Published: Tuesday, May 17, 2011
In our view / Workers' comp reform
Majority should hold firm
In the state Senate, where bipartisan compromise produced a responsible budget for hard times, democracy is working as it should.
Not so much in the House. There, one man -- Speaker Frank Chopp of Seattle -- continues to thwart the will of what most observers believe is a majority on reasonable and necessary reform of the state's workers' compensation system.
This has become a battle between labor-aligned Democrats and everyone else -- centrist Democrats and Republicans in both chambers, and the Democratic governor. It centers on a key change to workers' comp law: allowing injured workers to voluntarily take a lump-sum settlement instead of a lifetime pension. It's an option available to workers in 44 other states.
The aim is clear, and rational: to reduce costs to a system that the state auditor says is bleeding red ink and is projected to become ever more costly for employers and workers, putting a further damper on economic recovery and job creation.
It's a system that's clearly out of whack: Long-term benefits and lifetime pensions make up 8 percent of workers comp claims, but 85 percent of the system's costs.
A reform bill that includes the lump-sum option passed the Senate with bipartisan support. Last week, Gov. Chris Gregoire put forth another compromise proposal, one that also includes the voluntary settlement option.
A similar proposal was introduced in the House earlier, and most insiders think it has the votes to pass. Chopp, however, refuses to allow a vote.
Chopp and organized labor oppose the lump-sum settlement option, arguing that injured workers would be pressured to settle for less than they can get currently.
Apparently, they don't think much of workers' ability to think for themselves.
Workers' interests would be protected. The proposals being considered provide for worker counseling, and an oversight board that includes labor representation must approve all settlements. But workers would be in control of their own decisions. They don't need to be protected from themselves. The insinuation that they do seems more than a little insulting.
All this continues to hold up action on the 2011-13 budget, threatening to force a second special session. Chopp argues that if proponents would just back off the voluntary settlement idea, lawmakers could proceed to the budget and adjourn.
The same holds for him, though. Accede to the will of the majority -- simply by allowing a floor vote -- and the Legislature can move on.
The majority holds the high ground in this fight. It shouldn't blink.
Not so much in the House. There, one man -- Speaker Frank Chopp of Seattle -- continues to thwart the will of what most observers believe is a majority on reasonable and necessary reform of the state's workers' compensation system.
This has become a battle between labor-aligned Democrats and everyone else -- centrist Democrats and Republicans in both chambers, and the Democratic governor. It centers on a key change to workers' comp law: allowing injured workers to voluntarily take a lump-sum settlement instead of a lifetime pension. It's an option available to workers in 44 other states.
The aim is clear, and rational: to reduce costs to a system that the state auditor says is bleeding red ink and is projected to become ever more costly for employers and workers, putting a further damper on economic recovery and job creation.
It's a system that's clearly out of whack: Long-term benefits and lifetime pensions make up 8 percent of workers comp claims, but 85 percent of the system's costs.
A reform bill that includes the lump-sum option passed the Senate with bipartisan support. Last week, Gov. Chris Gregoire put forth another compromise proposal, one that also includes the voluntary settlement option.
A similar proposal was introduced in the House earlier, and most insiders think it has the votes to pass. Chopp, however, refuses to allow a vote.
Chopp and organized labor oppose the lump-sum settlement option, arguing that injured workers would be pressured to settle for less than they can get currently.
Apparently, they don't think much of workers' ability to think for themselves.
Workers' interests would be protected. The proposals being considered provide for worker counseling, and an oversight board that includes labor representation must approve all settlements. But workers would be in control of their own decisions. They don't need to be protected from themselves. The insinuation that they do seems more than a little insulting.
All this continues to hold up action on the 2011-13 budget, threatening to force a second special session. Chopp argues that if proponents would just back off the voluntary settlement idea, lawmakers could proceed to the budget and adjourn.
The same holds for him, though. Accede to the will of the majority -- simply by allowing a floor vote -- and the Legislature can move on.
The majority holds the high ground in this fight. It shouldn't blink.
Comments
(