Search Our Site

June 14, 2024 Injuries caused by lifting heavy loads were once again named the costliest in workers compensation, according to data released Tuesday by Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.   The insurer’s Workplace Safety Index estimates the top 10 causes of the most serious workplace injuries — those causing an employee to miss more than five days of work — and ranks them by their direct costs of medical and lost-wage payments. The 2024 figures mirror those of the previous two years and are based on injuries occurring since 2021.   The insurer found that U.S. industries spent $58.07 billion on the direct costs of worker injuries, and 82.5% of that total was for the top 10 causes of disabling injuries and illnesses.   Ranking the types of injuries, Liberty Mutual found that “overexertion involving outside sources,” risked by lifting heavy loads, cost employers $12.49 billion in 2021. Falls, which typically rank as the top injury, took second and third place, with falls on same level costing employers $9.99 billion and falls to a lower level $5.68 billion. Combined, the three categories represented nearly half of all injuries.   The remaining top types of injuries included “other exertions or bodily reactions” at $3.68 billion, car accidents at $2.76 billion, slip or trips without falling at $2.34 billion, caught in or compressed by equipment or objects at $2.05 billion, struck against object or equipment at $1.84 billion, and repetitive motions involving microtasks at $1.54 billion.

June 11, 2024 San Diego — Opioid use related to workers’ compensation claims decreased nearly 10% in 2023, marking one of the largest drops the workers’ comp industry has seen in years, according to a new report.   For its annual Pharmacy Solutions Drug Trends report, property and casualty industry service provider Enlyte examined trends in workers’ comp that its clients experienced over the past year. The report offers an overview of both in- and out-of-network prescriptions (retail and mail order).   All opioid categories showed utilization decreases. That includes the use of sustained-release opioids, which dropped more than 10%.   Opioid alternatives, commonly prescribed to manage acute and chronic pain, also saw decreases in utilization per claim. Use of anticonvulsants fell 7.4%, as did the use of antidepressants (6.1%) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDs (3%).   Overall, retail and mail order prescription utilization per claim dropped more than 5%.   The report also shows a drop in utilization per claim among all but one of the top 10 therapeutic classes (based on cost): migraine medications, which jumped 17%.   Nearly 280,000 people in the United States died from overdoses involving prescription opioids between 1999 and 2021, data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows.

June 11, 2024 Washington — A new resource from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences is intended to help employers identify and implement steps to protect workers from heat stress.   The Building Blocks for a Heat Stress Prevention Training Program is organized into five sections (with checklists) and an appendix. The sections cover:   How to determine heat stress ·        What training, approaches and resources are needed for a heat stress management program ·        How heat is controlled in the workplace ·        What makes heat stress worse? ·        Approaches to ensure workers’ rights   The appendix features two tables from the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists on threshold limit values and action limit values for heat stress.   “This is a useful resource for identifying and implementing steps needed to reduce the risk of heat stress for workers in indoor and outdoor environments,” NIEHS says. “Workers involved in disaster response and recovery, construction, transportation, agriculture, and many other jobs are vulnerable to the impacts of heat stress.”

June 10, 2024 Black and Hispanic workers are more likely to be injured at work and “psychological safety” is among the reasons such groups are unlikely to report unsafe conditions, according to a study released Monday by the National Safety Council.   In studying safety practices in the context of diversity, equity and inclusion, and the prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries among minority groups, NSC found that so-called voice suppression can “prove particularly harmful to employees of color, as they may already perceive their voices and opinions as less valued than the majority group.”   As a result, “Black and Hispanic workers report the most unease about reporting unsafe work conditions when compared to other racial and ethnic groups,” the Itasca, Illinois-based nonprofit advocacy group reported.   In addition, other research – such as that conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor — found that fear of income and job loss spurs the discomfort in reporting unsafe practices and, in some cases, injuries, the report said.   The report also highlighted Bureau of Labor Statistics data showing that such groups are more likely to work in high-risk occupations, with 24% of Hispanics, 21% of non-Hispanic Blacks, 20% of American Indians/Alaska Natives, 22% of foreign-born workers and 26% of workers with no more than a high school education employed in fields with high injury rates. This compares with 13% of white workers and 9% of workers with higher than a high school level of education in high-risk occupations.   The report said companies should provide improved and anonymous reporting procedures for all workers and communicate such protocols often. It also suggests that companies should be “mindful of jobs that demand high exertions, awkward or sustained postures, and a fast pace and eliminate them when able.”

