Ohio sues Marsh, AIG, Ace, Chubb, Hartford for anti-trust violations

Following a three year long investigation by his office and the Ohio Department of Insurance, Attorney General Marc Dann has filed suit against the world's largest insurance broker, Marsh & McLennan and four of the nation's largest insurance companies and their subsidiaries for alleged violations of the state's anti-trust laws.

The complaint, filed in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, alleges that Marsh administered a well-orchestrated conspiracy among insurers American International Group, Inc. (AIG), ACE Ltd., The Chubb Corporation, and the Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., to eliminate competition in the commercial insurance industry.Specifically, the filing cites numerous instances in which the insurers agreed to offer customers fictitious quotes, often referred to as "B quotes," in order to create the false impression that competitive bidding had produced the best possible price when, in fact, no competitive process had taken place.

A fifth company that had been under investigation, Zurich American Insurance Co., entered into a $7 million settlement with the state in October of 2006.

"Our investigation has produced evidence of blatant violations of the antitrust laws that have cost Ohio businesses millions of dollars," Dann said.

In the lawsuit, the Attorney General asks the Court to enjoin the parties from engaging in this type of activity in the future, to order them to disgorge all monies generated by the overcharges, and to assess monetary damages.

Source: Ohio Attorney General's Office

Ohio court ruling could impact auto damage claims

An Ohio couple whose vehicle was wrecked are entitled to more than just the money it will cost to repair it, according to a state appeals court ruling that found the couple also should be compensated because the accident reduced the value of their auto.

Consumer groups say the ruling could help other drivers in Ohio who have seen the value of their autos reduced by an accident.

Duke and Cheryl Rakich bought a GMC Yukon for $49,000 in 2003. Several months later the sport utility vehicle was broadsided.

Nationwide Insurance paid $8,000 for repairs, but when the Rakich's decided to sell the car, fearing the car was no longer safe, they received offers about $6,000 less than if the car had not been through an accident.

The July 24 ruling by the 10th Ohio District Court of Appeals in Columbus said the Rakich's could seek more than the repair costs, and could ask for the car's "diminished value."

The ruling requires Franklin County Common Pleas Court Judge Eric Brown to hold a hearing to figure out how much the Rakiches are still owed.

Nationwide spokeswoman Nancy Stelzer said that she couldn't comment on pending litigation. The company has until Sept. 8 to appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court. AP

The sinking subprime market: Creating woes for Countrywide and Balboa?

Many in the financial industry are speculating what could happen to insurance companies as a result of the subprime mortgage mess, but the truth is it may be too soon to tell.

One of the hardest-hit lenders, Countrywide Financial Corp. -- "the largest mortgage lender by volume, accounting for more than 13 percent of the loan servicing market as of June 30," according to the mortgage industry publication Inside Mortgage Finance -- is also the parent of Balboa Insurance Group (BIG).

BIG provides property/casualty/life insurance and also owns Balboa Reinsurance Co., a provider of reinsurance coverage to primary mortgage insurers; Countrywide Insurance Services Inc., an independent insurance agency that provides homeowners and other insurance products; and DirectNet Inc., a full service third-party insurance agency.

Earlier this year, BIG noted aggressive growth plans, expecting to expand nationwide with new products. Yet because of the negative implications associated with parent Country-wide Financial Corp., analysts are not sure those plans can be carried out.

Subprime mortgages were generally provided to high risk borrowers with poor credit histories often with adjustable rate mortgages. As interest rates have escalated, many borrowers are defaulting on their payments, forcing foreclosures and lenders to go out of business.

Countrywide has illustrated how difficult it has been to continue operating as usual. In early August, the company gave the first indication that disruptions in credit and secondary mortgage markets were hurting its financial condition in a report to the Securities and Exchange Com-mission. The company said, "it had enough capital to hold onto mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities until the housing market picks up, but if the debt markets tightened, it could result in the lender's loan production volumes falling, which would hurt earnings," the AP reported.

The following week, shares of the company's stock dipped, plunging the stock to a level half its value of one year ago. Merrill Lynch & Co. downgraded its rating on the stock from "sell" to "buy," citing "accelerating liquidity challenges." Similarly, Moody's Investors Service downgraded the company's senior debt rating to "Baa3" from "A3," citing funding problems.

