Earlier this week, the Labor Committee passed a bill out of committe that would significantly change the landscape of Iowa’s worker’s compensation system. The bill has been referred to as the “Employee-Choice” bill and has drawn significant interest and publicity. For instance, read this, and this, and this and this.
Iowa’s worker’s compensation system has been around almost a century. Worker’s compensation is a concept that was a compromise agreement between labor and employers. Prior to the implementation of a worker’s compensation system, an injured worker would have to prove that the employer was negligent and that the employee was free of neglignece to recover anything.
In order to limit the potential exposure to an employer and in an effort to compensate injured workers, both management and labor worked out a compromise that resulted in Iowa’s worker’s compensation system. As part of this compromise, both sides had to give us some important and cherished rights.
Employers gave up their negligence defenses. Now, even if an accident is solely the result of the employee’s own negligence, he/she will be paid for their time off work and provided necessary medical care. However, in exchange for giving up a legal defense, the employers also were given certain rights.
Among the advantages gained by the employers were the right to select the medical provider that treats an injured worker. The theory behind giving the employer the right to select a medical provider is that they know what types of injuries are likely to occur in their place of business, they develop an institutional knowledge of the best physicians treating those types of injuries, and are better suited to direct the care for more efficient and better quality care. Whether the employer’s choice of physician always results in better and more efficient care can and often is debated.
However, there are other practical advantages to the employer-choice scheme. First, the employer tends to develop a working relationship with a physician. That physician often times tours and gets to know the various jobs performed at an employer’s place of business. This allows the physician better understanding and knowledge to determine whether an injury was actually caused by the work duties. It also gives the physician the advantage of being able to write return to work restrictions that will permit a safe light duty assignment.
If the physican understands the light duty work options, he/she is more likely to release the worker back to work. Often times, those pushing for employee-choice argue this is a bad thing. However, employees actually earn more money working light duty than they do sitting at home. Therefore, it is actually a good thing for both sides to have a physician knowledgeable about the work duty options.
I understand that this is an emotional issue for some people. Who doesn’t want to be able to select their own medical provider? Ideally, both the employer and the employee could agree on a medical provider. Unfortunately, there is often mistrust of and a misunderstanding of the “company doctor’s” role. Similarly, there is often resistance from the employer to permit treatment by a physcian that does not understand the ability of the company to provide light duty and that may keep the worker off of work for extended periods of time. This inevitable conflict has to be resolved in some manner. And, it was compromised and decided in 1914. Changing the terms of that initial compromise may have far-reaching and undesirable future political, economic, and practical ramifications.
In fact, I have some concern about the message that it would sent to businesses in Iowa or considering relocation to Iowa. We are in a recession. Yet, our legislature seeks to overturn a long-standing statute and risk a significant increase in cost to employer’s in our state? This seems like a particularly bad point in time to be sending such messages. Rather than encouraging economic development and new jobs, this type of a tidal wave shift in Iowa’s worker’s compensation system would send a message at this critical time that Iowa is not friendly to, appreciative of, or desireous of businesses locating in, growing, or starting in our state.
Perhaps most importantly, as an attorney working in this system for over a decade and hopefully a few more decates into the future, I have great concern about the use of sheer political power to make sweeping reforms in the Iowa Workers’ Compensation system. I have urged against the brute political strength approach to work comp legislation in the past.
What comes around, generally goes around in the political arena. Political winds are not forever and there is likely to come a day when the Republicans experience a resurgence of support and control in Iowa. Although the Democrats control the legislature and the governor’s mansion, they should exercise restraint and avoid too much “tinkering” with Iowa’s balanced worker’s compensation scheme. If they turn the worker’s compensation system into a political battle, it will likely result in a respone from the Republicans when then regain power some day.
Iowa’s worker’s compensation system plays an important role. Turning it into a political tool could be disastrous in the long-term. None of us want to have the physician choice issue swinging back and forth depending on which political party is in control. It will make determination of rights more difficult and confusing. I would urge some restraint and consideration by the current majority. When the political tides turn, I hope not to have to do so, but vow to be back urging the same restraint be exercised by any Republican administration.
