Workers’ Compensation: Subsequent injuries payments.
This bill modifies several key areas within the Labor Code, especially concerning the compensation for employees who endure subsequent injuries leading to additional permanent disabilities. It emphasizes significant restructuring in determining criteria under which employees can receive additional benefits. Notably, it will require substantial evidence to establish the existence of prior disabilities at the time of subsequent injuries, which could lead to complications in claims processing but aims to make the system more transparent and equitable.
Assembly Bill 1329, introduced by Assembly Member Ortega, focuses on modifications to California's workers' compensation system, particularly dealing with subsequent injuries and the compensations payable for them. It aims to amend existing laws regarding how permanent disabilities are calculated when a worker with a prior disability suffers an additional injury. The bill proposes to rename the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund to the Second-Chance Employers Risk Reduction Trust Fund and establishes new methods for assessing permanent disability based on the whole person impairment rating as defined by the American Medical Association (AMA) Guides.
The overall sentiment regarding AB 1329 appears to be cautiously optimistic among proponents, who believe that the changes could streamline the process for compensating workers facing complications from prior injuries. However, there is also apprehension from some stakeholders about how the new requirements for evidence may affect claimants, particularly those who might find it challenging to procure detailed medical records or testimony to support their claims. This reflects a division in sentiment, balancing between the financial sustainability of the workers' compensation system and the fairness towards injured workers.
A key point of contention surrounding AB 1329 is the potential burden it places on employees regarding the proof of prior disabilities. Detractors fear that implementing such stringent evidence requirements might result in deserving claimants being denied compensation, thereby exacerbating the struggles of already vulnerable workers. Conversely, supporters argue that the bill is crucial for preventing fraudulent claims and ensuring that the resources of the Second-Chance Employers Risk Reduction Trust Fund are used judiciously for genuine cases.