Nash’s family filed a $50 million lawsuit against Sandra Herold, owner of the chimp – Travis. Now the other shoe drops – Ms. Herold and her attorney are claiming that this is a work related injury and Ms. Nash is only entitled to workers compensation benefits.

After I stopped laughing, I had to evaluate the merits of this case, for me it was quite simple – this is not workers comp. But I am going to give Ms. Herold and her attorney the benefits of being very smart and putting Ms. Nash in a position that may force her to file a workers compensation claim. Transferring their exposure to the comp system.

In Connecticut, Ms. Nash has to file a claim within one year of the alleged accident, if not she may be barred from filing a claim. So her choice, go ahead with her civil lawsuit or file a workers comp claim – if she does not file the claim and she looses the civil suit Ms. Herold gets away without any financial liability. This seems unfair and a cute way of manipulating the law.

Let’s take this one step further – could Ms. Herold and her attorney really convince someone that this was work related? Do they meet the workers comp burden? Can they answer these questions?

Was she in the course and scope of her employment – well Ms. Herold is alleging that Ms Nash worked for her towing company and Travis – the chimp was apart of her team. Travis was the company mascot and Ms. Nash took care of him as her regular job duties. Does this make her injuries work related? This is a test that Ms. Herold and her attorney will have to overcome.

Did the insurance carrier who insures Ms. Herold’s towing company know that the chimp was there? Did they assess the risk the chimp could pose for employees? Did they agree to insure that risk? If not this area of the “work” process may not meet the underwriting guidelines for the insurance carrier.

I could keep going but why bother, Ms. Herold and her attorney has managed to use the workers comp system to their own benefit – now the carrier will have to defend themselves against this case. In my opinion, Ms. Herold may have inadvertently sabotaged her case when she was interviewed by reporters after the incident happened – she said according to media reports that Ms. Nash came over to visit – now she says, she was an employee when she arrived at my house – you can’t have it both ways.

On September 29, 2009, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced a record-setting consent decree resolving a class lawsuit against Sears, Roebuck and Co. (Sears) under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for $6.2 million. The consent decree, approved by Federal District Judge Wayne Andersen, represents the largest ADA settlement in a single lawsuit in EEOC history. The EEOC’s suit alleged that Sears maintained an inflexible workers’ compensation leave exhaustion policy and terminated employees instead of providing them with reasonable accommodations for their disabilities, in violation of the ADA.

This case not only highlights the link between workers compensation and the ADA but it magnifies the fact that twenty years after the ADA was enacted employers are still struggling to understand the process. Even large employers have a hard time balancing and defining the ADA exposure as they manage the work related disability. The EEOC Chicago District Director John Rowe, who supervised the agency’s administrative investigation preceding the lawsuit, said that the case arose from a charge of discrimination filed with the EEOC by a former Sears service technician, John Bava. According to Rowe, Bava was injured on the job, took workers’ compensation leave, and, although remaining disabled by the injuries, repeatedly attempted to return to work. Sears, Rowe said, “Could never see its way clear to provide Bava with a reasonable accommodation which would have put him back to work and, instead, fired him when his leave expired.”

The underlying issue that this case raises is the importance of having a proactive return to work program that not only satisfies the workers compensation exposure but addresses the looming ADA accommodation requirements. It’s quite simple when employees are injured on the job employers must have a predefined plan, in place, that addresses return to work options as well as ADA accommodations. We can no longer discard injured employees from the workforce, we have to make a valiant effort to get injured employees back to work and keep them there successfully.  

If it’s so simple, why do employers struggle to create proactive return to work opportunities? And why do they fail to understand how the ADA exposure is created?

Let’s walk though a typical case that illustrates how intertwined and complicated the ADA exposure is, especially when you are balancing State workers compensation and Federal Leave guidelines.

Ouch, I’m Injured – The ADA Exposure Begins – Now!

David is a warehouse clerk, with a large multi-state employer; his job requires lifting up to 75 pounds. David lifts a box and injures his back – a workers compensation claim is filed and David is referred to an orthopedic surgeon, who eventually recommends surgery. David has back surgery and is left with significant lifting restrictions that not only affects his major life activities, but may prevent him from doing his pre-injury job without some accommodation. Several weeks after surgery and rehabilitation David’s orthopedic surgeon releases him to return to work light duty with restrictions of no lifting over 15 pounds.   

