10-20-2020; Stumbling Along In IL Work Comp—A New Permanency Concept of “Loss of Job???”; Marsh Publishes an Amazing and Informative Update on COVID-19 and Workers’ Comp and more

Synopsis: Stumbling Along In IL Work Comp—A New Permanency Concept of “Loss of Job???” Thoughts and commentary from Gene Keefe, J.D.

Editor’s comment: Probably around a decade ago, someone or three of the IL WC Petitioner’s bar was successful in getting IL Arbitrators to award “loss of trade” to firefighters and police officers who could not longer be in the fire or police department due to a work-related event. To my mind, this was happening as a “going-away-present” as such workers receive line of duty disability pensions that provide lifetime benefits. You may not know but when police/fire officers get line of duty disability benefits, the IL Pension code doesn’t allow them to also seek wage loss differential or total and perm benefits at Work Comp. In this setting, the “loss of trade” concept could get the appropriate worker $100K+ in tax-free “going away” money when they left their respective departments and moved into retirement or other work. In some States that are more government economical, the lifetime benefits of a line of duty disability pension would be all such a worker might receive.

This “loss of trade” concept also occurred for the construction trades to provide lots of money to electricians, plumbers, iron workers and others who had restrictions and didn’t choose to take wage loss differential benefits for any number of reasons.

Please note the “loss of trade” concept does make some sense in the context of the language of Section 8(d-2) of the IL WC Act that indicates that section of the IL WC Act contemplates increased benefits for an accidental injury that results in a lifetime loss of income. That said, please note no provision in the IL WC Act says or uses the words “loss of trade.” In short, that concept isn’t defined anywhere. When an IL WC hearing officer uses the term “loss of trade,” one can attach whatever legal meaning you like to what I respectfully feel is a “made-up” legal and claims term. In my view, we do that a lot in the IL WC system. Making up benefit concepts renders IL WC very unpredictable and wildly challenging to accurately set PPD reserves.

I am now advised most IL WC Arbitrators are looking at any claim where Claimant is changing jobs to merit dramatically increased permanency/impairment under Section 8(d-2). There is no requirement from the IL Arbitrator that an employer first exhaust all efforts to return the worker to the same position with accommodation, as the ADA requires. Basically, the Arbitrators are looking at “loss of job” claims and reacting. Again, as a WC veteran in this State, I don’t agree with any undefined concept that mandates an increase in reserves for the insurance carriers, TPA’s and self-insured employers in both the private and public sector. Please also note if a given Claimant has a leg or shoulder or wrist injury and they are compensated for “loss of job” under Section 8(d-2), IL employers and governments get no credit for paying such benefits if the employee injures the same body part repeatedly.

Case in point--we have an active claim in the office where the worker was working for around $15 an hour. She has purported restrictions making keeping her existing job a challenge—she may need to change to a lighter job.

Due to the giant and staged increases in our IL minimum wage, everyone who has any job in this nutty State will soon be making $15 an hour. The Illinois minimum wage goes up on 1/1 every year for the next five years. There is no question this worker, if she gets a job doing anything, sedentary/light or medium work, she will be making $15 an hour or more at some point in her life. In my respectful view, she isn’t going to suffer a loss of income.

Regardless, the Arbitrator in the claim is saying her needed job change is “loss of job” due to the work injury and OC is asking for 45% LOU BAW for a single injury to one body part. Ouch. We are countering at about half of the demand, which is still a lot of money. In my view, it isn’t the same when someone like Claimant has “lost her job” to change from a minimum wage job to a different minimum wage job. And, as our IL Supreme Court has just expanded IL WC to make us a “positional risk” state, if we are going to provide giant “loss of job” settlements and awards for anyone who might need to change jobs after an injury, the cost of IL Work Comp poker is going to go way up.

As I indicate above, please also note this “loss of job” concept runs directly contrary to ADA or the Americans with Disabilities Act. When Claimants can do some but possibly not all of the essential tasks of a job post-injury, all U.S. employers are supposed to reasonably accommodate them and bring them back. Some employers treat WC claimants as pariahs and won’t bring them back and let the insurance carrier or TPA deal with it. This can subject the employer to an ADA claim for not providing an “interactive meeting” as ADA and the EEOC requires—if you need help with this concept, please send a reply.

