Illegal Immigrants can Bypass Work Comp Laws

February 28, 2012
Physicians and Clinics, Worker's Compensation
14 Comments
healthcare, injured at work, medical clinic, medical treatment, on the job injuries, physicians, workers compensation, workers compensation benefits

Many illegal immigrants and workers usually have a difficult time obtaining healthcare, especially worker's compensation. But there is hope for these types of employees when it comes to receiving medical services.

Federally funded clinics are starting to emerge in popularity for many reasons. Most importantly, these facilities provide free medical treatment for illegal workers that don't have the ability to leave the job site to visit the medical clinic. And these employees are further concerned to engage certain people due to their immigration status. Moreover, most cannot afford healthcare or even office visit charges.

These free clinics continue to increase in locations. Surprisingly, these federally funded physicians will travel to the immigrants work site and provide medical care before work, after work and sometimes during the workers' lunch breaks. Only approximately twenty percent of these illegal workers utilize the free program due to a variety reasons of mistrust and a history of racial allegations. If an illegal worker cannot afford healthcare for any type of symptom or cannot travel to a medical clinic, then this would be a great place to start.

Worker's compensation benefits don't compare to regular healthcare benefits. Since the insurance providers lobby congress to pass certain laws, the work comp system positively caters to the workman's compensation insurance carriers. Medical treatment is still difficult to get approved by these insurance companies and reimbursement rates continue to decline. However, there are a few Experienced Work Comp Physicians and Medical Clinics available for on the job injuries and more.

With all this said, illegal immigrant workers that are injured at work can bypass the entire worker's compensation system without paying a dime. Happily, the employers of these injured workers don't have to pay the overly expensive work comp insurance premiums. The company owners can just simply call out the free traveling mobile medical clinic. Perhaps, they should just have a monthly clinic day and schedule a few baby deliveries at the same time. This is a deal for employers and immigrant workers; they get immediate medical treatment without first going through the difficulties in locating a treating physician and also not having to wait for authorization. Comment below if you know more.

14 Responses to Illegal Immigrants can Bypass Work Comp Laws

By Sugel, September 29, 2012 at 10:37 pm

While it might be ethically questionable, it would not be illegal for medical providers to refuse to continue treatment on workers compensation cases. However, if they do agree to continue, they must either accept the medical rates set by the state, or negotiate a better rate with the insurer. Balance billing of the employee is specifically prohibited by law.

Reply
- By Anas, November 14, 2012 at 12:54 pm
  
  Oh betcha they are. And luklicy we are in need of bush doctors here. Who wouldn’t want to ride to work on a dogsled? Plus we got poutine. Which MD could resist that?
  
  Reply
By Bowling, November 15, 2012 at 1:26 am

Come now, take a deep breath. Opposing ilelgal immigration does not automatically equate with hatred of ilelgal immigrants. One can certainly take the position that our immigration laws should be strictly enforced, while recognizing that most (not all!) of these immigrants are personally decent people trying to help their families out.But they should not break our laws to do so. Simple as that. Unless you know the hearts and attitudes of all the anti-immigration (really anti-ILLEGAL immigration) folks, you owe them the courtesy of not assuming bad intentions.

Reply
By Aya, November 16, 2012 at 5:19 am

You’re absolutely right. My piootisn doesn’t indicate otherwise, either. If you read the previous posts on the immigration issue in CT, you will see that I have repeatedly stated that I have no problem with cracking down on illegal immigrants. That’s the law and that’s the way it is.Some people view this as an attack on all immigrants and in some way, I can understand that too. Especially the part about Danbury banning volleyball outdoors, because it is an important part of the immigrant community.However, I do not endorse and quite frankly am repulsed by the rhetoric that the CT Citizens for Immigration Control engages in.

