Down
The Rabbit Hole
by Thomas Lynch
June 10, 2003
Attorney General
Tom Reilly has parachuted himself and his office smack-dab into
the middle of the Massachusetts workers' compensation rate filing
debate. In doing so, he threatens to pull the entire system headfirst
down the rabbit hole, right behind Alice and the March Hare.
Every two years,
the insurance industry, represented by the Workers' Compensation
Rating and Inspection Bureau, is required to submit a rate filing
to the Commissioner of Insurance. The State Rating Bureau, a unit
within the Division of Insurance, then offers its own filing, usually
a dissenting view, about where rates ought to go. After hearings,
the Commissioner of Insurance issues a ruling. It's usually a simple
game of insider baseball.
But this year,
things are different. Whereas the industry filed for a rate increase
of 8.6 percent and the State Rating Bureau asked for a decrease
of nearly 10 percent, the AG says they're both wrong. Very wrong.
His office jumped into the fray for the first time in 20 years and
filed for a decrease of 21.4 percent. If he prevails, the Commonwealth's
employers would see premiums decline by nearly 200 million dollars
next year. This means that the State Rating Bureau, representing
consumers, is almost 100 million dollars wrong, while the bean counters
in the insurance industry are off by a whopping $270 million. Wow!
If only he were right.
We
should step back and check the history.
Massachusetts employers have seen seven consecutive years
of massive premium reductions totaling 63 percent. Fierce insurer
competition routinely added double-digit discounts as well. Employers
get another break in the way the state handles medical costs for
worker injuries. In Massachusetts' workers' compensation, medical
providers are reimbursed within a fee schedule that is 20 percent
less than the existing Medicaid rate. In contrast, employers in
neighboring Connecticut pay medical costs that are 80 percent above
the Medicaid rate.
All of this
makes Massachusetts one of the best states in the nation in which
to buy workers' compensation. Studies show that the per-employee
cost of workers' compensation in Massachusetts is at least 48 percent
less than the national average.
So, why does
the AG think rates should decrease another 21.4 percent?
The AG accurately
points out that accident frequency, the number of reported injuries
has declined steadily over the last decade. However, rates are determined
by examining the costs associated with those accidents, not the
number of times they occur. And the cost of injuries has risen steadily
over the same period. Even with our steeply discounted medical payment
schedule, medical costs are snowballing and are the biggest driver
in the insurers' filing. Along with the bump in medical costs, injured
employees are staying out of work longer. In other words, we are
winning the safety battle with fewer accidents, but we are losing
the economic war because injuries that do happen are costing significantly
more.
The AG also
claims that to make employers pay more for workers' compensation
adds another leaden log onto the stack of economic burdens they
must carry on their already weakened backs. Well, if employers have
weakened backs, workers' compensation isn’t the culprit. Today's
premiums are precisely where they were 20 years ago, in 1983. Were
the AG's filing approved, rates would flash back to where they were
in the days of "Ozzie and Harriet." With rates that low,
carriers will flee the Commonwealth, catapulting our workers' compensation
system into a death spiral.
In an ideal,
rational world, insurers would receive a modest increase in rates,
at least. Even employers agree, because the Commonwealth's largest
employer group, the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, called
the insurers filing "reasonable." But this is not an ideal,
rational world; it is a political one. If the insurance industry
didn't have to make a filing this year, it probably wouldn't have,
given the economic climate
So, maybe the
best thing Commissioner Julianne Bowler can do is to discard the
AG's filing, split the other two down the middle and announce that
we're staying right where we are for a while. There's a lot to be
said for stability. That way, we might all avoid a date with the
Mad Hatter.
|