Hello There, Guest! Login Register
Index    |     Search    |     Members    |     Help

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Discussion Question for Attorneys
#1
Perhaps the attorneys who read this can offer some clarity.
It's my understanding that w/c is a bargain in which you lose your right to bring a common law action against an employer in exchange for a "speedy and effective" remedy (Please correct me if I'm wrong)
If I am correct, then it appears at times that some people are not getting what was promised to them in the bargain.
I've read that a contract that only benefits one party is no contract at all. It seems at times that some i/w's have given up something and got very little or nothing in return.
Can anyone help me make sense of this so I can stop thinking about it?
Thank you
 
Reply
#2
lostinconnecticut Wrote:Perhaps the attorneys who read this can offer some clarity.
It's my understanding that w/c is a bargain in which you lose your right to bring a common law action against an employer in exchange for a "speedy and effective" remedy (Please correct me if I'm wrong)
If I am correct, then it appears at times that some people are not getting what was promised to them in the bargain.
I've read that a contract that only benefits one party is no contract at all. It seems at times that some i/w's have given up something and got very little or nothing in return.
Can anyone help me make sense of this so I can stop thinking about it?
Thank you

I agree with you can some please help us i/workers.
 
Reply
#3
We can thank the labor unions for enacting workers compensation laws, a safety net which was originally intended to quickly provide benefits to injured workers.

Maybe the labor unions can "undo" this safety net and go back to the way it was prior to workers comp. Employees had to sue their employers.

Not saying I would want to do this, but whatever the answer is, the unions need to be the major players, then back the politicians who have power to make changes.
Let Go, and Let God......
 
Reply
#4
A couple of thoughts:

In Connecticut, worker's comp is always quicker than a lawsuit.

Before worker's compensation, employees generally got nothing. Trust me, as bad as you folks think it is, it can be a lot worse. Worker's comp is not a blank check. But if you have an uncontested injury you will get decent treatment, paid for your lost time, and compensated (albeit lightly) for your permanancy.

If you have a contested case (unwitnessed, or late reported) then you need to realize that your employer has legal rights too. You need to prove your case and that sometimes takes time and legal effort. It is a system. It is what the legislature enacted. We try our best to make it work but while you may be 100% sure of your position, your employer may be just as sure of his. And then there is a fight, and it takes time to sort it out.

Most lawsuits end up in defendant's verdicts these days and you get nothing.
Not the way for an IW to go, IMHO.
 
Reply
#5


jaspell>>>>I agree with what you have said here and have to admit that you gave a good description of the system. BUT the fact that an unwitnessed injury is generally thought and treated like a fake upsets me deeply. Automatically the IW is a liar UNLESS another has seen it. That is a disgrace. I for one was alone. Injured 5 body parts. Yes I was a joke to my employer, a liar, a fake. This comes after 20 years of loyal service. I thank God everyday that the Judge read every word submitted to him and
saw in the end who was the liar/faker and decided in my behalf. Thank you for your professional turn on issues.

CAP
 
Reply
#6
Jaspell, let me tell you why I for one filed a w/c claim against my company,I got hurt lifting 45 pound parts on a machine in a factory, turned while moving one of these parts and felt a popping noise in my neck.I felt bad for a couple of days, then decided to tell my superviser,I told him I felt like I needed to get it checked out by a doctor, he totally ignored me, just sat there looking at me, and then got up and walked away.So I then went up to the office and told our human resource guy. He told me to take ibupropin for a few days, , A week later I was still working and went back to see him.He said he was going on vacation and could I wait another week,I told him I would be on vacation the following week and I was willing to go to the doctor on my own time if he would set it up for me,he said he would call, I called him twice that week, never returned my call. When I went back to work his boss called me in the office and asked me if I had been to the doctor yet. I said no, they sent me that day I got injured june 14th, finally went to the doctor July 6th, they took me off work, went to several doctors over a 11 month time span, got released on mmi , permanent light duty, they could have given me another job that was easier, because I had done a inventory job before, not much lifting but instead I got terminated I had 23 years total with this company,sorry this is so long,When you get treated like crap this is why I filed a claim against my company.Thanks for your opinion though,Halftrak
no matter where you're at there you are
 
Reply
#7
Jaspell.
I was hoping to go a little deeper than that. I would agree that, when an injury is uncontested, things go smoothly. I guess in Connecticut this is true in about 90% of cases. The contested cases, which include pre -existing injuries/conditions, multiple injuries, as well as unwitnessed injuries seem to put an i/w at great risk for not receiving a fair share of the bargain.
We are then made acutely aware that our employers have legal rights.
When this is compounded by delays in excess of the statuatory time frame for resolution (361 days? mine took 965 days to get from initial dispute to decision) then it is NOT what the legislature enacted. (Did we really need a Supreme Court decision to enforce the 120 time limit for rendering decisions) Since often the chances of a good cure diminish over time, it is often not effective.
So. I believe a percentage, albeit a small percentage, don't receive what has been promised in the bargain. Are we to accept the argument that that this is acceptable because it works for the majority.
I realize a variety of people come to the forums, but many are from the minority who have given up something and have gotten little or nothing in return.
 