"We fear that the acceleration of margin calls and forced asset sales in the capital markets could lead to more problems for (Country-wide) to finance its mortgage operations," Merrill Lynch analyst Ken-neth Bruce told the AP.

Country-wide Chief Executive Angelo Mozilo maintained the company had enough cash to survive the credit market turmoil.

But on August 16, it tapped a $11.5 billion credit line from a group of 40 banks to help it fund loans. "Countrywide has taken decisive steps, which we believe will address the challenges arising in this environment and enable the company to meet its funding needs and continue growing its franchise," President and Chief Operating Officer David Sambol said in a statement.

Meanwhile, the company began laying off employees and issued the following statement:

"In recent months, the volume of subprime mortgage lending has contracted significantly across the industry. Last week, Countrywide announced reductions in branch and operations support levels of its Full Spectrum Lending Division and the subprime lending unit of the Wholesale Lending Division. Approximately 500 positions have been eliminated across the country. The company will continue to monitor market changes and production levels on an ongoing basis and respond as appropriate.

"Countrywide continues to recruit and hire sales professionals in its pursuit of profitable market share growth. It also is carrying on with its strategic growth initiatives in its banking, insurance, capital markets and global endeavors. "

However, A.M. Best Co. placed the financial strength of BIG's credit ratings under review "with negative implications," a status that reflects the financial pressures that currently exist at the group's ultimate parent, Countrywide Financial Corp." Best explained. "The ratings will remain under review pending discussions with the managements of Balboa and CFC in order to explain the current situation and the proposed strategic initiatives put in place to lessen any potential negative impact on the insurance operations due to the recent significant deterioration at CFC. Prior to the conclusion of these discussions, any further deterioration in the financial condition at CFC, as perceived by A.M. Best, would result in a downgrade of all the financial strength ratings and insurer credit ratings of Balboa's insurance companies."

CFC maintains: "Operational efficiency and rapid response to market changes have been hallmarks of Countrywide's continued success and increased strength through multiple housing cycles. When appropriate, Countrywide takes steps to adjust staffing levels, particularly in areas where the cost structure must align with production volumes."

Countrywide placed ads in the Los Angeles Times and Detroit Free Press, attempting to reassure investors and customers that their money is safe. "The future is bright," the ads say.

Yet judging by the potential ratings downgrades and the company's refusal to comment on the subprime situation to Insurance Journal after repeated phone calls, the financial picture at Country-wide and Balboa Insurance is not glowing as it once seemed.

Reports from the Associated Press contributed to this article.

The blame game and the subprime mortgage lending meltdown

The subprime mortgage lending blame game is in full swing -- with people arguing about who's at fault for mortgage defaults, bond losses and lender failures -- but "we're only in the very top of the first inning," when it comes to how far and wide the lawsuits will reach and how severe the impact will be on the insurance industry, according to one industry expert.

"Already general litigation in the subprime arena is pointing in about every possible direction. Borrowers have sued lenders. Lenders have sued financial institutions. Financial institutions have sued lenders. Regulators have sued just about everybody," noted Kevin M. LaCroix, an attorney and a director of OakBridge Insurance Services, a specialized insurance intermediary that focuses on executive liability coverages.

Currently, American Home Mortgage Investment Corp., Countrywide Financial Corp., Fremont General Corp., IndyMac Financial Group, New Century Financial and Radian Group Inc. are among the many financial entities that have been hit with class action lawsuits. (For a more extensive list of filed litigation visit LaCroix's "D&O Diary" at http://dandodiary.blogspot.com/2007/08/all-subprime-all-time.html.)

Whether the effect of such litigation spreads beyond financial institution directors and officers and errors and omissions lines of coverage remains to be seen, LaCroix said. However, questions are arising about whether auditors, lawyers and even credit rating agencies should bear some of the burden for investors' losses. Alle-gations against corporate gatekeepers question whether they sufficiently scrutinized the exposures of subprime lenders and other mortgage-related facilities.

