covid-19 call to action and legislative updates
Open Letter to Governors and State Legislatures Regarding Workers Compensation Coverage for Personnel Fighting COVID-19
Open Letter to Governors and State Legislatures Regarding Workers’ Compensation Coverage for Personnel Fighting COVID-19 from the Worker’s Injury Law & Advocacy Group.
Our country now has more confirmed cases of COVID-19 than any other country in the world. Many workers have, and will, contract this dreaded virus as a result of their work activities. Physicians, nurses, hospital employees, law enforcement officers, and first responders work around the clock on the front-line providing care and in direct contact with those suffering from this illness. Many of these brave caregivers have contracted the disease themselves or will in the near future. Others, while not yet testing positive, have lost wages as a result of quarantine. Those that have contracted COVID-19 have lost significant wages, incurred substantial medical bills, and some have even died as a result of their exposure at work.
Are these soldiers in this invisible war covered by workers’ compensation? Unfortunately, the answer is very complicated and in many states the answer may be, “No”. Several states deny compensation for “ordinary diseases of life.” Other states require clear and convincing evidence that the virus was acquired at work as opposed to exposure on the street, in a restaurant, or from a friend or family member. This burden of proof imposes a virtually insurmountable barrier to receiving benefits. The unintended consequence is that those who put their life on the line to protect all of us are left without a remedy when harm strikes their family. These are the most essential workers – the workers who go in every day knowing they will be directly exposed to this contagion, but also knowing that without their efforts more people will die. How can we send these workers into these dangerous situations as part of their work and not have them covered by workers’ compensation? Surely, none of us would want this result.
Many states have already taken some action to allow coverage of these workers if they contract COVID-19. On behalf of WILG® (Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy Group®), I ask and urge all Governors and members of state legislatures to take whatever action necessary – whether that be executive order or legislation- to make sure these medical workers, first responders, and law enforcement officers are covered by your state workers’ compensation law, should they become ill as a consequence of their work caring for infected citizens.
WILG® is the national non-profit membership organization dedicated to representing the interest of millions of workers and their families who suffer the consequences of workplace injuries and illnesses. If WILG® can assist in any way to ensure coverage and protection for your front-line workers during this pandemic, please let us know. We stand ready to assist.
Respectfully submitted,
William L Smith II
WILG® President (at time of letter)
Workers’ Compensation Coverage Presumptions for COVID-19
Prepared by the Workers’ Injury Law & Advocacy Group
As of January 2021
State |
Status |
Coverage |
Legal method of enactment |
Details |
Type of Presumption |
Alaska |
Passed (expired 11/15/20) |
First responders and health care providers |
Legislation |
Conclusive |
|
Alaska |
Proposed |
Workers in positions placing them at higher risk for infection |
Legislation |
Rebuttable by “clear and convincing evidence” |
|
Arkansas |
Passed |
All workers |
Executive Order |
No presumption, but removes prohibition of coverage of “ordinary diseases of life” |
|
California |
Passed |
First responders in all cases; other workers only after “outbreak” at employment |
Legislation |
Rebuttable |
|
California |
Passed |
All workers |
Executive order |
Rebuttable |
|
Colorado |
Failed in Senate |
“Essential workers” including a wide range of occupations |
Legislation |
Rebuttable by “clear and convincing evidence” |
|
Connecticut |
Passed |
All workers |
Executive order |
Rebuttable by preponderance of the evidence |
|
Florida |
Passed |
First responders |
Administrative rule |
Unknown |
|
Illinois |
Passed-withdrawn |
First-responders and front-line workers |
Administrative rule |
Emergency Rule 9030.70 (withdrawn after lawsuit) |
Rebuttable |
Illinois |
Passed |
First-responders and front-line workers (broadly defined) |
Legislation |
Rebuttable |
|
Kansas |
Failed |
All workers |
Legislation |
Rebuttable |
|
Kentucky |
Passed |
Healthcare workers, first responders, grocery workers, and others |
Executive order |
Contestable |
|
Massachusetts |
Proposed |
First responders and emergency medical workers |
Legislation |
Evidentiary occupational exposure--rebuttable |
|
Michigan |
Passed |
First responders |
Administrative rule |
Conclusive |
|
Minnesota |
Passed |
First responders and health care workers |
Legislation |
Rebuttable |
|
Missouri |
Passed |
First responders |
Administrative rule |
Rebuttable by “clear and convincing evidence” |
|
New Jersey |
Passed |
Emergency and healthcare workers |
Legislation |
Rebuttable by a preponderance of the evidence |
|
New Mexico |
Passed |
State emergency workers and first responders |
Executive Order |
Unstated |
|
New York |
Proposed |
First responders |
Legislation |
Unstated (conclusive) |
|
North Carolina |
Proposed |
First responders, healthcare workers, and other “essential” workers such as “food service” and “retail” workers |
Legislation |
Rebuttable by “clear and convincing evidence” |
|
North Dakota |
Passed |
Emergency workers |
Executive order |
Special eligibility--no presumption |
|
Ohio |
Proposed |
First responders and emergency medical workers |
Legislation |
Rebuttable |
|
Pennsylvania |
Proposed |
“Life-sustaining” occupations, which includes first responders but also grocery workers, pharmacists, trash collectors, and others |
Legislation |
Conclusive |
|
South Carolina |
Proposed |
First responders and healthcare workers |
Legislation |
Unstated (conclusive) |
|
Texas |
Passed |
First responders |
Administrative rule |
Special eligibility--no presumption |
|
Texas |
Proposed |
First responders and public safety workers |
Numerous legislative proposals |
Rebuttable by a “preponderance of the evidence” |
|
Utah |
Passed |
First responders |
Legislation |
Rebuttable |
|
Vermont |
Passed |
“Front-line workers” including a wide range of occupations |
Legislation |
Rebuttable by a “preponderance of the evidence” |
|
Wisconsin |
Passed |
First responders and front-line workers |
Legislation |
Rebuttable |
|
Wisconsin |
Proposed |
Wider group of “critical” workers than covered by previous legislation |
Legislation |
Rebuttable |
|
Wyoming |
Passed |
All workers |
Legislation |
Conclusive presumption of “increased risk” from work |