Welcome to: Accidents in Work

Get experienced work accident compensation claims people on your case

On Tuesday, a House panel approved a scaled-back plan to change elements of the workers' compensation system even though no one seemed to be happy with the compromises.

The panel voted to end a month-long stalemate and to send the bill to the full House, the Labour, Commerce and Industry Committee. Discussions during panel hearings were complicated and contentious and for a while, it appeared as though no agreement was possible.

Many lawmakers and interest groups believe the bill will do little to lower the high rates paid by business owners even though it might help settle a system that has seen dramatic cost increases over the last few years.

The bill addresses five key areas, including reducing the scope of the Second Injury Fund, which helps previously injured employees, to only those with amputated limbs, loss of sight or a ruptured spinal disk, defining injury in the context of repetitive trauma claims, requiring expert testimony to determine the severity of an injury, cracking down on fraudulent cases and reversing a court ruling that forbids communication between victims and employers.

"It takes the case to the House floor instead of being hung up here in committee," said Chairman Harry Cato, R-Travellers Rest, the author of the changes.

"It will help the stability and efficiency of the system, but I can't guarantee it will lower premiums."

Premium reduction or at the very least stabilization was the initial intent of the legislation, but that very quickly was abandoned in favour of partisan fighting.

The switch in emphasis, even though it brought about some consensus, disappointed both supporters and opponents.

Governor Mark Stanford was particularly disappointed as he had made workers' compensation reform a critical agenda item this year. It was on of his top legislative priorities.

Missing from the original bill was a cap on attorney fees and a set of universal guidelines to determine how much compensation is warranted for various workplace injuries.

Supportive lawmakers and the Governor believe that these components are critical to any reform and will go a long way to improve the business climate throughout the state, by reducing business owners' costs.

"The way the bill was gutted in committee today means achieving significant savings is far less likely," said Joel Sawyer, the governor's spokesman. "With the changes in this bill, it does a lot more to protect the interests of personal injury lawyers and a lot less to protect the interest of small businesses and injured workers."

Opponents of the initial legislation, such as legal groups such as the Association of South Carolina Claimant Attorneys were still upset with the final product. "If the goal of his bill was to reduce premiums, it doesn't do that," said Charleston attorney David Pearlman, the group's legislative director. "This bill hurts the working people of this state."

There is, however, a strong possibility the bill will be revived via a lat-minute amendment proposed by Rep. Wallace Scarborough, R-Charleston.