1. REHABILITATION ADVISOR

1.1 Issue: SB50A modified FS 440.15 (1) Permanent Total Disability. – (e) 1. to insert verbiage "the employer's or carrier's chosen rehabilitation advisor or provider"

1.2 Concern: Rehabilitation Advisor is an undefined term, which would allow further erosion of QRP qualifications and standards by allowing unlicensed and unqualified providers an entry into the Workers Compensation System. This has the potential of being very detrimental to Injured Workers.

1.3 Recommendations: Rehabilitation Advisor issue is best addressed by simply eliminating the term "Rehabilitation Advisor".

2. QRP CERTIFICATION & REGULATION

2.1 Issue: SB50A did not address QRP Certification & Regulation.

2.2 Concerns: In-house and Field Case Managers are 'the' personnel responsible for implementing many of the mandates of previous and current FS. Re-organization of DWC personal, responsibility and changes in mission have fragmented the process. The current bi-annual training and certification process is not certified or recognized by any professional organization or credentialing body. The entire training group within the DWC has been eliminated. The BRRS does not have a training staff. This function as become an additional duty for operations personnel. QRPs now deal with more Bureaus and Departments as a result of the Florida State administrative re-organization. It has become virtually impossible to determine who is responsible as separate personal groups within DWC, BRRS and AHCA each have limited concerns. No one Bureau or Department has assumed full responsibility for QRPs.

2.3 Recommendations: 1. Evaluate the feasibility of returning the Certification & Regulation of Medical & Vocational QRPs to the Department of Professional Regulation. and / or 2. Provide DWC and BRRS with sufficient funds and personnel to implement FS as mandated according to the legislative intent of 440.491 (7).

3. DISRUPTION OF QRP SERVICES AND PERSONNEL

3.1 Issue: 440.491(5)(d) states that unless medical care coordination or reemployment services have been undertaken (voluntarily within 60 days of the date of injury), then the QRP (or facility or agency) who conducts the assessment may not provide the ongoing medical care coordination or reemployment services.

3.2 Concern: This is ambiguous at best, and causes an unnecessary delay and additional cost. The necessity for such a change in service provider is suspect in the provision of "voluntary" services. In addition, the likelihood that the "second" QRP may not agree with the "first" QRP's recommendations results in additional delay, as there is no legislated or regulatory protocol for such a situation.

3.3 Recommendations: Eliminate paragraph 440.491(5)(d). This elimination is supported by the QRP community as well as the employers/carriers. The injured worker would benefit from a continuity of services.

4. THE COST OF REEMPLOYMENT ASSESSMENT AND REEMPLOYMENT SERVICES

4.1 Issue: 440.491(5)(b) "........... the cost of a reemployment assessment and the first $2500 in reemployment services to an injured employee must not be treated as a loss adjustment expense for worker's compensation rate making purposes."

4.2 Concern: The $2500 cap is quite old and antiquated. Although it is not a hard cap, restricting the classification of these costs above $2500 as a "cost of doing business" effectively caps these expenditures. There has been no inflationary correction of this amount, and it is irrational to limit the amount of assistance a severely injured worker can receive to help them return to productivity.

4.3 Recommendations: The $2500 limit needs to be eliminated, and all costs associated with reemployment of the injured worker should be classified as a "loss adjustment expense." This change effects only the 15-20% of the most seriously injured workers, who require occupational change.

Legislative Efforts-we need your support:

The Florida IARP Chapter has been represented by lobbyist Fausto Gomez during the past 3 legislative sessions. Our organization has been served extremely well by Mr. Gomez, who has been able to schedule appointments with various senators and representatives for IARP legislative committee members to meet and present our platform. Mr. Gomez was able to schedule 2 IARP speakers at last year's committee meeting of the Banking and Insurance Committee that was writing a "Glitch" bill. We feel that our organization and profession are in much better standing in Tallahassee at this time.

The 2006 legislative session begins March 14, 2006. We are quite confident that significant work will be undertaken in regard to Worker's Compensation. Although the Senate passed a "Glitch" bill last year (containing many items favorable to IARP), the bill did not reach the House in time to be passed there. In fact, the only Worker's Comp bill to pass both houses, was vetoed by the Governor. That was a special funding bill for the JUA.

So the issues that we were successful on last year will need to be readdressed again this year, in both the House and the Senate. The specific issues that we are dealing with include; eliminating the term "rehab advisor" which was introduced but undefined in the new law, add vocational testing to the Reemployment Assessment and expand and improve the definitions for medical protocol. We are finding a good deal of support for our positions.

Your IARP Legislative Committee is listed at the bottom of this page. We invite you to call or e-mail committee members with any thoughts or concerns that you may have.

All of this work takes money, and has been funded in part, through donations made by membership. However, a large part of these expenses have come at the cost of the general IARP budget. Donations are absolutely necessary at this time, for this work to continue, including the continued representation by Mr. Gomez.

We are asking each IARP member to donate $100.00 for continued legislative activity. The donations can be sent in total, or in installments. That's only $8.33 per month! Your individual support is needed!