Groups Warn Against 'Premature' Workers' Comp Changes
After lobbying the Legislature to makes changes to the workers' compensation insurance system for the past 18 months, business leaders are backing off this year.
February 06, 2018 at 03:52 PM
4 minute read
After lobbying the Legislature to makes changes to the workers' compensation insurance system for the past 18 months, business leaders are backing off this year.
The Florida Chamber of Commerce, Associated Industries of Florida and 15 other organizations sent a letter last month to the primary sponsor of the House workers' compensation bill advising him that any changes the Legislature makes to the system could be “premature and ultimately, inadequate” and that the current House bill doesn't do enough to control attorney fees.
But bill sponsor Danny Burgess, R- Zephyrhills, said he will continue to press for the measure (HB 7009) despite the apparent lack of support from industries that, in the past, have pushed lawmakers to act.
“It's hard for me to understand not wanting to push forward with everything we got,” Burgess, chairman of the House Insurance & Banking Subcommittee, told The News Service of Florida.
The National Federation of Independent Business-Florida supported similar legislation to last year. But the group's executive director, Bill Herrle, now says passing the House bill would be a “setback.”
He described himself as the “uncheerful cheerleader.”
“We have to appreciate the effort, but we just don't think team business gets a win in the end,” Herrle said of his association's reversal.
The House passed the bill in a 74-30 vote on Jan. 12, but the measure has not been heard in the Senate. Burgess said he has spoken to several senators about having it considered. He has not, however, spoken to Sen. Anitere Flores, who chairs the Banking and Insurance Committee, where the bill would have to be heard.
Much of the issue for business groups centers on plaintiffs' attorney fees, which businesses contend drive up insurance costs.
The Florida Supreme Court in a 2016 ruling known as Castellanos v Next Door Company, said Florida's then-restrictive fee caps violated injured workers' due process rights. The court authorized judges to award fees outside a fee schedule if adhering to it yielded unreasonable results.
Following the ruling, the Office of Insurance Regulation approved a 14.5 percent rate hike that took effect in December 2016, and business groups lobbied the Legislature to restrict attorney fees.
The House in 2017 responded by passing a bill that would have capped attorney fees at $150 per hour in certain circumstances. It had the support of NFIB-Florida, the Florida Chamber and Associated Industries of Florida. But the bill ultimately didn't pass the Senate.
Subsequently, rates for 2018 did not increase. Indeed, Florida Insurance Commissioner David Altmaier approved a 9.8 percent reduction. But the filing was based on information from policy years 2014 and 2015 and didn't include much data on cases settled following the Castellanos ruling.
For the 2018 session, the House recycled its 2017 workers' comp bill. But on the eve of floor consideration, business groups sent the letter to Burgess and every member of the House suggesting that lawmakers should have access to additional data before passing anything.
“We respectfully urge the House to stand ready for reform once the full impact of the Castellanos case is realized,” the letter reads.
The business community is confident that additional time will underscore the push to restrict attorney fees, but it faces major opposition from plaintiffs attorneys and groups such as labor unions.
Business groups are buoyed by the findings of an Office of the Judge of Compensation Claims report that shows a 36 percent increase in the amount of workers' compensation legal fees paid on behalf of injured workers in fiscal year 2016-2017.
The report showed that in all, attorney fees in the workers' compensation system totaled nearly $440 million that year. The majority — nearly $254 million — were forked out by employers defending workers' compensation claims, not to plaintiffs attorneys.
The House bill attempts to address the attorney fees, but “respectfully, we assert that more can be done in the area of attorney fees to control system costs without jeopardizing benefits to Florida employees,” the business groups wrote in the letter.
But Burgess said attorney fees must pass constitutional muster, and he said that the ones currently in his bill would meet that test.
Christine Sexton reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFlorida Supreme Court Paves Way for Attorney Fees Over $100k in Land Dispute
Miami’s Arbitration Week Aims To Cement City’s Status as Dispute Destination
3 minute readHit Song Ignites Multimillion-Dollar Legal Battle in South Florida
Ex-Big Law Attorney Disbarred for Defrauding $1 Million of Client Money
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250