David contacts his employer to return to work and he is told that they can not accommodate his light duty restrictions. His employer request that he stay at home, continue to collect workers compensation and contact them when he is feeling better – a typical conversation that occurs when employers do not have effective return to work policies or procedures – strike one in the ADA compliance process.

David continues to contact his employer because he wants to return to work, he is told repeatedly that there is no job available to accommodate his restrictions – strike two in the ADA compliance process.

Eventually, David is released to return to work full duty with permanent restrictions of no lifting over 20 pounds. David contacts his employer to return to work and he is told that they do not have a job available within his permanent restriction. David advises his employer that he can do his regular job if, he can use a Forklift to lift any items over his lifting restriction. The employer says no – they are afraid David will have another injury because his pre-injury job requires lifting up to 75 pounds – strike three in the ADA process – the employer is now out of compliance.

To further complicate matters, while the workers compensation process was under way, David’s employer puts him on Family Medical Leave (FMLA) which provides David with 12 weeks of job protection. The company’s leave policy mandates termination at the end of the 12 weeks of FMLA protection. Based on their leave policy, David is slated for termination because his FMLA protection has expired. The employer promptly contacts their insurance carrier attempting to settle David’s workers compensation claim – there’s no need to discuss return to work because David will be offered a monetary settlement –at this point the EEOC is knocking on the employers’ door. 

In this example, the employer does not evaluate reasonable accommodations that could help David return to work light duty, they did not have the interactive conversation with David to evaluate the type of the accommodations he is requesting, which is required under the ADA. David, a long term employee, feels that there are other ways to accommodate his restrictions but his employer is not willing to work with him so he hires an attorney and the ADA Elephant is now in the room. 

Most employers do not understand the difference between workers compensation disability and qualifying for ADA protection. The key difference between workers compensation and ADA is: workers compensation was designed to provide injured employees with medical and financial assistance following a work related accident. The ADA was enacted by Congress to protect individuals from discrimination associated with their disability and to provide reasonable work accommodation, if the employee qualifies for this protection.  The exposure is created when employers do not have proactive return to work policies, when they deny reasonable accommodation and when they are more interested in terminating injured employees who have work related disabilities than brining them back to work.

David’s employer incorrectly assumes that because he did not qualify for permanent disability under workers compensation he does not qualify for Americans with Disabilities Act protection or accommodation. The confusion, under the workers compensation system, David has a permanent impairment, he is not considered permanently disabled – this technicality does not mean that he does not meet the definition of disabled under the ADA. In the eyes of David’s employer, his work status is a workers compensation issue. Wrong – this is where the wheels come off the ADA accommodation car and the employer is sailing toward a costly reality check.

In our example, the ADA exposure started when David’s employer was notified that he had restrictions that would limit his ability to perform his regular job. The key reminder for employers, the ADA exposure can start with the injury itself because the injury can meet the definition of disabled under the ADA – example: an amputated arm.

Another key point, the workers compensation system, mandates that treating physicians address the employees ability to return to work and we further ask the doctor to address the employee ability to do their regular job, we then ask the physician to address permanent restriction and we get these notices routinely – yet we don’t have a plan to evaluate accommodations that will result in injured employee retention and successful reintegration into the workforce. I am constantly amazed by the disconnect that occurs when employers are clueless about the information sitting in their files.

In essence, workers compensation is the gateway to ADA accommodation. Employers incorrectly assume that the workers compensation system will protect them from ADA litigation – surprise, surprise, it will not! In fact, the workers compensation system does little to explain the exposure and they will not provide employers with a defense for inadequate ADA policies – the two systems are independent and co-dependent on each other.

During fiscal year 2008, disability discrimination charges rose to 19,453 – an increase of 10 percent from the prior fiscal year and the highest number of disability charges filed with the EEOC in 14 years. One factor that may be contributing to this rise, the economy. As the economy forced employers to make adverse employment decisions, many did not equate terminating injured employees with ADA litigation.  

We know the wrong way – so what is the right way to handle the ADA Exposure?

The solution is simple injured employees can return to work if employers make a valiant effort to bring them back to work. Your injury management program should be cohesively blended into your regular employment practices. When evaluating job accommodations, employers must focus on ability, not disability – what can the employee do and how can we keep them working?

