their former job while many others can and should be reinstated.  The process is complex but can be handled effectively with a consistent and comprehensive approach.






Privacy Policy

Monday, July 8, 2013

Calif. Workers'-Comp Fraudster Goes From Crutches To High Heels in Same Day



Video of Modupe Martin ditching crutches to meet a man for a park tryst helped convict her, DA said.
01/10/2013


Contact the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. today if you have a workers' compensation or a Social Security disability case.
Phone: 303-595-4777
We are located in the Denver Metro area.
226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer 
Any content of this blog is intended for informational purposes only.It is not intended to solicit business, provide legal advice from The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. and does not serve as a medium for an attorney-client relationship. Therefore, The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. is not responsible for the information on this blog which may not apply to every reader. Always seek professional counsel if you have any legal matters. Contents within the blog of The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C., logos and other related media are protected by the copyright laws of the United States and other jurisdictions.

Visit: http://www.injurydenverlawyer.com

Privacy Policy