Dave Kodama, director of Policy Analysis for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, agreed it's too early to tell how far-reaching the ripple effect of litigation will be. How-ever, Kodama said, with criticisms being leveled against the securities rating agencies such as Moody's and Standard & Poor's, others will likely be pulled into the fray.

"Pension funds are going to have to step back and look at their portfolio and see what is their exposure," as individuals will want to hold the funds' directors and officers accountable.

"Definitely insurance companies, including our members, are having to address this with their shareholders -- address what is their exposure in their investment portfolio [with] these types of securities," Kodama said.

According to Moody's, U.S. P/C insurers' exposure to subprime mortgage-backed securities is minimal. In a report, "Most U.S. Property and Casualty Insurers Have Little Subprime Mortgage Exposure," August 2007, the ratings agency indicated P/C insurers tend to invest conservatively and overall the industry's exposure to subprime-related in-vestments is less than $15 billion.

What's it all about?

In the simplest of terms, subprime mortgages were provided to high risk borrowers with less than stellar credit histories. They often were offered at higher rates of interest than those presented to more financially stable customers and carry a greater risk for both borrowers and lenders. However, over the past few years, many such loans were offered as adjustable rate mortgages with low interest rates at the outset and no money down. In some cases, little or no documentation was required to determine whether or not the borrower could afford to make the payments, especially as interest rates adjusted to higher levels.

Through a series of financial transactions, the mortgages were sold by the original lenders to other financial institutions. In many cases the loans were packaged as mortgage - backed securities and sold on the bond market.

The double whammy of rising interest rates and a cooling housing market caused the house of cards to come tumbling down. As interest rates rose, customers were unable to continue making their loan payments. Mortgage defaults and foreclosures soared, lenders were forced out of business, and bond funds rendered worthless. Lawsuits ensued, with companies hoping to recover some of their losses.

With defaults on the upswing -- and most experts believe there will be more to come -- Country-wide and other lenders tightened lending requirements, making mortgage loans harder to obtain.

Impact on claims

LaCroix said while price declines in the D&O sector over the past three to four years are not going to reverse overnight "there have been a number of claims in this area. ... That's going to affect underwriting and perhaps even pricing in the financial institutions area."

He said it's uncertain whether the domino effect will cause claims to spread broadly across business sectors. "It's something that the heads of the D&O underwriting facilities can't ignore. ... I think it will lead to conservatism and possibly, if the claims trends continue, the prices will be tightening."

Integro Insurance Brokers' Thomas Zacharopoulos agreed it "is premature to assess the impact of the sub-prime mortgage crisis on the overall D&O market. ... The initial impact will be an increase in cases in the financial industry sector (banks, hedge funds, insurance companies, etc.) but D&O cases take at least several years to settle as the existence and extent of wrongdoing needs to be ascertained."

Zacharopoulos added that expanded "litigation should not necessarily trigger an increase in the overall rate environment."

PCI's Kodama emphasized that the primary purpose of the D&O insurance product is to protect and defend the corporation and its directors and officers, not to protect the investments of individuals. He also noted that typically an exclusion in the D&O policy negates coverage if the adjudication process reveals intentional acts of fraud.

"The defense is not there for intentional acts of criminal activity found through the adjudication process," Kodama said.

Ohio Casualty officially joins the Liberty Mutual agency family

With $7.3 billion in premium, Liberty Mutual Agency Markets now largest regional independent agency.

Boston-based insurance giant Liberty Mutual Group is now the largest regional provider of property and casualty insurance distributed through independent agents in the country.

The insurer finalized its acquisition of Ohio Casualty Corp. on Aug. 24 and is realigning its $5.9 billion net premium regional agency organization to make room for Ohio Casualty and its $1.4 billion in premium.

The transaction, valued at $2.7 billion, strengthened Liberty Mutual's agency presence in Midwestern and Atlantic states.

"The addition of Ohio Casualty enhances the scale and geographic diversification of our Agency Markets business unit while strengthening the overall Liberty Mutual Group," said Edmund F. Kelly, Liberty Mutual Group chairman, president and chief executive officer, in a statement. "This is an excellent fit for us and further demonstrates our commitment to independent agents and their customers."

