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 In-surance Services, a specialized insurance intermediary that focuses on executive liability coverages.

Currently, American Home Mortgage Investment Corp. (which has filed for bankruptcy), Countrywide Financial Corp. (which recently began laying off staff), Fremont General Corp., IndyMac Finan-cial Group, New Century Financial and Radian Group Inc. are among the many financial entities that have been hit with class action lawsuits stemming from the subprime mortgage lending crisis. (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' loss of capital. Allegations against corporate gatekeepers question whether they sufficiently scrutinized the exposures of some of the subprime lenders and other mortgage-related facilities.

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

"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.

For its part Moody's has suggested that U.S. property and casualty 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 insurance companies tend to invest conservatively and that overall the industry's exposure to subprime-related investments 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 generally 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. Apparently 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 mortgaged-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 were rendered worthless. Lawsuits ensued, with companies hoping to recover from some of their losses.

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

Impact on claims
The lawsuits filed so far have "clearly had a material impact on claims," LaCroix said. While the 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," LaCroix explained. "And certainly 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 many business sectors. "But certainly I think it's something that the heads of the D&O underwriting facilities can't ignore, and it's clearly a concern for them. I think it will lead to conservatism and possibly, if the claims trends continue, the prices will be tightening."

According to Integro Insurance Brokers' Thomas Zacharopoulos, "It is premature to assess the impact of the sub-prime mortgage crisis on the overall D&O market. Rates over the past several years have been steadily more competitive across most sectors and industry groups. 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, a managing principal and leader of Integro's Management Risk practice, added that expanded "litigation should not necessarily trigger an increase in the overall rate environment. While the financial sector may experience firming rates, the spillover effect into other sectors has yet to be determined. If history is an indicator, the recent financial crises in Asia, Russia, and Long Term Capital Management during the late 1990s had minimal impact on the global D&O market."

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.

"The primary loss incurred by that product is mainly for defense costs for protecting the interests of the corporation, as well as its directors and officers," Kodama said. "That's the primary issue."

He also noted that typically an exclusion in the D&O policy negates coverage if the adjudication process reveals intentional acts of fraud, such as defrauding the public, the Securities and Exchange Commission or investors by intentionally withholding information.

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

La. district court: Allstate trial exhibits must remain open

Certain trial exhibits that were elemental in a recently settled wind vs. water case in Louisiana must remain part of the public record, a Louisiana district court judge ruled.

United States District Judge Sarah Vance in New Orleans on Aug. 16 refused to seal some of the trial exhibits in Weiss v. Allstate, a case that was settled earlier this year.

According to the judge's order, "Allstate sought protection for its claims manual and other manuals and documents used by field adjusters after Hurricane Katrina who adjusted claims made on Allstate homeowner insurance policies," asserting that "'production of these materials not subject to a protective order may put the company at a competitive disadvantage . . .' (Id.)."

Public Justice, a national public interest law firm headquartered in Washington D.C., and the California-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR), however, intervened in the case, seeking to keep the documents available to the public.

According to the FTCR, several months after the jury verdict in Weiss, the insurance company asked the court to either return or seal the trial exhibits. Representing FTCR, Public Justice opposed Allstate's request on the ground that the trial exhibits provide insight into Allstate's decision-making process and that denying public access to them "would directly impede FCTR's mission of educating the public about insurance practices and abuses." The motion to seal was also opposed by plaintiffs' counsel in the case.

In the Aug. 16 ruling the Court noted that "[p]ublic access serves to enhance the transparency and trustworthiness of the judicial process, to curb judicial abuses, and to allow the public to understand the judicial system better."

The documents are available for download at: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/insurance/AllstateKatrina/.

The court order and briefs for Weiss v. Allstate may be found at http://www.publicjustice.net/briefs_documents.htm.

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 Kenneth 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.

Allstate says it will raise rates in Texas despite state's opposition

Allstate will raise its homeowners' insurance rates despite a state order not to and a request by the state's consumer advocate to fine the company for each policy it renews at the new rate.

