The Workers' Compensation Section of the California State Bar honored four distinguished workers compensation veterans in ceremonies in Monterey on Friday.

The award for distinguished lifetime achievement was given to Dennis Hannigan, deputy commissioner of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. Hannigan has served for many years in a staff post with the WCAB, often writing decisions and sometimes serving on WCAB decision panels in his deputy commissioner role. Known for his integrity and encyclopedic knowledge of California workers' comp, Hannigan has truly served the people of California with excellence as a public servant.

Judge of the Year award went to Joel Harter of Sacramento. Harter has been the presiding judge in Sacramento and, with Court administrator Kevin Star on military furlough, is currently assigned to the EAMS project, a big undertaking at the moment. EAMS is either off to a good or a rocky start depending on whom you talk to.

Named defense attorney of the year was Jim Libien of the Laughin, Falbo Levy and Moresi office in Oakland. Libien has been a leader in the San Francisco Bay area workers' comp community for years. A straight-shooting, "old-school" kind of guy, Libien has eschewed the sort of scorched earth litigation style that has made its way into some California workers' comp firms. Liben has always been able to see the need for dignity in the comp litigation process, has promoted collegiality among members of the bar, and has been able to recognize that workers' comp is a benefit delivery system, not a civil litigation system.

The applicant attorney of the year award went to Linda Atcherley of San Diego. Atcherley has worker her heart out over the last few years on behalf of disabled workers. In 2007 she served as President of the California Applicants Attorneys Association. In 2008 she has served as
legislative committee chairperson for CAAA. Atcherley gave both posts her all, spending untold hours in Sacramento hearings and other comp-related meetings up and down the state.

I found myself standing at the awards event, looking out the windows at fog rolling off Monterey Bay, listening to their acceptance speeches as
a who's who of movers and shakers in the California "comp community" watched and applauded. The common theme was apparent: all four of these individuals had a commitment to the integrity of the law and the comp judicial process.

The "comp community" should be proud.

A sad note: attorney Steve Jiminez of Oakland suddenly passed away this year. A stalwart member of the Workers' Comp Executive Committee of the California Bar, Jimenez was destined for greater things before his passing. The California bar awards are now known as the Steve Jimenez Memorial Special recognition awards.

Stay tuned. Governor Schwarzenegger only has a couple more days to act on a number of workers' comp bills which are on his desk. I'll be covering that story.

Julius Young
www.boxerlaw.com
(you can subscribe to the blog by clicking on the RSS reader button on the lower right column under "Most Recent Entries")

Within the next few days it's likely that Governor Schwarzenegger will be exercising his veto on workers' comp bills on his desk.

Bills he will probably veto deal with a permanent disability increase, requirements that utilization review doctors be licensed in California, and prohibitions against discrimination in apportionment.

Meanwhile, the Governor has already exercised his veto pen to nix funding for the Miguel Contreras Labor Program which is the umbrella for the UCLA Center for Research On Labor and Employment, the UCLA Center for Labor Research and Education, the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education, and the UC Berkeley Institute for Research on Labor and Employment.

Until 2000, those programs (with a budget of around $6 million) were funded out of the budget of the UC universities where they are located.

In 2004-05 their funding was reduced. The following year, Schwarzenegger used a line item veto to nix their funding. UC redirected some monies to keep the institutes running, and in the 2006 state budget funding was restored.

These think tanks have long been a target of criticism from conservative and business groups who are hostile to organized labor.

But these institutes perform a valuable function, doing research into issues that concern working men and women in California.

The link to the UC Miguel Contreras Program can be found here:
http://www.ucop.edu/research/contreras/

The link to the Berkeley Institute can be seen here:
http://www.iir.berkeley.edu/faculty/

Efforts will undoubtedly be made to restore the funding or find other funding. But Schwarzenegger's selection of the UC labor institutes for defunding can be seen as nothing but punitive.

Once again, a tone deaf Governor has stuck his finger in the eye of California's working men and women.

Julius Young
www.boxerlaw.com
(you can subscribe to the blog by clicking on the RSS reader button on the lower right column below "Most Recent Entries")

Word came late Tuesday that the FBI is investigating possible fraud at AIG {as well as at Lehman Brothers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac).

And late Tuesday AIG announced that it has signed a deal with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The terms give the U.S. taxpayer preferred shares in AIG.

Here's a link to a good analysis of the AIG arrangement that just appeared on the New York Times online (writtten by Steven M. Davidoff):
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/ ... kes-shape/

Stay tuned.