In short, it is my hope the defense WC bar in this State is going to start to push back on “loss of job” awards and settlements to try to keep the lid on things. Understanding Illinois is a one-party State and will be for years to come, this may be challenging to do.

I appreciate your thoughts and comments. Please post them on our award-winning blog.

Synopsis: Marsh Publishes an Amazing and Informative Update on COVID-19 and Workers’ Comp. We consider this a must-read for U.S. risk and claims managers.

Editor’s comment: The U.S. work comp matrix is not experiencing the worst-case scenarios stakeholders predicted at the start of COVID-19, though employers and injured workers aren’t out of the woods yet, according to a new study from a global insurance broker and risk adviser, Marsh.

The workers’ comp insurance market is still competitive, as COVID-19 OccDisease claims have been balanced by declines in other categories of occupational injuries, Marsh announced in its recent study, COVID-19’s Impact on Workers’ Compensation Market Is Minimal, but Challenges Persist. If you want to read the study—click on the link “recent study” above.

As the pandemic continues, employers are likely to face obstacles such as payroll management, changing worker classifications and new legislation that could make it easier for employees to claim they caught Covid-19 on the job, according to the study. “At the same time, new tools such as telemedicine and a more collaborative approach to claims management can present opportunities for employers to stay ahead of the curve,” the study’s summary states.

The climate for WC insurers has shifted after years of growth and favorable workers’ comp trends, and systems saw that progress continue into early 2020 before the pandemic began. Despite an unstable labor market and forecasts that workers’ comp premium volume could fall by as much as 10% to 20% by the end of 2020. Longer-term impacts on WC carriers’ profitability should end up being less dramatic, according to the study.

Industry watchers predicted that a tidal wave of COVID-19 claims would enter U.S. workers’ comp systems. But aside from the health care sector, no such influx has happened, according to the study. Data analysis reveals average severity of COVID-19 claims is lower than anticipated.

As KCB&A has advised our clients and friends, there are two sorts of COVID-19 claims:

1. Folks who get test positive and get mildly sick or not but recover in a week or so and

2. Folks who get very ill and possibly pass from the exposure/disease.

In our experience, Category 1 above is basically the “flu.” Workers who recover from the COVID-19 “flu” go back to work just like folks that recover from Influenza A. The medical and lost time costs are minimal. Such COVID-19 claims haven’t been very expensive, with one survey reporting about 96% of claims cost less than $3,500, according to the Marsh study. 

Category 2 claims can involve long stints in the ICU and dramatic and six- and seven-figure exposures for WC/OD death benefits. The Marsh study indicates 4% of COVID-19 WC/OD claims have been very costly, creeping into the hundreds of thousands of dollars per claim to cover extensive procedures and hospital stays.

The Marsh study indicates “With the frequency of non-COVID-19 claims remaining lower than expected, the workers’ compensation line is expected to be less affected by the pandemic.”

Marsh says employers still need to be diligent when it comes to managing coverage and maintaining work site safety protocols. Many elements can dictate premium costs, including calculating payroll, classifying workers based on assumed risk while conducting normal job duties, and a company’s experience rating modification. A shift toward telecommuting and working from home has also created challenges for employers — as some employees must be temporarily reassigned classification codes — although the trend is likely to contribute to fewer workplace injuries, according to the study. To avoid missteps when it comes to reporting, Marsh says employers should keep separate records for payroll given to workers for time not worked in relation to the pandemic, instead of rolling into paid time off or another category. Employers should also keep payroll records for workers who continue to work but have assumed new roles in a way that the payroll could be split based on workers’ comp class codes, according to Marsh. Maintaining separate overtime records related to COVID-19 and recording the start and end dates of employee furloughs should also be helpful to employers, according to Marsh.

Workers’ comp claim trends have varied by industry, according to the study. While many industries have seen lower frequencies since the pandemic began in March, the health care sector is experiencing an uptick in year-over-year claims, and retail businesses have seen an increase in claims volume after seeing declines in the early days of the outbreak. The mix of claim types has changed since March, even while overall claims frequency has dropped, according to the study.

Before COVID-19, about 21% of all claims were for indemnity. But since the pandemic began, the share has risen to between 24% and 35%, according to a study by Marsh and consulting firm Oliver Wyman that looked at data through June 30. More uncertainty could be on the horizon, according to Marsh’s most recent study. Unemployment, furloughs and employees who are hesitant about filing WC/OD claims because of unclear job prospects could send new injury claims tumbling by as much as 20% by year’s end.

