I oppose SB 986-
“An Act concerning additional requirements for an employer's notice to
dispute reasonable
care for
an employee under the Workers' Compensation
Act.” In the 20 years I have had
an accepted claim in Connecticut
Workers Compensation I have had the commissioner deny me at least twice
medical
benefits without the slightest consideration for due process, a
meaningful
hearing or presentation of evidence. In
2005 the commissioner refused to examine the evidence I presented or
permit me
to bring into witness my treating physician. It
is my experience that commissioners are unqualified to
make
life decisions regarding injured workers and their families. I know, I lost mine, but hey, that was only
one person and who cares. Recognizing
there may be times when the employer could legitimately be concerned
about a
certain case, maybe they should have an appeal process but this process
should
be exclusive of Workers Compensation with the remedy Superior Court in
order to
protect Injured Workers. Appealing to
State of Connecticut Superior court assures injured worker Due Process
and the
right to present evidence at a meaningful hearing which does not occur
in the
present administrative agency. Bear in
mind, there are legal cost for the Injured Worker in either venue. The existing
Workers Compensation Statute gives the determination of reasonable and
necessary medical treatment to the treating physician exclusively. As we
heard in 2010 testimony by former
Workers Compensation Commission Michael Miles the existence of a 1997
Chairmans'
directive clarified the reasonable and necessary medical treatment
covering all
recommended treatment for the same injury and prior approvals are not
required
to expand treatment or medications. The
belief was that Connecticut Injured Workers would be receiving the
medical
treatment they needed and on a timely basis in order to hasten recovery
and
treatment of pain to save families and jobs if the 1997 directive had
been
followed to present. I propose
the follow wording be substituted in SB 986
to facilitate this goal: “If an employer in the
State of
Connecticut chooses to contest the reasonable and necessary medical
treatment
of an accepted claimant under The Workers Compensation Act, then that
employer may
appeal to the State of Connecticut Superior Court.
1.) The employer shall bear all costs
associated with the appeal, including employee legal costs. 2.) The employee will have automatic counter
claim of unfair dealing and business practices, along with non-dealing
in good
faith claim against employer. Retroactive
to January 1, 1991, the employee
may appeal to Superior Court where employer has denied medical
treatment
recommended by the treating physician including mandatory No. 1.)
proceedings.
“ Sincerely, William Lawler |
|||
| HOME |