Blog

Proposed Changes for Workers’ Compensation

Posted on January 24th, 2011 by Katie A. Hubbard

For the past few months, there has been a push in the Illinois General Assembly to reform Illinois Workers’ Compensation laws. SB 1066, as amended by House Amendment 2, was proposed to reform the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act and was approved by the House Executive Committee in early January 2011. However, the House did not vote on the proposed bill. The bill, however, will likely come up again as legislators try to reform the Workers’ Compensation system. Groups in support of organized labor and workers in Illinois vehemently oppose any bill that would take away rights from workers. Here is a list that highlights the potential detrimental changes the proposed bill would bring about:

o Utilization review – The new legislation would make it harder for doctors to decide on a treatment plan for their workers’ compensation patients. Instead, at the employer’s request, a utilization review would take place where a group of people who had not seen the patient would review the file and decide on the best treatment option.

o Choice of Doctor – Currently, an injured worker has the choice of doctor, and that doctor can refer the patient to any other doctor if it is related to the injury. If the patient is not happy with that doctor, they can select another, the limit being two. Under the proposed bill, the injured worker would have to visit a doctor the company chooses first, and if they are not satisfied they may select another doctor but there are limitations on referrals.

o Wage differential benefits – If a worker cannot return to their job after an injury, but can work another job with less strain on their injury, wage differential benefits allow them compensation for a lower wage at the new job. The new bill would limit this by only allowing wage differential benefits for five years after the award becomes final or at the age of 67.

o Medical fee schedule – The proposed bill would reduce the medical fee schedule for services given by hospitals and medical providers. This means that doctors will be receiving less for their work, and potentially deter them from accepting Workers’ Compensation cases.

o Alcohol – There would also be a stricter standard used if alcohol or drugs were involved in the accident. If the employee is found to be under the influence of alcohol at the time, they cannot recover. Also, if they refuse to be tested for alcohol use at that time, there would be a presumption that they had been intoxicated, which the employee would have to rebut.

With many legislators convinced that the state needs Workers’ Compensation reform, this issue will likely be addressed again in the 97th General Assembly. If these proposed changes eventually pass, they would be a serious setback for workers injured on the job who need workers’ compensation to survive and provide for their families when they cannot work.

For more information on Workers’ Compensation, contact Katie A. Hubbard.