“As the economy continues to reopen, however, these trends may gradually be reversed,” the study states.

Despite the trend toward enacting new COVID-related workers’ comp laws, “many COVID-19 claims have ultimately not met compensability requirements,” according to the Marsh study. Industry estimates show that only 20% to 30% of all COVID-19 claims have been accepted, with most coming from the health care sector, according to the study. “In contrast, about one-third of all claims have been denied for various reasons, including a lack of diagnosis and/or symptoms, refusal by claimants to be tested for COVID-19, and the fact that some claimants have largely been working from home,” the study states.

We salute Marsh for this interesting analysis. We hope the pandemic is going to end, as it has to. We appreciate your thoughts and comments. Please post them on our award-winning blog.

Synopsis: Annual IL State Chamber WC Conference Goes Virtual—Shawn Biery & John Campbell to present.

Editor’s comment: The 14th Annual Workers' Compensation & Safety Conference set for November 4th is being held virtual this year. The 8:30 am to noon program features John Ruser, President & CEO of the Workers' Compensation Research Institute (WCRI) and Michael Brennan, Chairman of the Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission.

The program also will include the following breakout sessions:

• Advances in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome - Presented by Dr. Andrew Zelby and Dave Rusch, Vice President of Business Service Development, Ovation Hand Institute;

• Medical Marijuana in the Workplace - Presented by AJ Sheehan, MVP Law

• The Covid-19 Rebuttable Presumption - What is it and What Does it Mean for You? - Presented by Peter Stavropoulos, Brady Connolly and Masuda

• 2020 Workers Compensation Case Law Update - Presented by Shawn Biery and John Campbell, Keefe Campbell Biery & Associates

• Snakes, Leaches, and Tobacco Enemas - The Case for Evidence-Based Medical Treatment Guidelines - Presented by Patrick Robinson, Vice President, Government Affairs, ODG, an MCG Health Company

• OSHA Updates for 2020 and Beyond - Presented by Matthew Horn, SmithAmundsen LLC

For more information and to register:

https://ilchamber.org/workerscompconference/

10-13-2020; Three Thoughts for All IL WC Risk and Claims Managers and more

Synopsis: Here are Three Thoughts From Gene Keefe That All Illinois Risk and Claims Managers Need to Know.

Editor’s comment: I consider this stuff to be fairly important for you to consider.

First, before, during and after the Pandemic, injuries and work-related exposures that occur while working remotely from home are covered by Work Comp or the OD—OccDisease Act. 

In Illinois, if and when your workers are hurt while working from home, they are entitled to the benefits and protections of the Illinois Workers’ Comp or OD  Acts. 

Illinois law requires an employer pay for all medical care and treatment, TTD/TPD and compensation for any permanent impairment or disability suffered by the worker. In order to be entitled to those things, your worker must

1. Report the event causing injury or disease within 45 days and

2. Be able to show they were injured “in the course” of their employment and the injury “arose out of” their employment.

The term “in the course of” one’s employment, in the most general sense is injuries occurring on the employer’s premises while performing the employer’s work during regular work hours. However, the definition of workplace and work hours is unquestionably forever changing.

We are now in an era of more employees working from home than ever before and still more contemplating such a change. For those people who are working from home, and who are injured, how do we determine if they are injured “in the course of” their employment and “arising out of” their employment? For IL Employers, this creates an incident investigation challenge—you have to fully and completely document what happened at someone’s home office/workplace and whether it is truly a work accident. If you need an Incident Investigation form and protocol, sent a reply.

Many of the criteria for the commuter are exactly the same as those for the home worker. For example, did the injury occur during those hours that an employer would have reasonably anticipated your worker to be working? Can your worker show they were engaged in meaningful work for you just prior and during the time the injury occurred? Did the injury occur while performing a task for their work? 

Still further, can they establish the injury “arose of the” employment? Was it their printer that fell on a foot and fractured it or was it their toaster oven? Document, document, document.

If an injury does occur while working from home, and is connected to work, it is important to insure your people know to report the incident to someone in a supervisory position at the employer as soon as possible. To capture proof of the reporting, consider recording a conversation and/or getting signatures.

Second, Understanding “Independent Contractor”—Gene’s rule.

