The example of beryiluim could explain why exposure to manganese levels at supposedly safe levels can lead to occupational disease. Those supposedly safe levels of exposure may not actually be safe. Another explanation about why supposedly safe levels of manganese lead to Parkinson’s could be found in the practices of the coal industry. Howard Berkes of NPR and Ken Ward Jr., author of the excellent Coal Tattoo blog for the Charleston (WV.) Gazette Mail teamed up to report on how coal companies would fudge coal dust level testing to make it appear that miners were exposed to much lower levels of coal dust than they were actually exposed.
OSHA’s rules could also be reversed by Congress under the Congressional Review Act. In 2001, the OSHA ergonomics rule that would have reduced musculo-skeletal injuries was reversed under this law.
Mike Elk of Payday Report recently ran an article detailing that workplace deaths among Latinos were the highest in 2015 than they had been since 2007. This spike was attributed in part to aggressive immigration enforcement by the Obama administration which immigrant advocates believed made workers afraid to speak out about working conditions over fear of deportation.
The repeal of the Affordable Care Act (President Barack Obama’s health care law) is a real possibility in the Trump administration. It will be difficult to know how a repeal would affect workers’ compensation without having an idea about what alternative plan, if any, would replace the Affordable Care Act. But it seems certain that if Americans lose health insurance, they will have less control over their own medical care if they are hurt at work.
In 2011, Vermont passed a single-payer health care plan. In a blog post I wrote for Jon Gelman’s blog, I observed that if all employees had their own doctors, it would be next to impossible for employers to route injured workers to occupational-medicine clinics. A blogger for Lynch Ryan made a similar observation. Doctor choice is critical, because some employers go so far as to unlawfully conspire with claims adjusters and doctors to undermine the value of an employee’s workers’ compensation claim. A single-payer system decouples health insurance from employment, which makes employers less influential in the system
The ACA is not a single-payer system, but millions of Americans gained health insurance through public Medicaid programs in states that chose to expand Medicaid after the Supreme Court struck down the mandated Medicaid expansion in 2012. This coverage was decoupled from employment. Insurance obtained through an exchange is also not tied to individual employers either. People who lacked health insurance tended to not have doctors, which meant that they had no choice but to see whomever their employer wanted them to for a work injury.
The biggest advantage this decision has for workers is the fact that a worker may dismiss a case at any time without prejudice under § 48-177 without having to worry about a counterclaim still hanging out there. In other words, this decision could prevent employers from forcing a trial before plaintiff is ready or if plaintiff wants to wait for trial until after the she or he is done treating.
Another benefit of this recent decision might be a little less obvious. Under Thomas v. Washington Gas Light Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that a worker may be able to have workers’ compensation coverage in multiple states for the same accident/injury. The reason this is important with respect to counterclaims is that the injured worker now has the ability to dismiss the lawsuit to allow for potentially more-favorable benefits in another state, while still maintaining the option to return to Nebraska jurisdiction at a later date if necessary.
The rights and benefits of injured people are heavily influenced and affected by the representatives who are elected at the state level for office.
Rehm, Bennett & Moore urges you to vote and recommends these candidates for the Nebraska Legislature. Voting for these candidates will help protect your rights to receive proper compensation for injuries, lost earnings and damages.
These are candidates who have gone on the record that they will work hard to protect a fair workers’ compensation system, unrestricted access to the courts for legitimate claims, and full personal responsibility for anyone who chooses to ignore the safety of others. Please do your research before voting, and be sure to cast your vote on Nov. 8.
On a recent Monday, an anhydrous ammonia pipeline leaked near Tekamah in rural northeast Nebraska, leading to one fatality. When such accidents in happen in rural Nebraska, the first responders are usually volunteers.
Unfortunately, Nebraska’s volunteer first responders also share the same exclusions from workers’ compensation as professional first responders. Foremost among these exclusions is the exclusion for occupational diseases that Brody Ockander wrote about here last month. In short, if an occupational disease manifests itself after a volunteer first responder retires for reasons not related to the occupational disease, the worker or the worker’s survivors could be excluded from receiving workers’ compensation indemnity benefits.
This exclusion is troublesome because of the regularity that volunteer first responders have to respond to chemical explosions and leaks. These chemicals cause symptoms that might not manifest for years. Last week, in addition to the chemical leak in Tekamah, Nebraska, there was a chemical spill at a grain processing plant in rural Atchison, Kansas, that led to 125 people being treated for chemical inhalation. Nebraska has had fertilizer plant explosions in 2012 and in 2014.
Fertilizer plant explosions are not uncommon in rural America. In 2013, a fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas, killed 12 first responders and wounded 200 in a town of 2,800. In addition to physical injuries, such devastation can also lead to mental injuries, which is in part why Nebraska expanded so-called “mental-mental” benefits to first responders. However, mental injuries like chemical exposure injuries may have delayed symptoms. I would encourage the Nebraska Legislature to amend court decisions on occupational diseases that would exclude the injuries of volunteer first responders.
Sept. 11 was tragic for the victims who died at ground zero after the attacks on the World Trade Center. But, the lasting effects of the dust and particulates that filled the air after the collapse of the towers have caused ongoing health issues for numerous other victims: first responders who were not killed in the initial collapse of the buildings.
Fortunately, the federal government came to the aid of these first responders by enacting the James Zadroga Act, which provides free testing and treatment for first responders of the 9/11 attacks. However, had this act not been enacted, how would these workers, who have developed health problems from working at ground zero, have been treated under the Nebraska Workers’ Compensation Act?
The biggest gap in workers’ compensation coverage under Nebraska law for occupational diseases occurs when the injured worker (or in this case, the first responder) does not develop symptoms or the disease until later in life. In a situation like that, if the occupational disease first manifests (or becomes an injury) after the injured worker has retired for unrelated reasons, the injured worker would be left without indemnity benefits. In other words, the injured worker could get no workers’ compensation money if he or she was retired when the disease showed up. Further, if the injured worker dies as a result of the occupational disease, but is retired at the time the disease becomes an injury, his or her surviving spouse would not be entitled to any money either. See Olivotto v. DeMarco Bros. Co., 273 Neb. 672 (2007): the widow whose husband died from asbestos exposure was not entitled to indemnity because her husband had been retired for 23 years when mesothelioma manifested.
Thus, if 9/11 happened in Nebraska, first responders who develop an occupational disease later in life might not be fully covered under workers’ compensation laws without some sort further government intervention like the James Zadroga Act.