Boston Workers Compensation Lawyer Blog
After you have been injured at work and need medical treatment, often times you will be contacted by your employer’s workers compensation insurance company or a nurse who works for the workers’ compensation insurer for the purpose of them trying to steer you to a certain doctor for medical treatment. If this happens to you, you should be very concerned about the intentions of the workers’ compensation insurance company. If you are receiving a weekly disability check from workers’ compensation, the workers’ compensation insurer does have a financial incentive to get you treated by a qualified doctor so that you can return to work as soon as possible and they can stop paying you your weekly disability benefits. However, some workers’ compensation insurance companies try to steer injured workers to certain doctors because they know the reputation of the doctor is such that he is more likely to recommend medical treatment that is less costly to the insurance company, such as ordering conservative medical treatment such as physical therapy or injections instead of surgery. Workers’ compensation insurance companies also are known to steer injured workers to certain doctors who are known to either not write disability letters for their patients (which are required in order for an injured worker to continue to receive a weekly disability check) or are likely to clear an injured worker to return to work well before that injured worker is actually physically capable of returning to his or her job (thus enabling the workers’ compensation insurer to stop weekly disability payments to the injured worker). Continue reading
AIG Found to Have Committed Fraud in Order to Reduce Payment to Injury Victim and His Family
A recent Middlesex Superior Court decision in the case of Anderson v. AIG, which ordered AIG to pay over $7 Million to a lawyer who was struck by a negligently operated bus (which was insured by AIG), exposes the lengths a large, wealthy and powerful insurance company will go to in an attempt to deny full and fair compensation to an injury victim and his family. In the Anderson case, AIG and its attorneys were found to have fraudulently created a fictitious version of how Mr. Anderson’s accident occurred in order to decrease its payout on the claim and save the massive insurance company a few million dollars. You may recall that AIG, whose 2013 net income was over $9 Billion dollars (yes, billion), is the same AIG that received an $85 Billion bailout from our taxpayers (which includes Mr. Anderson, the victim of this accident and victim of AIG’s fraud). Anyone other than plaintiff’s attorneys who routinely represent those harmed by the careless actions of others in litigation against large, powerful insurance companies like AIG, may be shocked by AIG’s conduct which was exposed to the court in this case. Those of us who routinely handle these cases are not shocked by the findings, but rather relieved that AIG’s fraud was exposed for all to see. Continue reading
What To Do When Workers’ Comp Refuses to Pay for Your Necessary Medical Care?
In Massachusetts, when you are injured on the job and your work injury requires medical care, your employer’s workers’ compensation insurer is responsible for paying for 100% of any reasonable and necessary medical treatment. You are not responsible for any co-payments and your medical providers are prohibited by law from “balance billing” you. (Balance Billing is an illegal practice where a medical provider attempts to bill a patient for the difference between what the insurance company has paid them, pursuant to their contract with the insurance company, and what they would normally bill a patient who does not have insurance). Of course, just because Massachusetts workers’ compensation laws mandate that your employers’ workers’ compensation insurer pay for 100% of your work-related medical bills, it does not mean that they will always follow the law. Continue reading
A Safe Workplace: A Requirement Benefiting Employees and Employers
The United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) has created a health and safety module for employers to follow which is aimed to help reduce workplace injuries to their employees. As OSHA states, employees and employers alike have incentives to maintain a safe workplace. Continue reading
During Winter, More Awareness Required On Construction Sites
Many Massachusetts and Boston area construction projects require work to be performed outdoors during our region’s harsh winter months. Construction workers are required to work in brutal winter weather conditions, such as extreme cold, snow and ice which can create dangerous working conditions. Because injuries caused by winter weather conditions on construction sites can be costly to both construction companies and construction workers alike, proper safety measures must be followed in order to prevent these injuries. Continue reading
The NFL Continues to Deny Workers’ Compensation Claims Filed by Injured Former Players
As the publicity of the NFL’s concussion crisis continues to increase, and public pressure continues to mount for the NFL to assume financial responsibility for the costs associated with injuries suffered by former NFL players, the NFL continues to deny former player’s claims for workers’ compensation benefits. The most recent example is former NFL player Robert Alexander, who suffered a cracked vertebrae in his neck, had his claim denied and has now been pending for 3 years in California. Continue reading
Unsafe Construction Sites Pose Danger To The Entire Community
Often times unsafe working conditions at construction sites cause injuries to construction workers who are employed at the project. However, a recent jury verdict awarding over $18 Million to the operator of a motor vehicle who was caused to lose control of his vehicle, crash and suffer injuries resulting in partial paralysis highlights the dangers that unsafe construction sites can pose to not only the construction workers, but also to the entire community surrounding the construction site.
In this case, the plaintiff was operating his motor vehicle when it struck a raised expansion joint, causing him to lose control of his car, leave the roadway and strike an adjacent stone wall and utility pole. The defendant construction company had been performing work on the roadway and had left loose gravel and other debris within the traveling lane. The defendant construction company also placed a partial asphalt patch and left an expansion joint spanning the travel lane that rose about two inches above the ground. There were no warning signs cautioning drivers that the roadway was being worked on at the time.
