Appeal Expected Over Ruling Overturning Florida Workers’ Comp System

By | August 19, 2014

  • August 19, 2014 at 2:42 pm
    observer says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Insurance companies should avoid this state at all costs until this is settled by the Supreme Court. Many employers argue that the law is unfair because it was the injured worker’s fault. But in this no fault system, the worker gives up the right to sue and get a payday (even when it is deserved) and the employer gives up the right to blame the employee (even when it is deserved). The state legislature sets the benefit levels as to what they deem as fair, not a jury or judge. Ironically, these laws were enacted to protect the injured worker because they got screwed by the system. Now the pendulum swings and workers have the upper hand and the law is preventing “the sky is the limit.”

    • August 20, 2014 at 9:44 pm
      CA Risk Mgr. says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      ^ I agree with most of what you stated, but actually, WC as a benefit delivery system was sought first and foremost to stop the hemorrhaging that employer’s were starting to see by loosing tons of civil lawsuits in the early 20th century and said “Time-out! This isn’t working for us anymore, we need a new system.” i.e. exclusive remedy. Labor retorted, “Why would we change it now, we’re starting to win the lawsuits?” Out came system design of the No Fault System and timely/immediate benefit provision.

  • August 19, 2014 at 4:38 pm
    jw says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    this ruling will take us back to pre industrial revolution days. But with the strong libertarian bent in todays politics this socialist program is in trouble.

  • August 19, 2014 at 4:54 pm
    Lou Zettler says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Good time for Florida to approve & in-act a NonSubscriber option !

    Hey Florida – look to Texas for guidance, Texas is the National leader, has the most experience & the lowest WC rates. Texas is also one of the most profitable states for sellers of Workers Compensation. Oklahoma is the latest state to offer Nonsubscription, can FL & CA be far behind?

    Donovan Brown should retain a experienced attorney, like Mike Dodge to write the amendments to remedy the 2003 gutting of the FL WC law, as the Judge stated, “it is inadequate as an exclusive remedy for all injured workers.”

  • August 20, 2014 at 11:58 am
    Stush says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    this just highlights the fact that the compensation levels and terms of injury need to be reviewed and updated. It was reviewed to address a bad state of affairs in 2003 but benefit levels do not keep up with the cost of living for one, and the length of disability needs to be more reflective of each persons job and injury. The judge is just pointing out that the current benefits and terms of dsiability may have been sound in 2003, but a decade later and things have changed. this is Florida, where politics have a larger role in the law than in other states. the trial bar is always looking for an edge and now they found one.

  • August 21, 2014 at 10:55 pm
    Gunard Swanson says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Finally someone is looking out for the “Employee’s Fundamental Right/s!!!!! A “Conclusive Settlement System” is truly unconstitutional. For instance, My Attorney was not even qualified in Workers Compensation, yet, he’s settled 700 plus settlements, and, one denial Tort Claim- myself. I have personally suffered since 9/5/2007. Try not receiving a paycheck for the most of two years??? This decision give me hope!!! 3 years of mediating with the Insurance Company and then to understand you never had a chance other than to “Conclusively Settle”). Had it not of taken another year to procure the contingent settlement I would of accepted it. What has happened to myself is nothing more than criminal, and, my own ‘State” is a contributor………….Please!!!!!!!

  • September 4, 2014 at 3:04 pm
    Sarah says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    OK, So NCCI should raise the rates by 56% and we go back to the prior statute before 2003. I am all for that! Hey lawyers, thanks for the raise in my commission checks and do not complain when your premiums go up by 56%.

  • March 3, 2015 at 2:24 am
    Jack Latson says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Yeah, if you want to see a state that has a workers compensation scheme that is totally biased against the workers and favors the insurance carriers, model your system after Texas’.

    In Texas, there is no right to a jury trial for any medical issues; if your doctor malpractices on you during treatment for a workers comp injury, you waive a cause of action against the doctor; if your adjuster maliciously prosecutes your wife for your alleged wc fraud, there isn’t a thing she can do about it; the worker has to prove causation with an expert medical opinion but gets no money for hiring the expert and there are virtually no lawyers that take wc because they get paid less than the going rate for plumbers in Texas.