June 1, 2024 U.S. Federal Drug Administration approval will clear the air on the questions surrounding the use of medical marijuana, experts say.   The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws Foundation, a Washington-based pro-marijuana lobbying group, keeps an extensive database of studies that aim to show the benefits of medical marijuana, including links to dozens of research papers on how medical marijuana helped chronic pain patients and reduced their reliance on prescription pain medications.   Many of the U.S.-based studies include details on research limitations, with institutions lamenting the country’s challenging legal environment for studying marijuana as it remains illegal at the federal level.   One paper cited, published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in 2017, states that “conclusive evidence regarding the short- and long-term health effects (harms and benefits) of cannabis use remains elusive. A lack of scientific research has resulted in a lack of information on the health implications of cannabis use, which is a significant public health concern for vulnerable populations.”   “There is a problem with researchers being able to obtain or at least legally obtain the type of cannabis that people are consuming in regulated markets,” said Morgan Fox, political director for NORML, who said federal legalization in any form will help.   To meet study guidelines “you have to obtain cannabis from a federally approved supplier and producer and (there are) significant barriers to research,” he said.   NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano wrote in an email that the organization “nonetheless possess(es) ample science highlighting cannabis’ safety, efficacy, and mechanisms of action to put most every debate to rest.”   Other countries have studied medical marijuana and the outcomes have been mixed, said Dr. Marcos Iglesias, Hartford, Connecticut-based chief medical director at Travelers Cos. Inc. FDA approval would be a gold standard for including the option for injured workers, he said.   Doctors are embracing a “wait-and-see attitude” to better understand any medical benefits, Dr. Iglesias said, adding, “because the hype is bigger than the benefits that we know of today.”   Brian Allen, Salt Lake City-based vice president of government affairs for Enlyte LLC, said evidence about medical marijuana’s potency and effectiveness is “anecdotal.”   “There’s not a lot of clinical support for some of the things that medical marijuana is being recommended for now,” he said. “When it goes through the traditional prescribing process and becomes a prescription drug that’s going to change. I wouldn’t say it’s going to change the science, but there’s going to be more science behind it.”

Throughout the world countless governing bodies and agencies as well as standards, regulations and policies have been established specifically with the goal of machine safety. Stringent safety standards mean that today’s machines are designed with greater safeguards for both the operator and process. However, the actual process of safeguarding may still raise the same questions to some as they have 20 years ago. What needs to be guarded, to what degree and with what type of device? The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) under the United States Department of Labor is responsible for setting forth polices to ensure safe working conditions which include machine safety as described in 1910 Subpart O - Machinery and Machine Guarding. The General Duty clause issued under the OSHA Act of 1970 states that each employer is responsible for supplying a workplace which is “free from hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm”. The options to provide such a workplace are endless and knowing where to begin the process can be over- whelming. There are a few regulations that call out requirements for specific machinery such as 1910.213 for woodworking machinery or 1910.217 for mechanical power presses, but these requirements are a bit abstract and leave room for interpretation. Since the process to change or update regulations to a more current and clear set of documents can be long and arduous, OSHA suggests the use of the most current and relevant industry consensus standards be followed when needed in an effort to be sure employers are well informed when working to pro- vide a safe workplace. For example ANSI RIA15.06 is a current and relevant industry standard which is used to safeguard robot and robotic cell application. Another example is NFPA 79 which is used to ensure proper wiring practices are used. It is clear that it is a requirement by law to provide a safe working environment. In order to provide safe working conditions we first need to know what is to be safeguarded, thus the first step in safeguarding is to identify the hazards or the risks associated with the machine. Identifying these risks is also one of the first steps in the risk analysis process. These risks include, but are not limited to: mechanical hazards such as rotating or sharp parts; electrical hazards such as live parts; radiation; ergonomic, etc. ISO 12100 Safety of Machinery — Risk Assessment is a current and relevant industry consensus standard which can be used as a guide to help identify machine hazards. Read more