Reply
#8
Let me give this one shot.

Now do not get the wrong idea, for I too am an Injured worker.

But then again now starts from the main issue, the word being used is (Bargain), as we accept the bargain as injured workers. This is not true at all. Nevertheless, yes we accept what is written to be said Law. Now we are not paying for the Insurance ( Workmens' Compensation ) But the employer is. Being said, then the Contract is not with us as injured workers, but with the employer, to help prevent Law Suits from taking place upon them. It is written only that such injured worker is allowed (Reasonable) Medical care. However, what is (Now) then considered (Reasonable) and then again by who's standards? This is where the problems start to fall into place. We as injured workers accept no Bargain, but we do accept what is written as our States outline as Workmens' Compensation Laws, Rules, and Statues.

Now my Injury was Classified as (No Contest). Hummm, then yet, I still had to fight and pull teeth and what not, to obtain that what is called (Reasonable Medical Care). Then as we are allowed a doctor to treat us and voice a Medical Opinion, so is the Employer and their Insurance allowed having us seen by their Doctor of choice for their Medical Opinion of what they feel is (Reasonable Medical Care). Now when the two sides collide, is when we as the injured may be put on hold, only to seek a Hearing officer to review such reports and then make a legal Decision to what is going to be Reasonable? Being said and written, we are not under any (Contract) or any (Bargain), but we are subjected to what is known as State Workmens' Compensation law.

Now we will learn, that a small dollar claim mostly goes unnoticed and has little problem in the process. But, when the Dollar claim starts to rise, surgeries are in question for pain relief, is when it's highly possible a problem is seen to come into play. For off we go to an IME Doctor for a Medical Opinion. If it's not reporting back the same as our Doctor or Surgeon is requesting then off we go to a Hearing. We get scared and nervous, (and we should) and we seek the help from a Attorney. Then, once this happens, things need to be put in proper place for the Attorney to help you combat your claim. (Sometimes obtaining medical reports does take time) Then we have to wait for a Staus call hearing date to be set-up. Hopefully the Insurance Carriers Attorney will make the very first Hearing, but don't count on it. Or their Attorney will ask for it to be continued. And on and on it goes. delays set in place now. But, as you may see what their Attorney can do, is a matter a fact the same thing our Attorney can do. And there you have it, the Law at work, performing for both sides. While we wait without proper treatment and heal all wrong and all. All we can do, is wait and pray someday we will be better then what we hope for.
Reply's are intended solely for informational purposes. They are based on personal opinions, experience, or research and are "not to be taken as fact or legal advice", otherwise, always consult an attorney or a doctor.
 
Reply
#9
Part of the bargain includes that you do not have to show that your employer was negligent in order to qualify for benefits. In the vast majority of WC cases, this part of the bargain is huge. It is true that you also give up your rights to pain and suffering. However, the system does move a great deal more rapidly then the civil justice system, and all you have to show is that you were injured as a result of your work duties.
 
Reply
#10
The bargain I refer to occured sometime in the early 1900's. I believe it is well recognized that in exchange for giving up your right to sue your employer, you would receive a speedy and effective remedy for work injuries. It's called "the bargain" that is worker's compensation.
I understand the current situation all to well! The issue I am raising is that in any compromise (bargain, contract) both sides must receive some benefit in order for it to be legal. Through the years legislation has been passed and has at times eroded the worker's rights.
I believe many of us would say that it is neither speedy or effective.
If you have "given up" your right to sue and have gotten nothing in return, can that be legal. I realize the system works well for 95%, but what about the rest. In exchange for common law rights, you have a system. If the system doesn't work for any one of us, what did we gain by what we gave up.
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  IMR Applications and Attorneys responsibility Shadow 18 7,914 12-24-2017, 01:10 PM
Last Post: California_Help
  Attorneys upset that I applied for SSDI 7on7off 36 18,874 07-16-2014, 12:01 AM
Last Post: 1171
  Attorneys seem to be pushing Settlement. Jahlil0712 11 11,612 01-26-2014, 02:13 AM
Last Post: bronco54501
  1171, Others from California -- Discussion?? chrischris 12 7,894 09-09-2011, 08:35 PM
Last Post: DYAN1000
  not ready for qme attorneys says i cant reschedual riptorn 5 7,552 03-18-2011, 10:09 AM
Last Post: bronco54501
  Attorneys tkl1126 0 2,695 03-01-2011, 08:08 PM
Last Post: tkl1126
  mpn docs or attorneys choice? curley2 22 18,393 11-14-2010, 01:11 PM
Last Post: 1171
Question Attorneys fee amh711 3 4,715 07-09-2010, 12:19 PM
Last Post: Bad Boy Bad Boy
  % for Attorneys Fees ? for Settlement 70% and 30% or .333 borninabarn 11 13,043 02-18-2010, 05:41 PM
Last Post: Still in Limbo
  attorneys say inpainokla 3 3,592 12-18-2009, 12:22 PM
Last Post: Bad Boy Bad Boy

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)