  • March 7, 2015 at 8:18 pm
    Gunard Swanson says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Whether the system is fair or not? It should still follow the law the Higher Court has set down. To allow the Insurance Entity “Employee Leasing Companies” to effectively run on their own accord “Due Process” is purely common to the “Interest” the State shares with regard. We are in America, right! Surely, the State is corrupt and blantantly don’t care about American Justice. A true investigation needs to be completed soon enough and restore WC back to a fair, Constitutional System. The 1st District Court Of Appeals is the starting point! The new Court House (Taj Mahal) is a good point!!!!!!

    Most Respectfully,

    Mr. Gunard Swanson….still looking for justice!

  • April 16, 2015 at 4:50 pm
    Nancy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    An injury to an employee while at work and an injury on the same property to a non employee should be handled the same, regulated according to the same statutes. Current workers compensation law does not allow for compensation for future lost earnings, lost earning capacity, future medical expenses, permanent impairment, pain and suffering, and loss of capabilities and enjoyment of life, among other things. 104 weeks or maximum medical improvement negates further responsiblity of an employer, while the injured carries daily whatever incapacity they may have for life. I agree, Judge Cueto’s ruling is a start. Florida’s workers compensation law needs a remedy. The Florida Legislature and the Attorney General must first and foremost realize they represent the employed as well as the employee. The issue could tie the Legislature and the Courts for some time.

  • May 4, 2015 at 6:56 pm
    Dodi Spence says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Good day,

    I would like your help in finding answers regarding the Florida Workers Compensation Insurance laws and regulations. My name is Dodi Spence and I can be reached via email at omgdodi71@hotmail.com. Please note I have never filed a Workers Compensation claim and my concerns stem from the treatment of hard working Floridians who are being neglected due to the current workers compensation laws.

    Is it logical to allow an insurer to deny treatment to an injured worker based on “Normal Aging”? Well it is happening in Florida. Imagine if you will an officer is at work fine and dandy, he is involved in a motor vehicle accident while on duty, suffering multiple herniated disc only to have the injury claim denied for Normal Aging. I cannot help but wonder if campaign contributions from Florida Insurance companies have influenced the elected official’s votes regarding the Florida Workers Compensation laws? I know a few injured workers who have endured lengthy delay and denials in excess of two year). When an injury occurs at work the injured worker must wait for the insurer to deny the claim and provide a letter of denial to the injured worker BEFORE the injured worker can use his/her health insurance. If the injured worker does not wait for the letter of denial letter both the workers compensation insurer and the injured workers health insurer can legally deny the claims for treatment of the work related injury. In essence under the current laws/regulations the injured worker is left to linger (most often in pain) while waiting for treatment to be covered by the injured workers health insurance or paying medical expenses out of pocket for treatment that should have been covered under workers compensation.

    Is it unethical, immoral and borderline fraud for an insurer to deny treatment to an injury because of “Normal Aging”? If “Normal Aging” is an acceptable reason for denying treatment to an injured worker, then is it reasonable to believe that a state law requiring employers to purchase workers compensation insurance is nothing more than organized fraud? I just do not understand how a state law mandating employers to purchase an insurance policy where there will be no coverage if the employee age’s. Is that simply fraud/extortion? Would the regulations be a violation of the RICO act (extortion/fraud)?

    How is it legal for the State of Florida to require employers to purchase insurance knowing the claims can be denied due to “NORMAL AGING”? “NORMAL AGING” is part of the normal life process. Florida’s current legislation is leaving injured workers in pain, employers out their investment (the injured worker) and facing the expense of hiring a replacement employee….all while the insurer profits by denying medically necessary treatment to the injury citing the underlying “NORMAL AGING” as a reason for denial. The denial is not based on abnormal aging; it is based on NORMAL AGING. I could understand a denial of treatment due to abnormalities, as it is not the norm, but when an insurer can deny a claim for being normal as a underlying cause, how is that not fraud?

    I believe Florida’s elected officials owe an explanation to Florida’s workforce for such an egregious and reckless disregard for the health and well being of Florida’s workers. Would it be logical to allow the Health Care Insurers for the Florida’s Elected Officials to deny medical treatment under group health insurance due to normal aging? If not, I would like to know why Florida laws make it acceptable for workers compensation insurers to deny a claim for “NORMAL AGING”, after all workers compensation is a group insurance. I look forward to your response.

    Sincerely,
    Dodi Spence



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*