Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (51314)	3/2/2008 10:57:27 AM
From: neolib	Respond to of 543284

In addition, the system is "no fault" to the extent that the only question is whether the employee was injured on the job...is that what you meant by no fault? I meant "no fault" as to the company. The way things work in Oregon, and I believe in CA as well, is that the company rating (and hence insurance premium) is affected by claims. It is particularly a problem for small companies which statistically should have few claims, then each claim hurts the rating pretty badly. Of course pressure does not to apply to the company to avoid bad practices. Hence my other comments. How do worker's comp cheaters get by with claiming new injuries when their past medical records are available to the worker's comp carrier? Ed It is (or was) illegal in CA for an employer to obtain any information regarding a potential employee's prior claims history.