Based on 2006 results compiled by A.M. Best Co., the combined $7.3 billion in net written premium makes Liberty Mutual's Agency Market division the largest regional provider of property and casualty products sold through independent agents in the country. Consolidated net written premium for the entire Liberty Mutual Group including its sizable direct writing business in 2006 was $20.6 billion.

The companies in Liberty Mutual Agency Markets have more than 6,800 employees and approximately 6,500 appointed agencies. Ohio Casualty has about 2,100 employees and operations in 48 states and approximately 3,400 appointed agencies.

Ohio Casualty Corp. is the holding company of The Ohio Casualty Insurance Co. and five property and casualty insurance companies (The Ohio Casualty Insurance Co., West American Insurance Co., American Fire and Casualty Co., Ohio Security Insurance Co., Avomark Insur-ance Co. and Ohio Casualty of New Jersey Inc.).

The acquisition resulted in a slight realignment of the Agency Markets insurers in order to take advantage of Ohio Casualty's strength in Midwest and Atlantic states.

Ohio Casualty will retain its name and cover Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washing-ton, D.C., and West Virginia.

Hawkeye-Security Insurance operations will be split between America First Insurance and Indiana Insurance. Headquar-tered in Iowa, Hawkeye-Security sold personal lines in Iowa, Kan-sas, Missouri, and Wisconsin and commercial insurance in Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and Wisconsin.

The Pennsylvania business insured by its Northeast regional company Peerless will be moved to Ohio Casualty.

The resulting line-up of Agency Markets companies and their states is:

America First Insurance: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas

Indiana Insurance: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin

Montgomery Insurance: Ala-bama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee

Ohio Casualty: Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washing-ton, D.C., and West Virginia

Peerless Insurance: Connecti-cut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont.

Colorado Casualty, Golden Eagle Insurance and Liberty Northwest will continue to operate in their current territories: Colorado Casualty in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming; Golden Eagle Insurance in California; and Liberty Northwest in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington.

The specialty lines operations of Liberty Mutual Agency Markets and Ohio Casualty will be combined into the Specialty Products Group.

Liberty Mutual Agency Markets also includes Wausau Insurance Companies, a national commercial property and casualty insurer; and Summit Holding Southeast Inc., a mono-line workers' compensation insurer covering Florida and nine Southeastern states.

Several executive appointments were made related to the acquisition. Dan Carmichael, president and chief executive of Ohio Casualty, will stay on with Liberty Mutual Agency Markets as an executive consultant to President Gary Gregg. David Lancaster is now president and chief executive officer of Indiana Insurance; Michael Winner was named president and chief executive officer of Ohio Casualty; and John Busby was named senior vice president and chief operating officer, Specialty Products Group.

Credit scoring use still an issue for officials, consumer groups

The recent release in late July of a long-awaited Federal Trade Commission (FTC) study on the use of credit scoring for underwriting and rating purposes did nothing to put to rest the controversy over its use by insurance companies. The study did support insurers' contention that there is a valid connection between how well a person manages finances and how likely it is that they will be involved in an accident. However, instead of putting out the fire, it seeemd to energize some officials and consumer groups.

Consumer groups cry foul play

Consumer groups were quick to express their concerns with the results of the study. The Center for Economic Justice and other consumer groups cried foul play, saying that African American and Hispanic minorities were indeed negatively affected by the use of credit scoring, whether intentionally or not. Birny Birnbaum, executive director for the Center for Economic Justice, said that a study by the Missouri Department of Insurance found that a consumer's race was the factor most predictive of an insurance score. And despite relying on data hand picked by insurers, the recent report by the Federal Trade Commission found that insurance scoring was a proxy for race.

"Insurance scoring represents 21st century redlining and the end of insurance as insurers develop ever more-detailed rating schemes based more on economic status, credit scores, education, occupation, prior liability limits -- than the risk of loss and should be prohibited," Birnbaum said in an opinion piece he wrote for Insurance Journal, Aug. 6, 2007.

But not all consumer advocates agree and some have even mellowed a bit on the issue.