Julius Young
www.boxerlaw.com
(you can subscribe to the blog by clicking on the RSS reader button on the lower right column below "Most Recent Entries")

If you waded through the September 23rd Wall Street Journal coverage of the credit crisis and proposed bailout, your eye might have come to an interesting heading.

"Insurance Companies Need a Federal Regulator".

The authors? A bipartisan group of four from Congress.

Senators John Sununu (Republican-New Hampshire) and Tim Johnson (Democrat-South Dakota). Members of the House Melissa Bean (Democrat-Illinois) and Ed Royce (Republican-California.

The central thesis of this op-ed piece is that after the federal rescue of A.I.G., it's time for Congress to reform how insurance companies are regulated. After all, the U.S. taxpayer is now loaning-and owning-a massive insurance carrier.

Insurance products unheard of just a few years ago-insurance on credit default swaps- is at the heart of the meltdown that threatens the life savings of Ma and Pa Kettle.

In 1945 Congress enacted the McCarran-Ferguson act, making insurance regulation a state issue. But this has left a patchwork of regulatory oversight in an industry with a key role in national and global commerce. Individual states do not have the resources to properly regulate huge multinational insurers.

The authors note that:
"Because each state is responsible only for its individual jurisdiction, no state can keep tabs on insurance companies that cross state or international boundaries. Consequently, the impact insurers can have on our capital markets and national economy is almost entirely overlooked."

These politicians, cooperating across the political spectrum, introduced in 2007 legislation ("The National Insurance Act of 2007") to establish an operational federal charter for insurance companies. The goal would be to establish oversight for insurers operating in the global marketplace.

The 2007 version of the bill (S.2509) proposed creation of an independent federal Office of National Insurance within the U.S. Treasury Department. That office would be charged with regulating the solvency and market conduct of insurers under the federal charter. Note that there was also a 2007 House bill with similar provisions.

Under S.2509 federally chartered insurers would still have been subject to certain categories of state law, including state compulsory workers' comp laws. Insurers would be free to choose state charters and regulation, making it an "opt-in" system.

It's certainly possible that some proponents of the concept would like to see uniform federal tort laws and uniform workers' comp laws. Business interests have never succeeded in pushing national tort reform, and efforts to promote a national workers' comp law are moribund. But a trend toward federal regulation might give those concepts a boost.

The carrot for insurers for federalizing insurance regulation is that insurers would not incur the costs of complying with 50 different sets of state regulation.

According to the sponsors, "An OFC will provide a safer, more cost-effective regulatory environment for our economy and for our consumers".

As this post is written, Washington is engulfed with negotiations over the scope and governance of a credit crisis bailout package. Long-held notions about capitalism, penalties for "moral hazard" and the scope of government power hang in the balance as the Paulson-Bernanke plan is vetted. Not to mention whether you have a paycheck and a savings account several months from now.

But once those issues are resolved, insurance regulatory reform may eventually gain traction. And the AIG debacle may fuel the movement.

Supporters of the concept have included the American Insurance Association, the American Bankers Association, various reinsurers and the Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers.To be sure, at the moment some of these groups aren't currently politically popular.

On the contrarian side are associations of professional insurance and many mutual insurance companies. Also opposing in 2007: California Insurance Commissioner (and future Governor candidate) Steve Poizner.

Poizner's opposition seems to have centered around the concept that it is better to have regulation closer to home and that if insurers could choose state or federal charters, confusion might result. Clearly, Poizner's turf would have been reduced.

Stay tuned.

Julius Young
www.boxerlaw.com
(you can subscribe to the blog by clicking on the RSS reader button on the lower right column below "Most Recent Entries")

Friday in California.

Some of you reading this may be stuck in an office, fantasizing taling the fishing gear this weekend to the nearest lake or pier.

In Washington, a big fishing trip is about to begin.

Led by Los Angeles Democrat Henry Waxman, a Congressional subcommittee is going on an oversight investigation about the recent problems at A.I.G.

Subpenas have been issued to old and newly installed A.I.G. managemment.

Given the heavy role of the U.S. government in saving A.I.G, it woould appear to be a public relations disaster if A.I.G refuses to cooperate.

So perhaps in a few months we'll have a more detailed look at the workings of this insurance behemoth, and what went wrong there. Waxman is known as a very tough investigator.

Stay tuned.

Julius Young
www.boxerlaw.com