Remember, the workers compensation system is built to provide notification of injured employees medical and work status after each doctor’s visit. These notifications address the employee’s ability to return to work with or without restrictions. If the employee has restrictions, the restriction may eventually affect the employee ability to perform the essential functions of their pre-injury job – creating the ADA exposure. You have to have a plan before this happens. You must evaluate each injury independently and determine if the injured employees qualification for ADA protections. Then you must review the pre-injury job description, evaluate the essential functions or duties required to do the job and you must complete the interactive process with the injured worker to determine how you can accommodate them in the workforce. Is there request for accommodation reasonable and can we provide it? Without these key ingredients more employers will find themselves on the EEOC radar.

If you are still struggling with this process – there is fantastic information available at the Job Accommodation Network’s website – http://www.jan.wvu.edu/

It’s unfortunate for Sears that they had to be the one to turn the return to work light bulb on for other employers. Employers now have 6.2 million reasons to evaluate their workers compensation return to work polices and simultaneously evaluate how they comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Before the Injury:

• Create a written return-to-work policy.
• Review the policy with new employees during their new-hire orientation or with existing employees during their annual review.
• Write a detailed job demand evaluation that identifies the specific tasks and physical demands associated with each job within the company.
• Create a detailed job description for every position.
• Establish a working relationship with a walk-in clinic or occupational medical center.
• Assign a specific person in your organization that will be responsible for administering the return-to-work program. This person should have a thorough knowledge of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and the Workers’ Compensation Statutes.

One of the complaints I hear from employers is, “I tried to bring the employee back to work but they complained the whole time they were here. Finally, in frustration we let the employee go home and they never returned to work.”  The question asked by most employers is, how do I avoid this scenario?

To eliminate or reduce the employee’s ability to manipulate the return to work process, you should implement the following post accident procedures:

Identify tasks that can be grouped together to accommodate the injured employee’s restrictions.  Focus on matching the employee’s ability to do the job versus focusing on what they cannot do.

Send a copy of the proposed modified-duty job description to the treating physician, and ask him or her to approve the position. You are asking the physician to acknowledge that the employee can complete the tasks based on the restrictions imposed. This avoids the “I’m in too much pain to do this job” scenario.

Notify the injured employee by phone and in writing that you can accommodate their restriction. Ask them to come back to work.

When the employee returns to work review the position and inform the employee that the treating physician confirmed their ability to perform the modified tasks.

• Educate your supervisors so they can effectively manage the injured employee.
• Communicate the job offer to your insurance carrier.
• Continue to monitor the employee until they are released to work full-duty or until they are at Maximum Medical Improvement.  Review the final work status and any permanent restriction in compliance with the provisions set forth in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Conclusion – Injured Employee’s Can Return to Work Successfully!

Workers’ compensation return to work programs, have to be an integral part of your retention policy or strategy. Your employees—are your most valued asset. If employees are your most valued asset, then you should recognize the importance of implementing a comprehensive return-to-work program. Your obligation as the employer does not end when the injury begins. Returning an employee to work is an investment in your company, and it shows that you still value your employees after they are injured.

 The answer to getting injured employees back to work starts before you hire them and definitely before they are injured. Having well defined return to work policies and procedures that can be implemented immediate will insure that the employee returns to work – successfully.

This scenario plays out at countless companies on a daily basis, the frustration of getting treating physicians to join the return to work team. The key question for employers, did you explain your return to work goals to the physicians who treat your injured employees? Are we asking physicians to be mind readers? Or are we allowing our employees, who may have their own agenda, to determine their return to work options?

Workers Compensation is a team sport – everyone has to work for the same goal on the same team – unfortunately medical treatment often creates a disconnect between the goal of the employer – return to work; the goal of the employee – stay at home a little bit longer and the goal of the treating doctor – fill out volumes of paperwork so he or she can get paid and keep everyone happy in the process.

It is remarkable to review statistics that compare the length of time an employee is off work due to non-work–related injuries and the length of time they are off work due to a work-related injury. If you compare diagnosis, prognosis and treatment, the work-related disability statistics are significantly higher. If you remove the fact that the injury happened at work, most individuals would recover and resume their regular duties very quickly. Adding the workers’ compensation component creates a sudden extension of symptoms, treatment and a distinct delay in the amount of time required to return to an active lifestyle.
 