Robert Hunter, who follows the insurance industry for the Consumer Federation of America, says the issue is far from dead. He concedes it's less widely debated today than a few years ago when more than 40 states were debating the issue every year. That's partly because about half of the states have adopted a 2003 model law proposed by the National Conference of Insurance Legislators, or NCOIL.

The model law prohibits companies from "solely" using credit information to set rates. Proponents of stiffer legislation say the model law doesn't do much because insurers prefer to also consider other, non-credit data anyway. The "solely" has taken the sting out for many legislators who had qualms about banning its use completely, according to Hunter.

"I think the NCOIL model really snuffed out a lot of the activity," Hunter said. "It gave the legislators a way to look like they were doing something without offending the insurance companies."

However, some states have added some restrictions. In Washington and most recently Delaware, insurance companies can apply credit models to only new customers.

In 2002, Maryland became the first state to ban insurance scoring for homeowners' premiums. Hawaii doesn't allow scoring for homeowners insurance either, and regulators in California and Massachusetts don't let companies consider credit when setting auto insurance rates.

Win/Win Attitude

Still insurance representatives agree -state battle is less "onerous" than it used to be.

"Over the last three or four years, this issue has kind of calmed down," said Sam Sorich, a vice president with Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, an insurer trade group. "More and more consumers now understand that their credit will be considered. There's a growing acceptance of it. Frankly, most people are helped by the fact an insurance company is using credit."

Some of the FTC report's major conclusions support Sorich and other insurance representatives on the positive aspects of credit scores. Among these findings:

• Insurance scores are effective predictors of risk under automobile policies. They are predictive of the number of claims consumers file and the total cost of those claims. The use of scores is therefore likely to make the price of insurance better match the risk of loss posed by the consumer. Thus, on average, higher-risk consumers will pay higher premiums and lower-risk consumers will pay lower premiums.
• Use of credit-based insurance scores may result in benefits for consumers. For example, scores permit insurance companies to evaluate risk with greater accuracy, which may make them more willing to offer insurance to higher-risk consumers for whom they would otherwise not be able to determine an appropriate premium. Scores also may make the process of granting and pricing insurance quicker and cheaper, cost savings that may be passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums.
• Credit-based insurance scores appear to have little effect as a "proxy" for membership in racial and ethnic groups in decisions related to insurance. The relationship between scores and claims risk remains strong when controls for race, ethnicity, and neighborhood income are included in statistical models of risk.

In spite of these conclusions, Congressional leaders want to hear the supporting theories, opinions, and critical remarks for themselves.

A Congressional hearing on the FTC study and the use of credit scores at the state level that was scheduled in July, but was cancelled by U.S. Representative Melvin L. Watt, D-N.C., chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. No alternative date has been selected to hold the hearing, but it is clear that Rep. Watts will hold the hearing and expects to hear from a wide array of interested parties.

Reports from the Associated Press contributed to this article.

Feds release data on drunken driving fatalities

Texas led the nation with 1,354 drunken driving fatalities in 2006 and was among the states to record the largest increase in such deaths, federal transportation officials said.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released in late August data showing drunken driving deaths increased in 22 states and fell in 26 states in 2006.

The NHTSA reported that in total 17,602 people were killed in the United States in alcohol-related motor vehicle traffic crashes, essentially unchanged fromthe 17,590 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005.

There were 13,470 deaths nationwide in 2006 involving drivers and motorcycle operators with blood alcohol levels of 0.08 or higher, which is the legal limit for adults throughout the country. That number was down slightly from 2005, when 13,582 people died in crashes involving legally drunk drivers.

Texas' 2006 total was an increase of 34 from 2005, putting it even with Arizona and Kansas for the biggest jump. However, Utah, Kansas and Iowa had the largest percentage increases compared with 2005.

"Texas has run a first close and second with California for years," said Susan Bragg, victim services director for the North Texas chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. "It's because traditionally Texas hasn't been known as a strong enforcer of DWI laws. We have a lot of highways. We have a lot of drivers."

Results nationwide

The overall number of deaths involving drivers and motorcycle operators with any amount of alcohol in their blood was 17,602 last year. That was up from 17,590 in 2005, said Heather Ann Hopkins, spokeswoman for the national highway administration.

