Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-15T14:40:24.852Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Current Trends in Workers' Compensation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2021

Irvin Stander
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Report of the National Commission on State Workers’ Compensation Laws heralded a new era for workers’compensation in the United States. Appointed by the President in 1970, the Commission issued its report in 1972, and pointed out the gross inadequacies of all the state systems. To compel the states to modernize their compensation laws, the Commission established 19 essential recommendations, and placed time limitations on the adoption of these standards by the states, with the threat that if these recommendations were not met by July 1975, the Commission would recommend to Congress that the non-complying state systems be taken over by the federal government and operated under the generally more liberal provisions of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act.

Type
Article
Information
Law, Medicine and Healthcare , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , April 1982 , pp. 67 - 93
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Report of the National Commission on State Workmen's Compensation Laws (Washington, D.C.) (July 1972).Google Scholar
Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. §901 et seq. (1976).Google Scholar
Div. of State Workers’ Compensation Standards, U.S. Department of Labor, State Workers’ Compensation Laws in Effect on October 1, 1980 Compared with the 19 Essential Recommendations of the National Commission on State Workmen's Compensation Laws (Washington, D.C.) (December 1980).Google Scholar
Policy Group of the Interdepartmental Workers’ Compensation Task Force, Is There a Better Way? (Washington, D.C.) (January 17, 1977) (report to the President and Congress).Google Scholar
Darling-Hammond, L. Kniesner, T.J., The Law and Economics of Workers’ Compensation(Rand Corporation Institute for Civil Justice, Santa Monica, Ca.) (1980).Google Scholar
Proposed International Standards of the IAIABC for Workers’ Compensation Laws and Administration, IAIABC Journal, pp. 3-5 (July 1980).Google Scholar
Estimates of Workers’ Compensation Payments by State and Type of Insurance—1979 and 1978 (Social Security Administration, Washington, D.C.) (1980).Google Scholar
Fla. Stat. Ann. §440.01 et seq. (1979).Google Scholar
Crisis: Florida's Workers’ Compensation Act, Workers’ Compensation Monthly 2(4):1 (October 1981).Google Scholar
House Bill 3125 (known as the Chrest Bill) (Oregon 1979).Google Scholar
Senate Bills 1123 and 1193, Session of 1981; House Bills 1294 and 1295, Session of 1981 (General Assembly of Pennsylvania).Google Scholar
S. 1182, 97th Cong., 1st Sess. (1981).Google Scholar
Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA), 5 U.S.C. §8101 et seq. (1976).Google Scholar
Doyle, H.A., Changes in FECA Proposed, Workers’ Compensation Monthly 1(11):11 (May 1981).Google Scholar
Authority Says Original Purpose of Workers’ Compensation Lost, Compensation News (September/October 1979).Google Scholar
Analysis of Workers’ Compensation Laws (Chamber of Commerce, Washington, D.C.) (1981).Google Scholar
Krawchuk v. Philadelphia Electric Co., 439 A.2d 627 (Pa. 1981).Google Scholar
Reed v. W.C.A.B. & Stork Diaper Service and Dumas v. Latrobe Forge & Spring, _____A.2d_____ (Pa. 1981).Google Scholar
Jarvis v. Jarvis, _____A.2d_____ (Pa. 1981).Google Scholar
Bigley v. Unity Auto Parts, Inc., 436 A.2d 1172 (Pa. 1981).Google Scholar
Commonwealth v. College, 439 A.2d 107 (Pa. 1981).Google Scholar
Alessi v. Roybestos-Manhattan, Inc., and Buczynski v. General Motors, 101 S. Ct. 1895 (1981).Google Scholar
Federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. §1001 et seq. (1974).Google Scholar
Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Insurance Co., 446 U.S. 142 (1980).Google Scholar
Sun Ship, Inc. v. Pennsylvania, 447 U.S. 715 (1980), rehearing denied, 448 U.S. 916 (1980).Google Scholar
Nugent v. Executive Officers of Harter Oil Co., 396 So.2d 537 (La. App. 1980); Gallegos v. Chastain, 624 P.2d 60 (N.M. Ct. App. 1981).Google Scholar
Mike v. Borough of Aliquippa, 421 A.2d 251 (Pa. 1981).Google Scholar
Johns-Manville Products Corp. v. Contra Costa Superior Court, 612 P.2d 948 (Cal. 1980).Google Scholar
Fernter v. Daniel O'Connell's Sons, Inc., 413 N.E.2d 690 (Mass. 1980).Google Scholar
Reed Tool Co. v. Copelin, 610 S.W.2d 736 (Tex. 1981).Google Scholar
Johnson v. American Mutual Liability Insurance Co., 394 So.2d 1 (Ala. 1981); Sewell v. Bathey Manufacturing Co., 303 N.W.2d 876 (Mich. App. 1981).Google Scholar
Grantham v. Denke, 359 So.2d 785 (Ala. 1978); Barnette v. Doyle, 622 P.2d 1349 (Wyo. 1981).Google Scholar
Foley v. Polaroid Corp., 409 N.E.2d 1300 (Mass. 1980).Google Scholar
Ary v. Missouri Portland Cement Co., 612 S.W.2d 840 (Mo. App. 1981).Google Scholar
Brown v. Transcon Lines. 588 P.2d 1087 (Ore. 1978); Sventko v. Kroger Co., 245 N.W.2d 151 (Mich. App. 1976).Google Scholar
Coleman v. American Universal Insurance Co., 273 N.W.2d 220 (Wisc. 1979).Google Scholar
Guy v. Arthur H. Thomas Co., 378 N.E.2d 488 (Ohio 1978).Google Scholar
D'Angonia v. County of Los Angeles, 613 P.2d 238 (Cal. 1980).Google Scholar
McDaniel v. Sage, 419 N.E.2d 1322 (Ind. App. 1981).Google Scholar
Douglas v. E. & J. Gallo Winery, 137 Cal. Rptr. 797 (Cal. App. 1977); Mercer v. Uniroyal, Inc., 361 N.E.2d 492 (Ohio App. 1976); Tatrai v. Presbyterian Univ. Hosp., 439 A.2d 1162 (Pa. 1981).Google Scholar
Longever v. Revere Copper & Brass Inc., 408 N.E.2d 857 (Mass. 1980); Billy v. Consolidated Machine Tool, 412 N.E.2d 934 (N.Y. 1980); Winkler v. Hyster Co., 369 N.E.2d 606 (Ill. 1977); McAlister v. Methodist Hosp. of Memphis, 550 S.W.2d 240 (Tenn. 1977); Provo v. Bunker Hill Co., 393 F. Supp. 778 (D. Idaho 1978).Google Scholar