We all know that even when you are on a team, individuals play with their own self interest – this is no different in workers compensation. The significant difference between team sports and workers compensation – someone has to pay when treatment decisions delay the injured workers ability to access appropriate timely medical treatment or when the employer can not get appropriate information to get the injured worker back to work timely.

How do you get everyone to work on your return to work team? 

The first step for employers – stop pretending that your goal is not getting the employee back to work as soon as possible – return to work is not a secret! Everyone who works for your company should understand your company’s return to work policy, the minute they start working for your organization. Keep the policy simple – “If you’re injured we will make every attempt to bring you back to work, until you are able to return to your pre-injury position.”

The second step – get the physicians who treat your employees to understand the same message. One of the realizations that most employers fail to acknowledge, they are not in the room when their employees seek medical treatment. Imagine yourself as the injured employee. What would you tell the doctor that would keep you off work? If you do not provide the treating doctor with adequate information to evaluate the employees ability to return to work – you’re giving the doctor a crystal ball, then complaining when he doesn’t see the same vision you do.

The third step – having a pre-determined injury management strategy that is consistent, cohesive and tactical. Everything starts on the ground floor; do your employees understand their role in the return to work process? Do you have a policy that you can follow every time an employee is injured? Or are you willing to cast blame on the treating doctor for your failure to plan for the inevitable injury that will occur at your company. Effective return to work programs start the day you hire your first employee not the day the file the Notice of Injury.

Forth step – understand your job site. If you don’t have clear job descriptions it is not the doctors’ fault that you don’t know what the employee did before the accident. Frankly, there is no excuse for not knowing the job demands and communicating that information to the treating physician. The job description dispels any myths or misinterpretations about the job requirements. A very specific job description is an essential part of the return to work process.

 Every employee who sustains an injury with your company should take a copy of their pre-injury job description to the initial appointment. If the employee is referred to a specialist, a copy of the job description should be sent to that doctor. Provide an area on the Job Description Form that asks the doctor to confirm receipt and asks him or her to address the likelihood of the employee returning to this position immediately. If the employee can not return to the position immediately ask the treating physician to give you an estimated return date.  

Fifth Step – document and consistent follow through. Return to work should not be left up to your insurance carrier; it is the employers’ responsibility to make sure the employee returns to work or stays at work after the injury – not the adjuster, treating doctor or ancillary provider – it your job to make sure it happens. Use the restrictions given by treating physicians to as a tool to find the employee a job – focus on what the employee can do versus what the limitations are. Let’s not forget one other thing – human resources. Workers compensation does not mean employment rules go out the window your lack of HR polices is not the physicians fault. Follow through means that you get all the stakeholders on your return to work team to read the same playbook.

Finally, we have to stop accepting poor performance and rewarding the behavior with money. If you go into a department store and you get bad service, do you keep shopping there? Workers compensation is the only consumer based process that accepts mediocre service and rewards that type of service with a constant stream of business. What do I mean? For many years I worked as an adjuster and during those years I encountered numerous physicians who did not cooperate with my request for medical treatment status, refused to return my phone calls and admonish me to get the work status from the dictation attached to the bill. These physicians continued to stay on the approved provider list and year after year we sent them more patients or allowed the employee to select them, without doing anything to correct the disruptive relationship. Why did we do this? I guess we expected a different result – no we need to complain.

Employers have a responsibility to insure that their employees receive adequate timely medical treatment. Timely, is the key word – waiting weeks for treatment authorization can delay or eliminate the return to work options. Employers also have an expectation that treating physicians will make every attempt to work with the employer to safety bring the employee back to work.

Physicians we recognize that when you went to medical school they did not prepare you to handle the nuances of the workers compensation system, with a little effort we will educate you on the process, because we have to collectively work towards the same goal – getting the injured employees back to work successfully.

Clearly we have a lot of work to do to make this relationship productive.  Everyone has a vested interest in making sure injured employees receive exceptional medical treatment – that results in their rehabilitation from the injury and their speedy return to gainful productive employment. Treating physicians are the most important factor in the return to work process. The relationship that you develop with your authorized treating doctors will often determine if your employees return to work or remain off work. We have to make every effort to create a team that works towards the same goal.