I get asked constantly how to define an “independent contractor” under IL Work Comp. It is basically easy and trust me, case law is mildly deceiving.

Please also understand your “worker” is not an independent contractor because they agree to it orally or sign off on it or otherwise act like they are somehow “independent.”

They are only independent for WC purposes if they have their own WC insurance and show you the policy. The policy has to cover anyone and everyone that works with and for you. I can’t stress this enough. If they have their own WC insurance and they die at work or become seriously injured/disabled, you want the claim to go through their own coverage with your coverage as a backup.

Please assume they have six young kids and dependent parents and they are going to complain to their congress-person or state rep if the worker is injured and disabled/dead. The politician is going to find them a great Claimant lawyer and the lawyer is going to appropriately come after you for coverage—you need to be ready to show the policy or “proof of insurance” to demonstrate that worker was “independent” and their issues aren’t on your dime. If you can do that, you have an independent contractor relationship. If you can’t, it is going to be hard to defend you. Feel free to contact our defense team for help, as we do defend folks who may have similar issues and need guidance.

So Gene, what about the “opt out” thing where a worker who runs the “independent contractor” company can “opt out” of WC/OD coverage?

You hear a lot of things--there is no reason, none under which I can recommend any of my/our KCB&A clients should allow an “independent contractor” to opt out of coverage. Basically, what that means is there is no coverage to protect the person from gigantic medical bills and lost time and whatever their permanency/impairment might be.

Again, the family and friends of that injured man or woman are coming after YOU! Don’t let that happened by allowing the worker to opt out—make sure they haven’t done so.

Third and last for this week—what are the risks of operating a company/employer in IL and not have a Work Comp/OD policy?

In simplest terms, the risks are both “business-busting” and “you-busting.” If you are operating a company without WC/OC coverage, you can and will be subject to a $10,000 fine along with $500 for every day you were operating without insurance.

That fine can be levied on your business whether it is a sole proprietorship, corporation, LLC or whatever form you use. It is also possible for Claimant and counsel to “pierce the corporate veil” and attack your personal assets, like your home or car.

On top of all those challenging things, you can not only face a WC claim before the IL WC Commission, it is also possible you can be sued in Circuit Court for the injuries with unlimited risk—a verdict for worker injuries or death could be in the millions or tens of millions.

And last but not least, it is a class 4 felony or a crime to operate a business without WC/OD coverage. You could lose your house, your car and go to jail.

In short, please, please don’t operate a business in this nutty State without work comp/occdisease coverage.

I appreciate your thoughts and comments. Please post them on our award-winning blog.

Synopsis: Annual IL State Chamber WC Conference Goes Virtual—Shawn Biery & John Campbell to present.

Editor’s comment: The 14th Annual Workers' Compensation & Safety Conference set for November 4th is being held virtual this year. The 8:30 am to noon program features John Ruser, President & CEO of the Workers' Compensation Research Institute (WCRI) and Michael Brennan, Chairman of the Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission.

The program also will include the following breakout sessions:

• Advances in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome - Presented by Dr. Andrew Zelby and Dave Rusch, Vice President of Business Service Development, Ovation Hand Institute;

• Medical Marijuana in the Workplace - Presented by AJ Sheehan, MVP Law

• The Covid-19 Rebuttable Presumption - What is it and What Does it Mean for You? - Presented by Peter Stavropoulos, Brady Connolly and Masuda

• 2020 Workers Compensation Case Law Update - Presented by Shawn Biery and John Campbell, Keefe Campbell Biery & Associates

• Snakes, Leaches, and Tobacco Enemas - The Case for Evidence-Based Medical Treatment Guidelines - Presented by Patrick Robinson, Vice President, Government Affairs, ODG, an MCG Health Company

• OSHA Updates for 2020 and Beyond - Presented by Matthew Horn, SmithAmundsen LLC

For more information and to register:

https://ilchamber.org/workerscompconference/

9-28-2020; Has the IL Supreme Court Ended Accident Defenses in IL WC?; Kevin Boyle on Important New Indiana IWCB Rule and more

Synopsis: Has the IL Supreme Court Ended Accident Defenses in Illinois? Are We Now a “Positional Risk” State?

