California: OK, it's not perfect, but workers comp deal works

Sacramento Bee ^ | April 18, 2004 | Daniel Weintraub

[John Jorsett]

A few hours after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders settled last week on a delicately balanced plan to overhaul the state's troubled workers compensation system, the lawyers who represent injured workers attacked the deal as a sellout to employers and insurance companies and an assault on employees hurt on the job.

"INJURED WORKERS CHOICE OF DOCTORS IS ELIMINATED," the lawyers' statement screamed. "The injured worker can choose a doctor only from a 'closed panel' or pool of physicians selected exclusively by employers or insurers. Free choice from a pool of company doctors is no choice!"

But here is what this provision would actually do: It would allow employers to offer workers a network of doctors approved by the state and obligated to follow national standards in diagnosing and treating injured workers. Workers who disagreed with the first doctor's recommendation could get a second and a third opinion. If they were still unhappy, they would be entitled to an independent medical review from a doctor chosen by the state. And if that review vindicated them, they could leave the employer's network to get care elsewhere.

[jocon307]

I think this is a great victory for Arnold. He is doing what he said he would, and he remains quite popular. Go ARNIE!

[cynicom]

Doctors for both sides are bought and sold.

[E Rocc]

We had reform of workman's comp (including the end of "doctor shopping") in Ohio. Unfortunately, the unions managed to pass a referendum to revert the state to the old system...something everyone but them agreed was a piece of clinton.

The horrific workman's comp system is one of the main reasons Ohio's recovery is lagging behind the rest of the nation.

-Eric

[Carry_Okie]

It's total socialism in the workman's comp business.
How well do you think that's going to work?

It requires State price fixing.
It Does Not Limit judicial relief.
It Does Not Define injuries.
It Does Not Tie premiums to costs.
It requires more State oversight of procedures and providers.

How long will THAT take?
How many bureaucrats will THAT take?
How much will THAT cost?
The purpose: more Democrat union dependents.

Any bill out of the Slave Party has a primary purpose: Assure more Slave Party voters. Any real reform would get the State out of the insurance business and take on the trial lawyers.

[Amerigomag]

Yes, it is rather disappointing legislation.

I can't imagine why Schwarzenegger caved...unless he knew that the initiative didn't have a good chance.

We still have the initiative in November which DOES include real reforms, many sponsored by Schwarzenegger.

I hope that Schwarzenegger continues to actively support the initiative. I'm going to.

[Carry_Okie]

Your story is an outrage. It is pure racketeering and extorsion on the part of the legal system.

Where are our district attorneys and grand juries on this kind of crap?

Yeah, I know.

[John Jorsett]

Is there a database that a prospective employer can check to see the worker's comp history of these leeches before they're hired?

If I recall correctly, the new bill will do away with employers having responsibility for "injuries" that were pre-existing, so maybe your experience will become a thing of the past.

[John Jorsett]

I was under the impression that the signatures weren't going to be turned in now, so there'd be no initiative on the ballot.

[Carry_Okie]

I can't imagine why Schwarzenegger caved...

Easy. Arnold never misses a chance to take a bow. He will never allow the impression that he lost. The mediots covered for him in order to persuade him from going to the initiative.

What mystifies me is that McClintock went along with it. It may be that he believes that the best we can do is to take what we can get and then go for more in November, but claiming victory now will make that harder to do.

[mcg1969]

What mystifies me is that McClintock went along with it.

McClintock is not one to fold. If he voted for it then I imagine that it's for the very reason you state: that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I do hope he still pushes for the initiative.

[SierraWasp]

"...but claiming victory now will make that harder to do."

Even the most Churchillian of leaders eventually feels the withering sting of looking back and seeing that no one is following... that conservatives and your own Party, like the disciples in the virtual garden of gesthemene... are sleeping, or out collecting 30 pieces of silver, or chasing some other notorious celebrity... looking for more love in all the wrong places...

Even the stongest grow weary standing alone for commonsense! It's exhausting, overwhelming and eventually demoralizing!!! One can stand rejection and ignorance for only so long, then you realize you must surrender and hunker in the bunker, with the only hope remaining, to fight again... some other day... I know the feeling!!!

[John Jorsett]

Sounds like the kind of thing talk radio is made to address. Embarrassing politicians on the air seems to work wonders sometimes. Roger Hedgecock here in San Diego does this frequently, and it can certainly build a fire under some slackass on the public payroll. It really gets amusing when he has the politician as a guest on the program and someone like you calls in with a horror story. There's nowhere for them to run then.

[Amerigomag]

I can only believe that both Schwarzenegger and McClintock knew something.

Either the initiative was not going to pass because focus grouping told them it was simply unpopular or it would take too much money to mount an effective campaign against the insurance companies, unions and lawyers.

Or worst yet, and my real fear, is that this backtrack is part of a larger deal with Burton. The California GOP has a long history of selling out it's constituents and principals to cling to even a spec of power

Time will tell. In the meantime, over the next 18 months, employers won't see any premium relief but premiums probably won't be raised either. Too much political heat.

[Southack]

"The DA turned me down and the ADA flat out told me "This is an election year, we need rapes and murders. There's no glory in worker's comp."

No wonder you got nowhere.

You don't take a case to a DA. If the DA hasn't come looking for you (usually due to publicity), then don't bother.

What you do is counter-sue the employee for fraud. Your "well documented case" is your ticket to getting a bigger settlement from your employee than what you stand to lose to your employee in her original suit against you.

But here's the kicker: in your counter suit, any decent attorney will set up the case so as to provide you with an opportunity to ask the judge in your *civil* case to order the employee held on *criminal* charges.

You tried a full frontal attack (by going to the DA). You lost. I've been in business for decades. I seldom go for full frontal attacks. Far more successful are the oblique attacks. Let the judge demand charges. DA's don't turn judges down.

You'll learn.

[calcowgirl]

Thanks for the summary, C.O.

I didn't have the energy to sift through all the various provisions. I do find it ridiculous that the legislature makes these late-night back-room deals on something as complex as WC and then demands a vote on the voluminous new law the next day. That process, in itself, usually makes me skeptical. Declaring "victory" and flooding the headlines of all newspapers only solidifies my skepticism.