May 28, 2024 Barely noticed outside marijuana industry groups, the Biden Administration has been moving to change the classification of marijuana as a less dangerous drug. That follows a recommendation by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to the Drug Enforcement Agency last year to reclassify the substance from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug. The move by the DEA will portend change in how marijuana is used to treat workers’ compensation and auto injury claimants. On April 30, sources in the DEA revealed the agency is taking steps to officially reclassify marijuana, and that news is getting noticed. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not legalize it federally for recreational use, but it would for medicinal use. The DEA website defines Schedule III drugs as those “with a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence.” Some examples of Schedule III drugs are products containing less than 90 mg of codeine per dosage unit (Tylenol with codeine), ketamine, anabolic steroids, testosterone. For workers’ comp and auto personal injury claims, the current status of marijuana as a Schedule I drug is creating challenges for employers and insurers. As more states legalize marijuana for medicinal use, carriers and employers find themselves potentially at odds with federal law as physicians recommend marijuana to treat claimant injuries. State and federal courts have issued conflicting rulings on whether insurers or employers are required to reimburse for medical marijuana. The U.S. Supreme Court had an opportunity in 2022 to hear two cases out of Minnesota but decided the issue wasn’t ripe for their consideration. The change in status of marijuana will clear up any questions on the legality of reimbursing claimants for medical marijuana. Classifying marijuana as a Schedule III drug will also create an environment in which marijuana will be subjected to more rigorous clinical trials and FDA standards for prescription drug use. Better clinical data will help employers and insurers gain greater confidence around medical marijuana use and provide researchers with information needed to weave the clinical use into treatment guidelines However, reclassification could take some time. The DEA took the next step toward that process on May 16 by releasing a formal ruling for rescheduling. This action kicks off a 60-day public comment period. After that time, the ruling will undergo a judicial review prior to approval. After the rulemaking process and judicial review, the DEA could publish a final rule. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would allow the FDA to regulate it like any other prescription medication. It would also make it easier for researchers to gain access to marijuana for study purposes. Over time, medical marijuana will likely move from the corner dispensaries you see today to local pharmacies and would be distributed like other prescription drugs. It would also make it easier for providers to prescribe medical marijuana. Once the FDA starts approving prescription medical marijuana, it will become more common as part of the drug regimen for a claimant. Marijuana would still need to be medically necessary for a particular injury, and FDA approval would indicate approved clinical uses for the drug. Medical marijuana would have to meet the same criteria for use as any other medication. Still, the federal rulemaking process can take months to years, and drug manufacturers will need time to develop, test and clinically try any proposed drug before it is ready to market to consumers. So, it will be quite some time before an approved marijuana-based medication is ready to join the mainstream of medications. Allen is vice president of government affairs for Enlyte’s Pharmacy Solutions team. In this role, Allen provides clients with insight into new legislation and regulations in pharmacy solutions and workers’ comp. He is a nationally recognized policy expert for workers’ compensation and insurance issues.

May 20, 2024 An employee who was denied workers’ compensation benefits after being shot by a co-worker can proceed with a tort claim against his employer, a state appeals court in Florida has ruled. This case involves Giovanni Bastien, who worked at a Pepsi packaging and distribution facility in Medley, Florida. Bastien was shot by a co-worker who was “purportedly disgruntled over union activities,” the court’s decision says. Argument escalates to shooting A local news report gives more detail about the specific circumstances surrounding the shooting. It says that Bastien argued with co-worker Jimmy Lee Franklin at work about union issues before the two agreed to clock out of work and go find a place to fight. The news report adds that after the pair moved off site, the argument escalated and Franklin shot Bastien multiple times. Bastien then drove back to work before being taken to the hospital, it says. According to the court decision, Bastien told his manager while he recovered from his injuries in the hospital that he planned to file a claim for workers’ compensation benefits. The employer fought the workers’ compensation claim, saying that Bastien was not entitled to receive workers’ compensation benefits because his injuries did not occur within the course and scope of his employment. Workers’ compensation benefits denied The state’s division of workers’ compensation agreed with the employer. It denied Bastien’s claim entirely, noting that the shooting took place off the employer’s premises. Bastien responded to that development by filing a tort suit against the employer. The employer said that claim could not proceed because it was entitled to workers’ compensation immunity. In other words, the employer argued that workers’ compensation was the only avenue of relief available to Bastien – even though it had just argued that he was not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits. A trial court said the employer could not raise the immunity defense, and the employer filed an appeal. Appeals court explains The reviewing court explained that the state’s workers’ compensation is set up to ensure the quick and efficient delivery of disability and medical benefits to injured workers, and that it operates without regard to fault. Under the workers’ compensation system, it added, employees generally give up the right to sue for negligence in exchange for the rapid recovery of benefits. The rule that workers’ compensation benefits are an injured employee’s exclusive remedy has exceptions. One of those exceptions applies when an employer asserts that an employee’s injury did not occur within the course and scope of their employment. You can’t have it both ways That is exactly what happened here. The employer opposed the workers’ compensation claim on the basis that Bastien’s injuries did not occur within the course and scope of his employment. Then, it turned around and argued in the tort action that workers’ compensation was Bastien’s exclusive remedy. The court also noted that under state workers’ compensation law, employers cannot assert workers’ compensation exclusivity in cases involving intentional torts. The court’s decision does not explicitly address that exclusion’s application to Bastien’s injury. The court ruled that the employer could not assert the immunity defense. Though the employer may have celebrated what looked like a win when it avoided the claim for workers’ compensation benefits, now it must face the challenge of defending and defeating what could ultimately become a much more expensive claim against it. OSHA offers guidance The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has developed a number of resources that are designed to help employers keep violence out of their workplace. OSHA says factors that affect the risk of workplace violence include: whether money is exchanged with the public whether alcohol is served where the work is performed time of day location of work. As far as occupations that are more prone to involve violence, OSHA identifies the following: Workers who exchange money with the public Delivery drivers Healthcare professionals Public service workers Customer service agents Law enforcement personnel People who work alone or in small groups. OSHA recommends establishing a zero-tolerance workplace violence policy and advises employers to conduct workplace assessments that will identify ways to reduce the likelihood of a violent incident.