Editor’s comment: Please note Illinois is a one-party State. Republicans don’t have a seat at our State’s table (and may not ever be back). Like Chicago, the only election of note is the Democratic primary. In my view, decisions like this are felt to be “liberal” or pro-labor. I don’t agree with that view. I consider this an “anti-lawyer” ruling, as it is going to render claims that were previously defensible to now be compensable—please trust me, Illinois business/TPA’s and insurance carriers are certain to drop relevant accident disputes, accept claims and pay benefits quickly. When this happens, Claimants aren’t going to need or go to Petitioners’ attorneys and TPA’s/Insurance carriers won’t need defense attorneys. Only time will tell.

In McAllister v. The Illinois Workers’ Compensation Comm’n, after six years of litigation involving an simple operated knee, our highest Court changed the test used to determine whether injuries caused by common bodily movements and everyday activities at work, such as bending, twisting, reaching, or standing from a kneeling position, are compensable under the IL Workers’ Compensation Act. From my position, this is intended to overrule earlier rulings from the Supreme Court that placed a small additional burden of proof on claimants. If you have such claims pending in your active IL WC claims, send a reply if you want my view on whether you might continue to dispute/defend them. Please assume if you don’t review and reconsider handling, you are sure to get petitions for penalties and attorney’s fees so loved by the Claimant bar in this State.

I have taught several hundred law students who are now WC lawyers on both sides. In teaching them to evaluate challenging accident claims, we reviewed the 1969 ruling by the IL Supreme Court in The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois ruling where someone injured themselves putting their coat on at work. That claim was denied as a risk common to the public. In 1991, the decision in Hansel & Gretel Day Care, claimant injured herself standing up from a stool in a preschool. Again, the act of simply standing was not found to be compensable.

In this ruling, Claimant McAllister injured his right knee working as a sous-chef and filed a claim under the IL WC Act. McAllister testified at arbitration his job duties included arranging food in the restaurant’s walk-in cooler. On the day in question, suffered pain in his knee while moving from a kneeling to a standing position while searching the cooler for a misplaced item. He admitted under oath he didn’t slip, trip, slide or suffer any trauma. There was no asserted safety failure by Respondent, his employer. Basically, he simply stood up and felt pain. That description of an event hasn’t been an “accident” in this State since the inception of workers’ comp as a system of benefits in 1909.

Please also note the IL WC system hasn’t ever used the “positional risk” theory that other states have—in a positional risk state, if the worker is “positioned” at work when they suffer pain, it may be compensable because they are at work, regardless of cause. I believe IL WC is moving or has moved to that situation. In my view, our IL Supreme Court has judicially changed the common reading/meaning of our IL WC Act which requires both “arising out of” and “in the course of” employment—they are now only going to require “in the course of” for a physical problem to be work-related. Trust me, that is a giant expansion of IL WC claims, coverage and costs. It is also going to require fewer and fewer lawyers on both sides, as TPA’s/Insurance carriers simply drop disputes and pay, pay, pay.

In McAllister, the Arbitrator found in Claimant McAllister’s favor. The IL WC Commission panel followed traditional law and reversed that decision and found the injury did not arise out of the claimant’s employment. The Circuit and Appellate Courts affirmed. However, the Appellate Court was divided regarding the extent to which injuries caused by everyday activities were compensable under the IL WC Act. The majority favored the analysis contained in Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, 129 Ill. 2d 52 (1989). This was an injury when Claimant stepped of a street curb going to his car.

Two concurring Appellate Court justices, however, preferred the analysis contained in Adcock v. Illinois Workers’ Compensation Comm’n, in which Claimant asserted he was injured simply pivoting in a swivel chair. In Adcock, the Court ruled Claimant had to establish his or her job duties required the claimant to engage in the everyday activity that caused the injury to a greater degree than the general public, even in situations where the activity was directly related to the claimant’s job duties.

The IL Supreme Court went a different direction. They agreed with the Appellate Court majority and held Caterpillar Tractor “prescribes the proper test for analyzing whether an injury ‘arises out of’ a claimant’s employment, when a claimant is injured performing job duties involving common bodily movements or routine everyday activities.” What is odd about the Court’s recognition of Caterpillar Tractor is WC benefits were denied in that claim! I am mildly baffled to see the ruling used to support a claim for benefits. With deepest respect to our reviewing courts, in my view, rulings like this are almost impossible to make sense of. The act of “stepping off a curb” is something that happens literally millions of times every day across the globe—if you are a klutz and injure yourself stepping off a typical street curb, you shouldn’t be able to complain to your employer and get substantial benefits. Please also note lots of WC fraud may follow when Claimants find out how easy it is to “fake” such occurrences that I don’t consider “accidents.” Welcome to Illinois.