Reply
By silver price, December 7, 2012 at 12:11 am

My workers compensation claim was made in the State of: Alaska High again Sorry so many post, got a lot happening here right now… So, I work for a union employer, I am on a hour bank system. So if I have worked 5500 hours without layoff, then for sake of example, then I have 5500 hours in the bank… Thats not what I have exact but you get the point. So my benefits related to medical coverage once I’m off work is all based on that bank. So I ran out of disability a year ago, now 1.2 years in to my time off I’m losing my health coverage completely. I’m being forced on to Cobra by the employer. So, my question is this. I got hurt at work, that’s not disputed, I have had surgeries, and just had a Major surgery again 3 weeks ago due to the injury and neuro surgeons predict 6 more months off work. Cobra is $1100 dollars a month. There is no way I can do that. I have a Amputation, and have had re-constructive surgeries on my arms and both shoulders, so I have health issues, plus a prosthetic to keep serviced. Also, ongoing meds that cost around 600 a month. So I cant afford my health care, and my insurance is ending, and I feel none of this would be happening if I were not injured at work. Therefore it’s the fault of this injury that my insurance is about to cost 1100 a month. So shouldn’t work comp pay my cobra?

Reply
By gold account, December 9, 2012 at 12:25 am

My workers compensation claim was made in the State of: Alaska High again Sorry so many post, got a lot happening here right now… So, I work for a union employer, I am on a hour bank system. So if I have worked 5500 hours without layoff, then for sake of example, then I have 5500 hours in the bank… Thats not what I have exact but you get the point. So my benefits related to medical coverage once I’m off work is all based on that bank. So I ran out of disability a year ago, now 1.2 years in to my time off I’m losing my health coverage completely. I’m being forced on to Cobra by the employer. So, my question is this. I got hurt at work, that’s not disputed, I have had surgeries, and just had a Major surgery again 3 weeks ago due to the injury and neuro surgeons predict 6 more months off work. Cobra is $1100 dollars a month. There is no way I can do that. I have a Amputation, and have had re-constructive surgeries on my arms and both shoulders, so I have health issues, plus a prosthetic to keep serviced. Also, ongoing meds that cost around 600 a month. So I cant afford my health care, and my insurance is ending, and I feel none of this would be happening if I were not injured at work. Therefore it’s the fault of this injury that my insurance is about to cost 1100 a month. So shouldn’t work comp pay my cobra?

Reply
By silver price, December 9, 2012 at 9:11 pm

While it might be ethically questionable, it would not be illegal for medical providers to refuse to continue treatment on workers compensation cases. However, if they do agree to continue, they must either accept the medical rates set by the state, or negotiate a better rate with the insurer. Balance billing of the employee is specifically prohibited by law.

Reply
By idebenone, December 16, 2012 at 3:07 am

The coverage doesn’t replace traditional health insurance but helps ensure that workers have a place to go for preventive care so they don’t end up in emergency rooms, said Joseph Villela, senior policy advocate with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.

Reply
By Idebenone, December 18, 2012 at 6:26 am

• Only .2% of businesses have over 50 employees and don’t already offer insurance to full-time workers. Providing these folks with insurance is the only “employer mandate” in ObamaCare.

Reply
By carnosine eye drops, December 21, 2012 at 9:48 pm

“National health care without tort reform?” The ENTIRE legal cost for health care, including insurance premiums, lawyer fees, court judgements, etc. – ALL OF IT is 1% of the health care budget. The GOP is not going to “save” health care by preventing people injured by doctors from seeking compensation. They are only interested in protecting the budgets of their insurance company friends. Tort reform is a substitute for health care reform. Think for yourself – have you ever heard of a state that passed tort reform having lower medical costs than other states? – NO, because the insurance companies don’t lower premiums to celebrate tort reform, they just pocket more money.

Reply
By piracetam, December 27, 2012 at 10:15 am

There could be some good news for injured workers presently on PA Workers Compensation. President Obama’s Health Care Plan will include coverage for people with pre-exsisting conditions. One might ask why this is important. Well, this could throw a “curve-ball” into negotiations for medical settlements or even “set-asides” for future medicare treatments for work related accidents. The proposed bill will include coverage for pre-exsisting conditions which will guarentee coverage (through government) for possible serious injuries that could have taken place at the work site. Since the government will cover this area what would be the need for “set-asides” with Medicare? How will future medical treatments be formulated for the injured workers if this health care bill passes both the US House and US Senate? There are a lot of unanswered questions and negotiations to take place among both Houses of Congress before this bill is passed but I see this potentially being a solid benefit to the seriously injured workers in PA. What do you think about the positive outcomes that could occur?