"The number of people who died on the nation's roads actually fell last year," U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said at a news conference in Arlington, Va., a Washington suburb. "However the trend did not extend to alcohol-related crashes."

Transportation officials announced the new figures as they unveiled an $11 million nationwide advertising campaign as part of a Labor Day weekend campaign called "Drunk Driving. Over the Limit. Under Arrest."

"This crackdown is very, very, very important because it's the penalties that are imposed when someone chooses to ignore the law that really have the ability to make changes," Peters said.

Florida, Missouri and Pennsylvania had the greatest decreases in numbers of drunken driving deaths last year, while the District of Columbia, Alaska and Delaware had the largest percentage decreases compared with 2005.

The District of Columbia had the smallest actual number of drunken driving deaths with a total of 12.

Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Fatal workplace injuries drop slightly in 2006

The Department of Labor's BLS National Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries for 2006 reported that 5,703 people died from on-the-job injuries in 2006 compared with 5,734 in 2005. The rate of fatal work injuries in 2006 was 3.9 per 100,000 workers, down from a rate of 4.0 per 100,000 in 2005, BLS reported.

The overall fatal work injury rate for the U.S. in 2006 was lower than the rate for any year since the fatality census was first conducted in 1992.

Fatal highway incidents remained the number one cause of on-the-job deaths claiming 1,329 lives, accounting for nearly one out of four fatal work injuries. While fatal highway incidents remained the most frequent type of fatal work-related event, the number of highway incidents fell 8 percent in 2006. The number of fatal highway incidents in 2006 was the lowest annual total since 1993.

Falls ranked second, increasing 5 percent in 2006, claiming 809 lives. The 809 fatal falls in 2006 was the third highest total since 1992, when the fatality census began. Fatal falls from roofs increased from 160 fatalities in 2005 to 184 in 2006, a rise of 15 percent.

Being struck by objects ranked third, with 583 fatalities, although the number of workers who were fatally injured from being struck by objects was lower in 2006, after increasing for the last three years. The 583 fatalities resulting from being struck by objects in 2006 represented a 4 percent decline from the 2005 total.

Workplace homicides ranked fourth claiming the lives of 516 workers, with more than 80 percent of those workers being shot. However, the number of workplace homicides in 2006 was a series low and reflected a decline of over 50 percent from the high reported in 1994, the Census reported.

Fatalities involving fires and explosions increased by 26 percent in 2006, rising from 159 in 2005 to 201 in 2006. Fatalities resulting from exposure to harmful substances or environments were also higher in 2006, led by a 12 percent increase in exposure to caustic, noxious, or allergenic substances.

Other key findings

Coal mining industry fatalities more than doubled in 2006, due to the Sago Mine disaster and other multiple-fatality coal mining incidents.

Fatalities among workers under 25 years of age fell 9 percent, and the rate of fatal injury among these workers was down significantly.

The 937 fatal work injuries involving Hispanic or Latino workers in 2006 was a series high, but the overall fatality rate for Hispanic or Latino workers was lower than in 2005.

Fatalities among self-employed workers declined 11 percent and reached a series low in 2006.

Aircraft-related fatalities were up 44 percent, led by a number of multiple-fatality events including the August 2006 Comair crash.

Reducing fatalities

"Business and labor must continue to work together with government to reach the ultimate goal of zero fatalities," said Michael W. Thompson, president of the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE). "The BLS report noted that 5,703 people lost their lives on-the-job in 2006. The report indicated the number one activity in the workplace that led to fatalities was again transportation incidents."

In all, 27 states reported higher fatality numbers in 2006, while 23 states and Washington, D.C., recorded lower totals, ASSE reported. Texas had the highest number of worker fatalities with 486 followed by California with 448 and Florida with 355. The 12 states recording an increase in fatalities by 20 percent or more were Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont and West Virginia.

"We applaud those states that continue to see a drop in worker accidents and fatalities, such as Alabama, Iowa, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Carolina, Wisconsin and Wyoming and the District of Columbia which recorded declines of 20 percent or more," Thompson added.