The practice of workers' compensation law has been significantly altered since the COViD-19 pandemic forced practitioners into a virtual practice. While the original goal was to return to the "old normal" as soon as possible, complete with live hearing, in-person doctors depositions and even some actual paper, it seems that attorneys and judges alike have grown increasingly comfortable with the "new normal." A bit of caution is warranted, however, in letting this new normal degrade the practice.

For those who do not practice workers' compensation law or who are not familiar with its history, the concept was brought to the United States after successful forays in Europe at the turn of the 20th century. It was designed, first and foremost, to provide wage-loss replacement for workers injured on the job and support for these workers and their families during times of total disability or work-related death. The law also provided for payment of medical and funeral expenses. Over time, however, in many states, the focus of workers' compensation shifted to a process of making cash payments for "physical impairment" or "permanency" with no regard for a loss of earning capacity. These jurisdictions came to be called "schedule states." Perhaps the most extreme examples of each system are separated by the Delaware River. Pennsylvania is, plain and simple, a wage-loss state, which maintains the integrity of its civil litigation roots and deference to wage loss as the primary focus, notwithstanding the 1996 failed effort to impose the concept of "permanency" on the practice. New Jersey, on the other hand, was one of the first schedule states in the country, having morphed into a largely administrative practice with a singular focus of impairment ratings and their corresponding lump sum value.