Gus Rau Meyer, president of Rau Construction Co., said a questionable workers' compensation claim seven years ago caused his insurance rates to climb so much that, spread through five years, it wiped out the equivalent of one year's profits.

So on March 6, Meyer went to the Kansas Statehouse to testify in favor of a bill that would limit what businesses have to pay a worker who exacerbates a pre-existing injury while on the job.

"We would like to see that there are means and methods for this to be considered," Meyer said in an interview. "None of us want to see an injured worker. And if someone is hurt, that's why you buy insurance -- to make sure they're taken care of and made whole. But can we have a physician do an analysis and make a professional determination of whether a percentage of that injury was a pre-existing condition?"

The House Commerce and Labor Committee began hearings on the bill March 6 after it passed the Senate 28-12 on Feb. 24. Supporters, like Meyer, said it's not fair for companies to have to foot all the bills for a hurt worker who reinjured a pre-existing condition.

But opponents, including Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, said the bill goes too far toward stripping employee rights.

In an interview with the Kansas City Business Journal, Sebelius said Kansas' workers' comp premium rates are the eighth-lowest in the nation.

"Our workers' compensation rates are, frankly, something we need to advertise," Sebelius said. "The reforms that were enacted 13 years ago have worked."

Sebelius was a member of the House in 1993 when the Legislature passed a comprehensive workers' comp reform package. Part of that reform abolished what was known as the second injury fund, a pool of money the state administered to pay out claims when workers reinjured a pre-existing condition.

Since then, some employers have argued that they're unfairly forced to pay for expensive medical treatments or exaggerated disability settlements based, in part, on injuries not attributable to the hurt worker's current job.

In the Rau Construction case, a former worker said he tripped and fell at work, leading to surgery and a partial disability settlement. Rau eventually learned the employee previously had been in a serious motorcycle accident and had a workers' comp claim from an earlier job.

Meyer, who was paying about $100,000 annually in workers' comp premiums before the incident, said he has paid a total of $80,000 in higher premiums since then.

"That $80,000 hit is in excess of one year's net income for us. It hurts," Meyer said. "We felt we paid him for a surgery and a partial disability payment for a serious motorcycle accident and a work comp claim from a previous job."

Sen. Karin Brownlee, R-Olathe, the co-chairwoman of the Commerce Committee and a key supporter of the bill, said Meyer tells an all-too familiar story.

"There are too many times when an injury doesn't even occur on a job site or a portion of the injury is attributable to the aging process," she said. "In those circumstances, it should not be the responsibility of the employer to pay 100 percent of the indemnity to the employee."

But Rep. Candy Ruff, D-Leavenworth and a lead opponent of the bill, said that existing law already allows employers to limit what they pay if there is a diagnosed pre-existing injury that can be backed up with documentation. The new bill would require less proof of a pre-existing condition, which could unfairly punish an employee with a legitimate claim, she said.

"Basically, what you're doing is forcing (injured workers) to hire an attorney so the attorney can hire a doctor so the doctor can come in and argue with the company's doctor," Ruff said.

The Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce supports the bill, said Bob Vancrum, a chamber lobbyist. If an employee hurts his knee playing softball, then strains it again while lifting something heavy at work, his company shouldn't be responsible for paying all of those medical bills, he said.

"We don't think that's right," Vancrum said. "What it's really done is encourage businesses not to hire people who have pre-existing injuries, and we don't think that's right, either. We just think an employer should only be responsible for what happens under their watch."

Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville, termed the bill the "Kansas Employee Depreciation Act," saying it would allow doctors to define very subjective percentages of pre-existing injuries. Journey said he was most appalled by the provision that would limit what a company has to pay if an injured worker were laid off because of "economic reasons," which Journey contended was too vague.

"I'm all for workers' comp reform. I'm all for making the system better," he said. "But it has to be balanced. They want to make it all against the employee."

Noting that he and Sen. Roger Reitz, a Manhattan physician, were the only two Senate Republicans to vote against the bill, Journey said the true motivation for the bill is political.

"It's all about giving the governor the worst bill possible so she has to veto it," he said.

Sebelius acknowledged that "politics always enters into the discussion."

"I just hope we don't have a situation where we take a step back, making it difficult for workers to be hired and to penalize people who shouldn't be penalized," she said.

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it | 816-421-5900
If You Have Suffered a motor accident, whiplash injury, accident at work, medical negligence, faulty goods, criminal injury, slip or trip, industrial injury, accident in a public place or would just like some advice, please don’t hesitate to give us a call on 08000 71 22 71 for any personal injury, accident claim