Skip to main content

Workers' Comp 101 - history

Workers’ Compensation- what is it? How did we get here?

The Florida Workers’ Compensation system……..it is supposed to be a self-executing system. Basically, a person unfortunately gets hurt at work, they get sent to the doctor, the doctor patches them up and they return to work when released by the doctor to return to work. If the injured person loses pay from work, they get paid for a certain percentage of their salary for time missed from work due to the injury. That’s pretty much the way Florida Workers’ Compensation is supposed to work....but as we all know, there is so much more to the story.

This will be the first in a multi part series that will go over the basics of the Florida Workers’ compensation system. It is written for any and all that are interested in, work in, or just want to know more about the Florida Workers’ Compensation system. Basically, it is a bird’s eye walk-through the system. It is not meant as a critique of the system nor will it written as an opinion piece and it will hopefully not be slanted towards an injured person or the employer. It will be just as Joe Friday from Dragnet would say, just the facts, ma’am.

The series will be written for education purposes only; it is not intended to be legal advice. If anyone has questions on the content, please feel free to reach put to me for a more in-depth conversation or post your questions online and I will try to respond as soon as possible.

In order to start, we need to understand and comprehend what the Florida Workers’ compensation system is, we need to start with a brief history.

Workers’ compensation has been called a "Grand Bargain" between employers and workers that developed at the beginning of the 20th century. Under this Grand Bargain, workers receive guaranteed, no-fault benefits for injuries, illnesses, and deaths, but forfeit their rights to sue their employers. Employers receive protection from lawsuits but must provide benefits regardless of fault.

In the early 1900’s, the United States was going through the industrial revolution. We all know the stories, children working, no regard for employee safety, long hours, It was up to the injured employee to prove that the employer was negligent.

The first compensation system in America was proposed by President Taft and put into law in 1908 to cover those workers involved in interstate trade.

The first comprehensive workers' compensation law was finally passed shortly thereafter in Wisconsin in 1911. Nine other states passed regulations that year, followed by thirty-six others before the decade was out. Florida did not start its Workers’ Compensation program until 1935. Florida created the Industrial Commission which began actual operations in June 1935. The final state to pass workers' compensation legislation was Mississippi in 1948.

Initially, there was no compensation for the first fourteen days of the disability. Compensation for disability was not to exceed $18.00 per week. Compensation for disability was paid at the rate of 50%, 55%, and 60% of the employee's average weekly earnings, dependent upon the number of dependents of the employee. Medical treatment was furnished at a cost not to exceed $250.00, except in surgical cases in which the maximum expense to the employer was $500.00. Compensation could not exceed 350 weeks and it could not exceed $5,000.00.

According to the Florida’s Division of Workers’ Compensation website, in the first year of the Florida Industrial Commission, 10,977 cases on "workmen's" compensation were reported by Florida's 67 counties. Of these, 2,983 were reported in Dade County and 1,985 were reported in Duval County. Benefits paid were approximately $290,434.00. By contrast, in 2019, there were almost 51,000 litigated cases in the state (7112 litigated cases in Dade county alone) and countless unlitigated case with over $637,500,000.00 paid in benefits.

As time progressed, the Florida Worker’s compensation system changed in an attempt to keep up with the times. The first major change occurred the late 70’s. Since that time, it appears that every year there was some change to the workers’ compensation system. The last major overhaul was in 2003. We will touch on some of the changes as we go through the system. The next topic we will cover is what is an employee, a simple distinction you might say, but one that the statute takes a few pages to define.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

CESPEDES V YELLOW TRANSPORTATION

This April 24, 2013 1DCA opinion affirmed in part and reversed in part Judge Portuallo's JCC decision. in this case, the claimant argued that the JCC erred by: (1) improperly shifting onto Claimant the burden to prove  the compensable injury was the major contributing cause (MCC) of his disability and need for surgery;  (2) finding  that the medical services at issue did not constitute “emergency care or services,” and that lack of notice to the  Employer/Carrier (E/C)  precluded authorization or payment; and  (3) finding  the opinion testimony from the emergency room physician, Dr. Acebal, is not admissible  pursuant to the “self-help” provisions contained in chapter 440.  The 1DCA reversed on the first two grounds raised and affirmed on the last. As background, the Claimant injured his lower back in 2006.  the Claimant declined surgical treatment, and ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Miami Dade County School Board v Russ

This May 29, 2012 1DCA decision reverses Judge Hill's JCC decision. The claimant filed a PFB and the JCC determined that the “initial response” was the November 9 documents prepared by the EC (notice of appearance, request for production, letter of representation, notice of deposition, and letter to the mediator) the JCC concluded that because the E/C did not assert an SOL defense, the E/C had waived that defense. The E/C argued that its initial response to the Petition for Benefits was filed on November 10, 2009. Based on the case of Certain v. Big Johnson Concrete Pumping, Inc., 34 So. 3d 149 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), the 1DCA ruled that that the “initial response” has to explicitly state a position either denying or conceding the particular claims therein.
Post a Comment
Read more

QUIROGA v FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH

This January 16, 2013 1DCA opinion affirmed Judge Pecko's JCC ruling. In this case, the claimant Claimant challenged an order of theJCC that accepts the opinion of one medical doctor over another and thereby denied benefits. The claimant did not request an EMA.  The claimant's argument was that the JCC committed fundamental error by not appointing, sua sponte, an EMA to resolve the disagreement in medical opinions. The Claimant also  argued that the JCC has no “jurisdiction” to resolve medical disagreements unless an EMA is first appointed.  The 1DCA wrote that "Without equivocation, this court has held that a JCC’s failure to order an EMA evaluation is not fundamental error. Although a JCC is required to appoint an EMA where there is a disagreement in medical opinions, a party who does not timely seek the appointment of an EMA below will not be heard on appeal to complain of the failure to designate an EMA.”   The 1DCA further indicated that...
Post a Comment
Read more