"We continue to believe that this is a competitive and actuarially justified rate," company spokesman Bill Mellander said. "This is about giving us a strong competitive position in the marketplace where our agencies can be providing homeowners with an accurately priced product that serves their needs."

On Aug. 20, Texas Insurance Commissioner Mike Geeslin ordered Allstate not to implement its statewide rate hike of 5.9 percent and an average 2.1 percent on top of that for homeowners in some coastal counties where customers can buy windstorm insurance from the insurer.

In Order No. 07-0719, the Commissioner stated, "Allstate Texas Lloyds filings, separately and in combination, proposed rates that were excessive, inadequate, unreasonable, and/or discriminatory for the risks to which they apply."

The Office of Public Insurance Counsel, which represents consumers before regulators, has asked the Texas Department of Insurance to impose a $25,000 fine for each policy Allstate renews.

The company has said it needs the increase because of rising construction costs and expensive reinsurance, which the company buys to help cover claims after a catastrophe. Mellander also said the company has followed the law in implementing its rates.

A spokesman for the Texas Department of Insurance said he could not speculate on how the state would respond.

State regulators have ordered the company from now on to file its rates for approval before implementing them.

The Office Public Insurance Counsel also wants state regulators to disapprove rates Allstate currently charges homeowners under Allstate Texas Lloyds and Allstate Fire and Casualty.

Combined, the companies have 917,000 policyholders in Texas.

Public Insurance Counsel Director Rod Bordelon said the company overstated its projected losses, expenses and profits in order to inflate its rates.

Allstate increased rates statewide an average 5.6 percent in 2006 and is appealing a state district judge's order this year to refund $56 million in premiums in relation to rates it charged in 2004 and 2005.

In July, the company withdrew a proposed 6.9 percent rate hike when regulators signaled they wouldn't approve it.

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

New rules for residential contractors in Ark.

All must show proof of workers' comp insurance

Residential contractors in Arkansas who own their own businesses may opt out of workers' compensation coverage for themselves, but must purchase it for their business, according to a bulletin recently issued by state regulators. According to new rules under Act 398 of 2007, "residential contractors must provide proof of workers' compensation coverage as a condition of licensure or renewal of an existing license."

A bulletin jointly released by the Arkansas Workers' Comp-ensation Commission, the Arkansas Insurance Department and the Arkansas Contractors Licensing Board clarified that, "A residential contractor who is a sole proprietor, partner of a partnership, member of a limited liability company, member of a professional association, a self-employed employer, or an officer of a corporation may purchase a workers' compensation policy and exclude himself or herself from coverage through the insurance contract. The exclusion request must be signed and dated by the person requesting to be excluded and must be submitted to the insurance company at the inception of the policy."

All business owners who opt to exclude themselves must hold a Certificate of Non-Coverage. The agencies emphasized that a "Certificate of Non-Coverage is not and cannot be used as a waiver of workers' compensation liability." According to the bulletin, a contractor/business owner must at least purchase a "minimum premium policy," even if the owner chooses a self-exclusion and has no employees.

For more information visit the AWCC Web site at www.awcc.state.ar.us/news.html.

Okla.'s PLICO climbs out of $143M hole

Oklahoma-based Physicians Liability Insurance Comp-any (PLICO) in just over two years has overcome a $143 million surplus deficit. Carl Hook, M.D., president and CEO of PLICO, said the company met the goal one and one-half years in advance of a state-mandated deadline.

PLICO, the state's largest medical liability insurer, was placed under supervision by the Oklahoma Department of Insurance in 2004.

The company said a medical professional liability crisis for loss years 1998 through 2001 resulted in a huge increase in the size of awards, as well as an increase in the frequency of claims reported, and independent actuaries determined PLICO had a surplus deficit in December 2003. At the time it maintained no reinsurance. A capitalization plan was developed and implemented on July 1, 2004, to address the problem.

The state legislature in 2004 passed a bill temporarily exempting from PLICO reserve requirements, giving it until Jan. 1, 2006, to build sufficient reserves. In 2005, the deadline was extended to Dec. 31, 2008.

The insurance department approved a series of rate increases for the company beginning in 2004. Part of the proceeds from the rate increases was to be used to buy reinsurance.

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.