Glenn Hansen

MultiCare Health System
President, WSIA

In the next week, a Workers’ Compensation reform bill will be dropped with the primary emphasis being on Medical Provider Networks, Compromise and Release settlements, and re-defining what is and is not an Occupational Disease.  For change to happen, we need your help.  Now is the time to keep momentum going by becoming familiar with the changes and letting your legislators know how important these issues are.

Why does it matter? 
We are concerned with the quality of medical care provided to our employees.  Better treated employees have better long term outcomes both financially and emotionally and can continue to be assets to our companies.  Medical Provider Networks are a valuable tool used in other states to maintain a higher standard of care.

Some claims are difficult to resolve either because they are questionably compensable or involve issues that go well beyond the scope Title 51 originally intended.  Examples might be minor injuries with serious unrelated medical conditions that retard recovery and return to work.  We often see efforts to add such conditions into the claim, increasing the likelihood of permanent total disability.  Without a way to resolve such claims, the option ends up being a court battle over a pension.  There are of course cases that fall in different ranges of complexity, but the point is that Compromise and Release legislation would help resolve some currently unresolved cases.

What is an occupational disease?  Years ago, we knew pretty clearly what would be accepted and what would not.  More recent times have seen a shift to a more doctor focused view.  It’s not quite as simple as this, but for the most part, if the doctor says something is work related, the Department says it is work related regardless off the major cause of the condition.  We want to accept Occupational Illnesses without becoming a personal health plan for many non-industrial illnesses that we currently are having to dispute.  Having a clearer definition moves us back in that direction.

Supplemental Pension Fund worth a look!
Finally, what if I told you that I was going to come to your business and use your electricity indefinitely and that you got to pay for it without any say in how I used your electricity?  That is akin to the current methodology employed in the Supplemental Pension Fund.  Self Insured employers have a lower percentage of the pensions in the system and a higher percentage of productive hours per pension claim.  We also do not control State Fund claims management or entry of pensions into the system.  What that means is that we pay more than our fair share for the supplemental pension increases.  WSIA is supporting an effort to split out the costs associated with Self Insured pensions so that our rates for every self insured employer currently paying assessments can be reduced.

Currently, the 2010 rate for the SPF is .0970 per productive hour and all employers pay that rate.  That is up 16% from .0836 in 2009.  Some assess their employees 50% of that and others do not, but for an employer with 10 million productive hours, the annual assessment is $970,000.  That rate is only expected to grow with time, particularly in the State Fund.  We believe that the assessment figure could drop for self insurers significantly by splitting off by tens of thousands of dollars compared with the current method of funding by Labor & Industries.

As President this year, I want to hear your thoughts and concerns.  What are we doing right?  What could improve?  Please don’t hesitate to contact me at glenn.hansen@multicare.org to let me know your thoughts.

Updated 6 January 2010

Back to News