When the  Missouri Legislature passed “Work Comp” reform in 2005 the goal was to payback insurance companies and business groups for their support. The winner always gets the spoils, but this time fairness and common sense had to take a far back seat to expediency. Older workers were punished -for aging!!  Section 190, subsection 3 states that ”Any award of compensation shall be reduced by an amount proportional to the permanent partial disability determined to be a preexisting disease or condition or attributed to the natural process of aging sufficient to cause or prolong the disability or need of treatment. Reduced by “the natural process of aging!” Believe it or not,the intent of the legislature was to punish workers for the natural aging process.

When do we punish people for aging? From the age of 35? What about 20? Why doesn’t a worker get a bonus for healing faster, if he is young? Every middle aged worker is going to have some arthritis, or may have diabetes or some frailness as time goes on. Now the older worker is to be penalized if his “natural aging” prolongs his disability or treatment. So if you don’t bounce back at 50 the way you did when you were 25 because your body has become more frail, then the insurance company should be able to make you pay for your own treatment and at the same time cut off your lost time benefits. Where’s the outrage from groups life AARP and other advocates for older citizens? Too bad we can’t reduce the pay of Missouri legislators as they get older! Nevermind, they always stand up for themselves when it comes to their own pay raises and retirement benefits, but there is no common sense when it comes to injured workers.

Over the years, I have handled numerous Missouri and Illinois “work comp” injury cases. It often surprises injured workers to find that they can pursue their case in both states.  Sometimes we will have an injured worker who is employed in St. Louis, but who is injured, for example, in Belleville, Alton, or Granite City, Illinois. Under these circumstances, the worker can pursue their case in both Illinois and Missouri. As an attorney, I will usually file a claim in both states and eventually determine which state is most favorable.  In Illinois Workers’ Compensation cases, a worker can choose their treating doctor, which is certainly an advantage.  There are also more favorable circumstances where an emloyee can’t return to their former employment and needs vocational rehabilitation.  In addition, there are higher maximum rates for temporary total disability, permanent partial disability and permanent total disability benefits.  However, for employees who are not as highly paid, the permanent partial disability rates are based on 60%, rather than 66 2/3%, as is the case in Missouri.   Missouri Workers’ Compensation also has a special benefit called the “Missouri Second Injury Fund” which often provides extra compensation for a wide variety of pre-existing conditions.” Illinois Comp” tends to favor highly compensated workers who are seriously injured.  “Missouri comp” tends to favor less highly compensated workers and workers with significant pre-existing disabilities.  If you qualify for benefits in both states, it may be helpful to hire an attorney who is licensed in both states. There are a multitude of other factors which may come into play, such as attorney’s fees which are 20% in Illinois versus 25% in Missouri.  Also the venue, or place where your case comes up for hearing, will influence your attorney’s strategy.  My advice- ask your attorney if he practices in both states! Submitted by Jeff Swaney FREE CONSULTATION 314-481-7778