A recent headline in the Lancaster Sunday News read “City Pays 1.2 Million to Cover Injuries in Change of Policy – Light Duty Programs for Those Hurt on the Job Out – Settlements In.  According to the reporter, the new City administration made the decision to stop transferring injured employees to positions that were light; instead they were planning to offer all of them a settlement to leave the City. The City Administrator said “this approach will cost the city more now, but we will save money in the long term.”  

So, Are Return to Work Programs Still Viable?

The answer is easy – in tough economic times businesses can not afford to overlook return to work programs because indemnity or lost wage payments are one of the key drivers of workers compensation cost. If you opt to keep the employee out of work, you risk paying for lost wages or indemnity benefits until the employee exhausts the state mandated benefits.  Indemnity payments impact your experience modification and ultimately drive up the cost of your workers’ compensation premiums as well as, your cost of doing business.

The average company can not afford to take the position that the City of Lancaster, a self-insured organization, took because multiple settlements and lack of return to work programs will find your company uninsurable. Several years ago, when I first started my consulting practice, I received a frantic phone call from an insurance agent who advised me that his client received a Notice of Cancellation and that he had sixty days to find them new coverage. Apparently, the company had numerous accidents, large settlements and their idea of injury management was – injury, terminate, settle, a cycle that earned them the Notice of Cancellation.

This employer did not attempt to quantify the impact of allowing injured employees who could return to work, the option to stay at home, nor did they evaluate the long term cost of offering a settlement to every injured employee versus retaining the employee with some job accommodation. If this employer had asked two simple questions—what is the cost of leaving these employees at home? And what is the long term cost of settling these claims? —they might not have been so quick to say, “We have nothing available – let’s settle.”

The reality for this insured, his agent could not secure replacement coverage. The agent advised me that he contacted several underwriters to find out if they would be interested in issuing a quote for this client. After he relayed the fact that the company’s paid-in premium amount was $280,000 and the claims paid-out total was $850,000 the underwriters broke into hysterical laughter. No one was interested in providing workers’ compensation coverage for this company. The client faced the real issue of closing his business because he could not secure coverage. In today’s economic climate and as employers make decisions to terminate or layoff or refuse to offer light duty positions to injured employees, they must evaluate the long term cost of this adverse decision.

Workers Compensation is not forgiving and the system is built to punish employer’s long term for decisions they make now. Frankly, employers are not in a win-win situation when it comes to workplace injuries. If you leave the employee at home, the insurance carrier pays them to be there. This, in turn, affects the amount of money you pay for premiums. If you refuse to bring the employee back to work you may be in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act – ADA. If you bring the employee back to work in a nonproductive light-duty position that has them counting paperclips, you are paying state and federal taxes as well as benefits for an employee who is not contributing anything to your bottom line. While settlements seem like the best immediate option for employers this does not eliminate their long term cost.  

An argument could also be made that the cost associated with injured employees remaining off work does not stop when companies, like the City of Lancaster, make the decision to settle the worker compensation claim. The settlement actually transfers the cost of the injury to the general public, the next employer or the social security system in the form of disability payment, when the settlement money runs out.  

What can you do to keep your organizations return to work program viable?

Quantify the cost – everyone especially today, understands dollars and cents – your only option is proving that the return to work program is financially beneficial to your company’s bottom-line. Imagine if everyone shared your return to work vision – the only way to share your vision – speak to your management team in financial terms. “It cost X to keep the employee at home, it cost Y to settle them out of the system, the long term impact on our profits is Z, the three year impact on our workers compensation cost is XYZ. Based on my evaluation I recommend that we implement a proactive return to work program instead” – This vision will sell even the most skeptic managers. Settlements may seem like the best option, return to work is the most cost effective solution.

How would you rate your companies training program?  (a) Exceptional – (b) Great –
(c) Adequate – (d) Needs Improvement

Most employers rate their training programs as Great to Adequate; in reality most programs need drastic improvement.

The typical employer describes their training program in the following manner: “Well, we have new employees come in to the HR Department to complete the hire package, then we go over their benefits, we show them a safety video and then we send them to their department for job-specific training.” What the employer is actually saying – new employees are put into a buddy situation, you are asking their co-workers to train them to do the job. Guess what —this is not training! That is passing the torch from Employee A to Employee B.