The Supreme Court explained, consistent with Caterpillar Tractor, common bodily movements and everyday activities at or near work are compensable and employment-related if the activity that caused the injury “had its origin in some risks connected with, or incidental to, employment so as to create a causal connection between the employment and the accidental injury.” The Court then overruled Adcock and its progeny to the extent that they require a claimant to additionally prove he or she was exposed to a risk of injury to a greater extent than the general public. The Court further found McAllister’s injury was the result of a risk that was distinctly associated with his employment and, as such, was compensable, and held the Commission’s finding claimant was injured by a neutral risk that was not related to his employment was against the manifest weight of the evidence.

I appreciate your thoughts and comments. Please post them on our award-winning blog.

Synopsis: A New IN Work Comp Board Rule for More Specificity in Applications and COVID claims update. Article and analysis by our IN WC Defense Team Leader, Kevin Boyle, J.D

Editor’s comment: Maybe you haven’t heard about this new rule change yet, but the Indiana Worker’s Compensation Board recently posted an important notice to help eliminate vague Applications for Adjustment of Claim. It’s been pretty common over the past decades for savvy Plaintiffs’ attorneys to file very bland Applications for Adjustment of Claim with only minimal language to describe the injuries. You’ve probably seen this kind of injury description: “injured on the job,” or “injured in the course and scope of employment” with no real description of what happened or what body part was injured. Plaintiffs’ attorneys would generalize for a variety of reasons including the ability to add additional injuries that may arise later since they did not specify a body part or type of incident.

That practice is not allowed any more. If you receive an unspecific Application, contact me and we’ll take appropriate action to get it fixed. Plaintiffs’ attorneys will have to amend with better descriptions now. Their new amended Application will be deemed to have been filed on the date of the original Application. But still, don’t let them get away with it. Make them specify at the outset of their claim.

I hope everybody is healthy and making it through the COVID-19 changes to just about every aspect of our lives in some form or other. In Indiana, we still have not had a published judge ruling in Indiana workers compensation cases on the virus since I updated you in April 2020. Our Legislature has not been in session for months, so legislation hasn’t been enacted except at the State and local level regarding masking and crowd sizes.

Indiana has not taken or followed the aggressive leads of surrounding states like Illinois, Michigan and Kentucky. So, still treat your claims as an occupational disease. Also, the IWCB’s notice issued in April that I previously covered in our newsletter is still helpful and remains good guidance regarding first responders, health care providers and others who may contract the disease in their work. If you need that information again, let me know.

We appreciate your thoughts and comments. Please post them on our award-winning blog. You can reach Kevin Boyle at kboyle@keefe-law.com for any concern related to Indiana or Illinois workers’ compensation, general liability or employment law.

Synopsis: Annual IL State Chamber WC Conference Goes Virtual—Shawn Biery & John Campbell to present.

Editor’s comment: The 14th Annual Workers' Compensation & Safety Conference set for November 4th is being held virtual this year. The 8:30 am to noon program features John Ruser, President & CEO of the Workers' Compensation Research Institute (WCRI) and Michael Brennan, Chairman of the Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission.

The program also will include the following breakout sessions:

• Advances in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome - Presented by Dr. Andrew Zelby and Dave Rusch, Vice President of Business Service Development, Ovation Hand Institute;

• Medical Marijuana in the Workplace - Presented by AJ Sheehan, MVP Law

• The Covid-19 Rebuttable Presumption - What is it and What Does it Mean for You? - Presented by Peter Stavropoulos, Brady Connolly and Masuda

• 2020 Workers Compensation Case Law Update - Presented by Shawn Biery and John Campbell, Keefe Campbell Biery & Associates

• Snakes, Leaches, and Tobacco Enemas - The Case for Evidence-Based Medical Treatment Guidelines - Presented by Patrick Robinson, Vice President, Government Affairs, ODG, an MCG Health Company

• OSHA Updates for 2020 and Beyond - Presented by Matthew Horn, SmithAmundsen LLC

For more information and to register:

https://ilchamber.org/workerscompconference/