This case is a good example of a construction company who did not fulfill their safety responsibilities at a construction site. Construction companies have a responsibility to perform their work in a reasonably safe manner, and should never be allowed to needlessly endanger anybody, whether it be construction workers who are working at their project, or members of the community such as this person who was injured while driving on a town road. Construction companies must perform a pre-hazard analysis in order to prevent these types of accidents. A pre-hazard analysis requires a construction company to determine (at the outset of the project) what unique aspects of each particular project could cause harm to people, and then either plan to eliminate that hazard or if it cannot be eliminated, to take reasonable precautions to prevent people from being exposed to the dangerous condition. A construction company performing work on a roadway that is open to the public should be expected to know that any conditions that they create which could impair a driver’s ability to navigate that roadway are putting the community at a substantial increased risk of harm, which may be serious injury or death. Construction companies must take all necessary precautions in order to prevent harm to the people who are expected to be exposed to these dangerous conditions.
New OSHA Construction Site Safety Rule Targets Occupational Diseases
Boston’s construction industry saw jobs decline by more than 20 percent during the recession. However, all signs indicate that Boston’s construction industry is once again booming, with 8,700 construction jobs added between August 2012 and August 2013. With more construction projects both underway and in the planning phase, this profitable yet dangerous industry is likely to receive more attention for construction site safety practices. The United States Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recently released a new construction site safety rule aimed to prevent silica exposure to construction workers. Silica exposure is known to cause severe lung diseases characterized by shortness of breath, cough, fever, and cyanosis (bluish skin).
With more construction projects underway and more construction workers being exposed to job site hazards, this new OSHA construction site safety rule is timely. The rule lowers the legal limit of silica dust that construction workers are permitted to breath by implementing new practices, such as wet cutting and improvements to ventilation. OSHA estimates that nearly 2.2 million workers in the United States are exposed to silica dust, most of which are employed in the construction industry.
Workers who are diagnosed with lung diseases that are caused by working conditions are entitled to Massachusetts workers’ compensation benefits. If the lung condition causes a worker to require medical treatment, the employer’s workers’ compensation insurance company is responsible for 100% of the resulting medical bills, meaning the worker is not responsible for paying co-payments and deductibles which they otherwise would have to pay by using their health insurance. If the work-related lung disease prevents a worker from doing the essential functions of his job, then that worker is entitled to weekly workers’ compensation disability benefits (temporary total disability [60% of Average Weekly Wage for up to 3 years], permanent and total disability [66.7% for life] or partial disability {60% of difference between pre-injury average weekly wage and post injury wages, for up to a maximum of 5 years]). In addition to medical and weekly monetary disability benefits, the employer’s workers’ compensation insurer may be responsible for payment of permanent loss of function benefits.
The Effects of the Newly Enacted Workers’ Compensation Law Restricting NFL Player’s Rights to file Claims in California
In October of 2013, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law a new bill that restricts the rights of many former professional athletes from pursuing workers’ compensation benefits in California. It is not often that the topic of workers’ compensation draws the attention of the mainstream media, however given the popularity of the topics of NFL concussions and the rising cost of medical care, this issue has certainly become extremely important to former professional athletes and owners of professional sports franchises alike.
WHY WAS CALIFORNIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION SO IMPORTANT FOR NFL PLAYERS?
California has long allowed former players to receive compensation for “cumulative trauma” and has a liberal statute of limitations. Most other states do not recognize cumulative trauma and have very restrictive statutes of limitations. In the past, many former players who either lived or played for teams outside of California and did not begin to suffer the effects of sports related injuries until after the statute of limitations had elapsed in their home state would turn to California as their fall back option, providing them with necessary compensation for medical care. Continue reading
Avenues of Compensation for Those Injured While Working for Uninsured Employers (Part 2)
PART 2 of 2
Part 1 of this blog, discussing workers’ compensation benefits available to those who have been injured while working for an uninsured employer in Massachusetts was published on October 18. Because workers’ compensation only provides limited benefits and often times does not provide adequate compensation for the harm caused by a workplace accident, it is important to thoroughly investigate all possible civil remedies which can provide additional compensation not provided by workers’ compensation laws, such as pain and suffering.
Civil/Third Party Claims
If a general contractor or negligent third party with insurance coverage or reachable assets cannot be identified, the injured worker has the right to recover full tort damages directly from his uninsured employer. Once it has been determined that the employer did not have workers’ compensation coverage on the date of injury, a plaintiff seeking a tort recovery against an uninsured employer must first establish:
1) the employee-employer relationship,
2) the plaintiff was injured, and
3) the injury arose out of and in the course of employment.
See. M.G.L. c. 152, §25A; G.L. c. 152, § 66. Continue reading