With this scenario, you are hoping that Employee A, your superstar employee, will pass down all of the requirements for the job. In reality, Employee A is frustrated because she has to train all of the new employees without additional pay, and she passes down her bad habits, her frustrations and what I like to call her accumulated employee baggage to Employee B. Before Employee B has a chance to get her feet wet, she is already forming a negative opinion of your company. Before long, you are totally surprised when Employee B is injured and out on workers’ compensation. What went wrong? You failed to provide the employee with adequate training to prevent the injury – you created a “tribal training program”.

As employers, you have to stop passing the torch – or doing what I call “tribal training”. In the olden days information was passed down from generation to generation using verbal queues, thousands of years later, employers are still doing this every day when they hire new employees. Employers have to recognize that “tribal training” is not training at all – job specific, formal, documented training is what prevents injuries.  Like a cookie cutter, every employee in the same job should have the same training – Consistency.

Where should you start?  

• Determine the specifics tasks required to do the job.
• Determine the essential functions and demands of the jobs.
• Write a clear job description that addresses the minimum requirements to do the job safely.
• Determine the safety rules that should apply to the job or work areas.
• Determine the minimum competency required to do the job safely.

Use this information to create a Training Matrix that charts the job task, minimum competency required to do the job, the safety requirements and a time table for the employee to achieve competency in the position. Then use this information to develop your training classes and start training your employees – Simple.   

Do not accept experience for training, even if employees come to your job site with impressive amounts of experience. The previous employer may have done things the right way, but they may not have; the employee may have been adequately trained to perform the job, but he or she may not have been. It is up to you to provide training specific to your work environment and the job tasks you are asking your employees to perform. 

Remember training should be an ongoing initiative, not a one shot deal. It should be Simple, Specific and Consistent. As the Employer you must recognize that bad hiring decisions and improper training programs can increase the likelihood that an employee will be injured. Spend the money to train your employees correctly—from the beginning. If you evaluate the overall cost of one workers’ compensation claim—including: the loss of manpower, the administrative cost to manage an injured employee, the workers’ compensation premium cost and the overtime to cover jobs that would have been done by the injured worker—you will see the cost benefits of integrating an effective training program that emphasizes safety into your workplace.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), mandates that you provide training to your employees. In today economic climate, most employers are asking their employees to do more with less staffing, it is imperative that your employees are highly trained and remain injury free. The most cost effective scenario is preventing injuries not managing them. In this economy, you can not afford to continue the training scenarios of the past. Job specific training will ensure that your company moves from one that is trying to survive, to one that is looking for new ways to thrive.

Margaret Spence, CWC, RMPE – President/CEO of Douglas Claims & Risk Consultants, Inc. and WorkCompSeminars.com. She is a Board Certified Workers’ Compensation Consultant, Speaker and Trainer who ranks among the experts in the field of injury management and return to work implementation. For more than two decades, she has managed workers’ compensation claims for Fortune 500 Corporations, Public Entities and small businesses. She is an expert at showing companies how to slash their workers’ compensation cost by implementing strategies that drastically reduce injury rates, increase productivity and energize employees to work safely. She is the author of – From Workers’ Comp Claimant to Valued Employee. Margaret pioneered adding National Return to Work Week to the 2009 US calendar – this week highlights the importance of implementing Return-to-Work or Stay-at-Work Programs.

National Return to Work Week was founded by Margaret Spence, a Florida Workers Compensation Consultant and author of From Workers Comp Claimant to Valued Employee. Margaret submitted NRTWW to Chase’s Calendar of Events last April, it was accepted and included in the 2009 Calendar of Events.

The Grim Reality for Injured, Ill or Disabled Employees:

ü      Annually, 4.1 million employees sustain work related accidents or injuries.

ü      1.1 million loose time from work after the injury. 

ü      Annually, employees loose approximately 80 million workdays directly related to their injury or illness. 

ü      Employees who remain off work for 16 weeks or more seldom return to the workforce.

ü      The re-employment options for people with work related disabilities dismal.

ü      The current unemployment rate for people with disabilities 14.0 percent.

The stakes have never been higher, everyday we hear disturbing information about layoffs and downsizing – when company’s layoff employees, what happens to employees who are injured on the job or have illness that prevent them from find new employment. What do we do with these individuals? – said Spence.   