Reply
By Piracetam, December 31, 2012 at 4:11 am

“National health care without tort reform?” The ENTIRE legal cost for health care, including insurance premiums, lawyer fees, court judgements, etc. – ALL OF IT is 1% of the health care budget. The GOP is not going to “save” health care by preventing people injured by doctors from seeking compensation. They are only interested in protecting the budgets of their insurance company friends. Tort reform is a substitute for health care reform. Think for yourself – have you ever heard of a state that passed tort reform having lower medical costs than other states? – NO, because the insurance companies don’t lower premiums to celebrate tort reform, they just pocket more money.

Reply
By carnosine eye drops, January 2, 2013 at 4:54 pm

The Act exempts small businesses from the employer mandate to provide health insurance for employees, and employers are not subject to penalties if they employ 50 or fewer employees. Seasonal workers do not count towards the 50 employee threshold. And for those employers subject to the penalty, they are only responsible for providing health insurance for full-time employees.

Reply
By cataract eye drops, January 4, 2013 at 1:26 am

Some employees have reacted to this crisis by resorting to unethical, if not illegal means. As a workers’ compensation attorney, I have noticed an increase in the filing of questionable, if not outright fraudulent workers’ compensation claims. Employees now claim that medical conditions, which are personal in nature, were caused through their employment, either through a specific incident or through repetitive trauma/exposure. The employees seek to have these personal conditions paid for by the employer’s workers’ compensation insurance. In some cases, the employees cannot even identify a specific date of accident, and will argue that the condition occurred over time. In other cases, the employees will identify a date of accident and simply have no witnesses to corroborate that the incident occurred. Regardless, if the employee has a personal medical condition, but is unable to afford medical care, that employee now seems more likely to convince himself and others that the condition is employment related.

Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

By Sugel, September 29, 2012 at 10:37 pm

While it might be ethically questionable, it would not be illegal for medical providers to refuse to continue treatment on workers compensation cases. However, if they do agree to continue, they must either accept the medical rates set by the state, or negotiate a better rate with the insurer. Balance billing of the employee is specifically prohibited by law.

By Anas, November 14, 2012 at 12:54 pm

Oh betcha they are. And luklicy we are in need of bush doctors here. Who wouldn’t want to ride to work on a dogsled? Plus we got poutine. Which MD could resist that?

By Bowling, November 15, 2012 at 1:26 am

Come now, take a deep breath. Opposing ilelgal immigration does not automatically equate with hatred of ilelgal immigrants. One can certainly take the position that our immigration laws should be strictly enforced, while recognizing that most (not all!) of these immigrants are personally decent people trying to help their families out.But they should not break our laws to do so. Simple as that. Unless you know the hearts and attitudes of all the anti-immigration (really anti-ILLEGAL immigration) folks, you owe them the courtesy of not assuming bad intentions.

By Aya, November 16, 2012 at 5:19 am

You’re absolutely right. My piootisn doesn’t indicate otherwise, either. If you read the previous posts on the immigration issue in CT, you will see that I have repeatedly stated that I have no problem with cracking down on illegal immigrants. That’s the law and that’s the way it is.Some people view this as an attack on all immigrants and in some way, I can understand that too. Especially the part about Danbury banning volleyball outdoors, because it is an important part of the immigrant community.However, I do not endorse and quite frankly am repulsed by the rhetoric that the CT Citizens for Immigration Control engages in.

