Comments on: FITSNews Exclusive – Sanford To Step Up On Workers’ Comp Reform

By: Exclusive - Sanford Settles With Workers’ Comp Commission | FITSNews For Now

Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:24:33 +0000

[...] workers’ compensation commission over a series of executive orders issued last year which forced the commission to apply objective standards to their settlement [...]

By: Pee Dee Pen Pal

Pee Dee Pen Pal — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:21:41 +0000

There was a time here in S.C. when the Governor knew the difference between a neighbor and a N.Y. Ins. Co. That time is passed. We have sold our souls to the carpetbaggers. The out of state and foreign industrialists now call the tune and our people are being required to dance their dance. The good people of S.C., the working people whose sole ambition is to go to work, do a good job, and get a pay check at the end of the week are being hammered.
What have our people done wrong that they should be treated this way? I can’t speak for the Governor but I like my neighbors. They are people like me. They go to church with me. Their kids play ball with mine. I want them to be protected if they get hurt on the job. The way things are now people starve slowly on their weekly checks. One can only imagine the suffering to come so we can “imporve the bottom line” for the Wall Street crowd.

By: Silence Dogood

Silence Dogood — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:29:15 +0000

The Law, glad you’re commenting here (I’m sure we all have a lot of really interesting and complex questions to ask you), while applying an objective standard is “the law” from the supreme court (I’ll take you at your word), my question for you would to be look to the statute or promulgated regulation and see if the AMA is indeed that objective standard (apparently it is not), And if not Sanford is incorrect in his mandating of it, especially when it was considered but did not pass the General Assembly – even by a slim marjin. Consider; a radom air blowing ping pong ball lottery machine would be objective (i.e. non-biased) however, Sanford ensuring the ping pong ball test was the standard used, despite being objective, would still not be “the law.” Especially if the legislature has considered and explicitly not passed that ‘law.’

Mr. Law, “Know they self”

P.S. If the legislation, not the court ruling, had said “an objective standard must be used to be implemented by the governor” then you would be correct if that standard is the one Sanford wanted to use, and set it down in a WRITTEN directive/decree AND nobody coudl successfully challenge the validity of such “objectivity” (which might be possible since as noted here lawyers may well be disliked, but they are also a crafty bunch).

By: mr business

mr business — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 15:29:19 +0000

If you look at the Senate bill, objective standards were included that would have required a commisioner to use them on rendering a verdict. That would have given objectivity and consistency in verdicts. But the business community didn’t want it. Why? Because injured workers would be compensated for their disability and not their impairment. Insurance rates would have gone down for businesses because jackpot awards based on feelings rather than evidence would have gone away. Also open ended supreme court cases were closed. This sounds like greed

SC is a disability state by law. Look what it says on the cover of the AMA guidelines.

By: The Law

The Law — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 12:24:56 +0000

Silence, your premise is wrong. Applying objective standards is the law in South Carolina. The great thing about state supreme court decisions is you can look them up. Problem is, some commissioners do not apply objective standards, or to phrase it differently, do not faithfully execute the law. As chief executive, it is the governor’s job to ensure such faithful execution.

By: New S.C. Lottery???

New S.C. Lottery??? — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 06:46:39 +0000

Jackpot Justice, you think worker’s comp is where all the litigation money is coming from? Have you every practice law in the area of worker’s comp, plaintiff’s or defense, my understadning was the highest award one could get was 500 weeks worth at 2/3 of the average wage for the state in the previous year. That is if you are deemed permenantly and completely disabled (might be except for para-or quadrapalegic?) which comes to a grand total of about 322,000 IF the max.comp rate of $645 (www.wcc.state.us) is 2/3 or LESS of your total salary and you are completely AND permenantly injured in an on the job accident. What do attorney’s get 30% or or 33% so the biggest award you are going to get 107,000 dollars for a case like? Hardly the Vioxx millions or the 10 million dollar McDonalds’ verdict. I am not a workers comp. attorney nor have I ever argued in a court room, but even with my limited knowledge I would have to say workers comp is not the new S.C. lottery by any stretch of the imagination.

By: Carolina Observer

Carolina Observer — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 03:35:20 +0000

wow jackpot justice – with thinking like yours no wonder we stay at the bottom in education…a no fault system with built in caps has no “jackpot” as you say…you are maxed out…so go do some research and come back and play with the big kids when you complete this weeks homework assignment

By: Carolina Observer

Carolina Observer — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 02:01:07 +0000

couple of quick notes on this:

-Still over 80% of comp claims are handled without lawyers (just ask comission)

-Everybody hates a lawyer until it’s them or a family member doing the suing, so I propose that when we register to vote we also state whether we favor the right to be able to file suit in a personal injury matter..and if you say no, you loose your right if something happens to you

- the unemployment system in this state is abused daily, but why isn’t business rasing hell over this, they pay unemployment tax….answer..no lawyers to attack, just the system, and that would be to tough

- finally it goes back to government 101 – Sanford can no make law

By: Silence Dogood

Silence Dogood — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 01:17:03 +0000

Mr Business, ditto, if a worker’s comp. commissioner is applying the S.C. Code of laws and if the AMA is NOTcurrently the law in S.C. then Sanford’s defacto changing of the law to encompass the AMA is “legislation of from the executive” if I can coin a really great ridiculous phrase. The great thing about laws and regulations is we or even WC Commissioners can look them up, this becomes very helpful in cases of disputes. The problem with Sanford deciding to sac a WC Commissioner that doesn’t follow the AMA – since it isn’t the law in S.C. – and maybe one tomorrow who doesn’t follow a perhaps even thrifter act of Uniform Worker’s Comp. standards tomorrow, is that it can be really, really, really ,really tough for employee’s, employers, attorneys, commissioner and judges to know just what in the hell Mark is thinking on a day to day basis – despite whether or not it is “pro-business.”

By: Jackpot Justice

Jackpot Justice — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 00:01:34 +0000

The uneducated bricklayer is not without employment opportunities. While it’s hard for some liberals to believe, the uneducated bricklayer can find other work if they are willing to do some searching. Just look in the newspaper. Believe it or not there are other jobs the uneducated bricklayer could do. This idea that the uneducated bricklayer will forever be a bricklayer is absurd. They may one day go back to school and get some education. They may decide to join another profession. The uneducated bricklayer should be compensated for their lost wages and medical expenses period. Workers’ comp has become a competitor to the South Carolina Lottery: jackpot justice.