“From a Workers Compensation standpoint – when employees are injured in the workforce there is a monetary reward mindset, a feeling that money is better than a job.”  She added, “This is the only system that rewards employees to stop working – even when they are capable of returning to some form of employment. We allow people to join the ranks of the unemployed for the price of a pick up truck” says Spence.

While most employees who are injured immediately return to work and continue their regular job – there are far too many who we settle out of the system. These employees either move on to a new employer, sometimes repeating the cycle, or they move to the ranks of the
unemployed. There is also another subset that move into the Social Security System and become permanently disabled – adding a new burden to an already over taxed system.

First Annual National Return to Work Week Virtual Conference will bring together employers, employees, treating physicians, vocational experts, insurance, legal professionals and disability providers from around the country to share best practices and exchange information to increase return to work opportunities for ill, injured and disabled employees. Together we can highlight the importance of Return to Work, Stay at Work or Transitional Duty Programs, we can not continue, even in this economic climate to exclude injured or disabled workers from the workforce.

The NRTWW Motto – Disability Does Not Mean No Ability – injured, ill and disabled
employees should not be discarded from the workforce. Nor should we create a system that rewards and allows them to discard themselves from the workforce. Join us on the BrightTALK Network starting on May 11, 2009 for the 1st Annual National Return to Work Week Conference

National Return to Work Week  will bring together employers, employees, workers compensation and disability providers to share best practices that increase stay at work or return to work opportunities for ill, injured and disabled employees.

About Margaret Spence, CWC, RMPE is the President and CEO of Douglas Claims & Risk Consultants. Spence is the author of From Workers Comp Claimant to Valued Employee – and the founder of National Return to Work Week. She is an injury management expert on a mission to help employers understand the importance of implementing proactive return to work or stay at work programs. Learn more about Margaret Spence, visit her website at www.margaretspence.com

Chase’s Calendar of Events – is the most comprehensive and authoritative reference available on special events, holidays, federal and state observances, historic anniversaries and more. Visit their website – www.chases.com

Join us now:

Employee retention, employee engagement and talent management are the buzz words in the Human Resources and Business Community. Every major publication predicts a dire staffing and talent shortage, yet every year employers allow trained talent to walk out their door after an occupational injury.

Historically, the workers’ compensation laws have not adequately supported the return to work process – it is much easier to offer injured employees a settlement than it is to provide them with the opportunity to return to gainful employment. The only problem with this scenario – the next employee you hire could be someone else’s settlement.

The Key Reason Why Employers Do Not Make a Valliant Effort to Retain Injured Employees.

Fear. Fear of re-injury, fear of litigation or just fear of workers’ compensation. All too often, an injured worker is not put back into the workforce for one of three reasons. First, employers do not feel that they can offer the employee a limited but meaningful job. Or second, they worry that the recovering employee, who is not up to “full speed”, many re-injure themselves and create additional injury claims. Third, the employer lacks the resources and knowledge to systematically manage injuries. And there is…

The Negative Side of Injury Management

I have heard countless stores from employers recanting the horrible experiences they have had as they attempted to bring injured employees back to work. As an adjuster, I witnessed the frustration and surrender that occurs when injured employees manipulate the workers’ comp system – I have vivid memories of employees driving me and their employers over the edge and to the settlement table.

Litigation and manipulation reinforce employers’ reluctance to bring injured employees back to work. Most employers do not want to deal with the attitude problems, productivity issues and the morale drain that can occur when injured employees do not want to be at work.

So, we don’t want to deal with them – but what do we do instead? We throw money at a bad problem – in vision your two year old toddler having a temper tantrum and you take him to Disney to shut him up. The next time he throws a tantrum you will be headed up the Turnpike to make his yelling go away – this is what we, (employers and adjusters) do to create professional workers’ comp claimants. We reward bad behavior with money.

Is There a Better Way?

The answer in a nutshell is yes. The primary reason why injured employees manipulate the workers’ compensation system – we allow them and then for bad behavior we reward them with settlement dollars. 

The answer to getting injured employees back to work starts before you hire them and definitely before they are injured.

1. If I walk into your company today to apply for a job – Is your return to work policy visible?
2. After I am hired, how did you relay your return to work expectations?
3. Is workers’ compensation an integral part of your Retention Policy or Strategy?

Your companies return to work program should not be a secret. Every employee who works for your company should understand the policies and procedures that must be followed if they are injured on the job.