By silver price, December 7, 2012 at 12:11 am

My workers compensation claim was made in the State of: Alaska High again Sorry so many post, got a lot happening here right now… So, I work for a union employer, I am on a hour bank system. So if I have worked 5500 hours without layoff, then for sake of example, then I have 5500 hours in the bank… Thats not what I have exact but you get the point. So my benefits related to medical coverage once I’m off work is all based on that bank. So I ran out of disability a year ago, now 1.2 years in to my time off I’m losing my health coverage completely. I’m being forced on to Cobra by the employer. So, my question is this. I got hurt at work, that’s not disputed, I have had surgeries, and just had a Major surgery again 3 weeks ago due to the injury and neuro surgeons predict 6 more months off work. Cobra is $1100 dollars a month. There is no way I can do that. I have a Amputation, and have had re-constructive surgeries on my arms and both shoulders, so I have health issues, plus a prosthetic to keep serviced. Also, ongoing meds that cost around 600 a month. So I cant afford my health care, and my insurance is ending, and I feel none of this would be happening if I were not injured at work. Therefore it’s the fault of this injury that my insurance is about to cost 1100 a month. So shouldn’t work comp pay my cobra?

By gold account, December 9, 2012 at 12:25 am

By silver price, December 9, 2012 at 9:11 pm

By idebenone, December 16, 2012 at 3:07 am

The coverage doesn’t replace traditional health insurance but helps ensure that workers have a place to go for preventive care so they don’t end up in emergency rooms, said Joseph Villela, senior policy advocate with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.

By Idebenone, December 18, 2012 at 6:26 am

• Only .2% of businesses have over 50 employees and don’t already offer insurance to full-time workers. Providing these folks with insurance is the only “employer mandate” in ObamaCare.

By carnosine eye drops, December 21, 2012 at 9:48 pm

“National health care without tort reform?” The ENTIRE legal cost for health care, including insurance premiums, lawyer fees, court judgements, etc. – ALL OF IT is 1% of the health care budget. The GOP is not going to “save” health care by preventing people injured by doctors from seeking compensation. They are only interested in protecting the budgets of their insurance company friends. Tort reform is a substitute for health care reform. Think for yourself – have you ever heard of a state that passed tort reform having lower medical costs than other states? – NO, because the insurance companies don’t lower premiums to celebrate tort reform, they just pocket more money.

By piracetam, December 27, 2012 at 10:15 am

There could be some good news for injured workers presently on PA Workers Compensation. President Obama’s Health Care Plan will include coverage for people with pre-exsisting conditions. One might ask why this is important. Well, this could throw a “curve-ball” into negotiations for medical settlements or even “set-asides” for future medicare treatments for work related accidents. The proposed bill will include coverage for pre-exsisting conditions which will guarentee coverage (through government) for possible serious injuries that could have taken place at the work site. Since the government will cover this area what would be the need for “set-asides” with Medicare? How will future medical treatments be formulated for the injured workers if this health care bill passes both the US House and US Senate? There are a lot of unanswered questions and negotiations to take place among both Houses of Congress before this bill is passed but I see this potentially being a solid benefit to the seriously injured workers in PA. What do you think about the positive outcomes that could occur?

By Piracetam, December 31, 2012 at 4:11 am

By carnosine eye drops, January 2, 2013 at 4:54 pm

The Act exempts small businesses from the employer mandate to provide health insurance for employees, and employers are not subject to penalties if they employ 50 or fewer employees. Seasonal workers do not count towards the 50 employee threshold. And for those employers subject to the penalty, they are only responsible for providing health insurance for full-time employees.

By cataract eye drops, January 4, 2013 at 1:26 am

Some employees have reacted to this crisis by resorting to unethical, if not illegal means. As a workers’ compensation attorney, I have noticed an increase in the filing of questionable, if not outright fraudulent workers’ compensation claims. Employees now claim that medical conditions, which are personal in nature, were caused through their employment, either through a specific incident or through repetitive trauma/exposure. The employees seek to have these personal conditions paid for by the employer’s workers’ compensation insurance. In some cases, the employees cannot even identify a specific date of accident, and will argue that the condition occurred over time. In other cases, the employees will identify a date of accident and simply have no witnesses to corroborate that the incident occurred. Regardless, if the employee has a personal medical condition, but is unable to afford medical care, that employee now seems more likely to convince himself and others that the condition is employment related.