'TD' Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 EXAMPLE: let's say you work at minimum wage in the fast food industry for 3 or 4 years as a youth. as an adult you decide to go into a trade as a union pipe fitter. you pass your tests and work as an apprentice for 2 years until you get certified as a pipe fitter. you work as a full fledged union fitter for 1 year and are injured on the job and become incapacitated. I wish it was for 2 years. 5 years of apprenticeship for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 I wish it was for 2 years. 5 years of apprenticeship for me. a fitter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 All those job changes don't mean anything or change the point I was making. Those professions all work towards about the same age range (i.e. retirement age). You're confusing "number of jobs" with "type of jobs". have you ever done ANY research of even layman's job-life statistics in multiple fields? or do you just base your opinion on what someone else tells you or writes in a blog (in this case the governor of illinois or the mccaskey family)? you obviously don't know anything at all about how workman's comp works for professional athletes and just want to rant. i even wonder if you know anything about workman's comp for anyone. i am certainly no expert and do not profess to know the in's and out's but before i would want to change a freaking law or support the change of a law that effects other human beings lives i would want to at LEAST understand it. it just sounds like salary envy to me rather than logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 have you ever done ANY research of even layman's job-life statistics in multiple fields? or do you just base your opinion on what someone else tells you or writes in a blog (in this case the governor of illinois or the mccaskey family)? you obviously don't know anything at all about how workman's comp works for professional athletes and just want to rant. i even wonder if you know anything about workman's comp for anyone. i am certainly no expert and do not profess to know the in's and out's but before i would want to change a freaking law or support the change of a law that effects other human beings lives i would want to at LEAST understand it. it just sounds like salary envy to me rather than logic. What do layman's Workers Comp rules have to do with a change in the law regarding professional athletes? The law will still pay athletes permanent disability, should they need it, as equally as it would to you or I. Here's the text of SB12: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/100/SB/PDF/10000SB0012lv.pdf 16 For accidental injuries involving professional athletes 17 that occur on or after the effective date of this amendatory 18 Act of the 100th General Assembly, an award for wage 19 differential under this subsection shall be effective for the 20 expected remaining duration of the employee's professional 21 sports athletic career. As used in this paragraph (d)1, 22 "professional athlete" means an individual whose employer is a 23 professional athletic team that is based in Illinois, 24 including, but not limited to, any professional baseball, 25 basketball, football, soccer, or hockey team based in Illinois 26 and who derives the majority of his or her income from playing SB0012 - 34 - LRB100 06318 KTG 16356 b 1 athletics for the professional athletic team. The expected 2 remaining duration of an employee's professional sports 3 athletic career shall continue until the employee reaches the 4 ageof35orforaperiodof5yearsfromthedateofthe 5 injury, whichever is later, unless the employer or employee is 6 able to successfully prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, 7 that the expected remaining duration of such employee's 8 professional sports athletic career has a shorter or longer 9 duration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 have you ever done ANY research of even layman's job-life statistics in multiple fields? or do you just base your opinion on what someone else tells you or writes in a blog (in this case the governor of illinois or the mccaskey family)? you obviously don't know anything at all about how workman's comp works for professional athletes and just want to rant. i even wonder if you know anything about workman's comp for anyone. i am certainly no expert and do not profess to know the in's and out's but before i would want to change a freaking law or support the change of a law that effects other human beings lives i would want to at LEAST understand it. it just sounds like salary envy to me rather than logic. You're projecting too much. What's so difficult to understand? http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/break...0203-story.html The article makes it pretty clear. Also, it's not salary envy in the least. They make millions for a reason. But they shouldn't continue to make millions via workers comp well after their career is over. I'm in this for the BEARS. If it hurts the team, I'm generally opposed as long as it's not something morally reprehensible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 What do layman's Workers Comp rules have to do with a change in the law regarding professional athletes? The law will still pay athletes permanent disability, should they need it, as equally as it would to you or I. Here's the text of SB12: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/100/SB/PDF/10000SB0012lv.pdf 16 For accidental injuries involving professional athletes 17 that occur on or after the effective date of this amendatory 18 Act of the 100th General Assembly, an award for wage 19 differential under this subsection shall be effective for the 20 expected remaining duration of the employee's professional 21 sports athletic career. As used in this paragraph (d)1, 22 "professional athlete" means an individual whose employer is a 23 professional athletic team that is based in Illinois, 24 including, but not limited to, any professional baseball, 25 basketball, football, soccer, or hockey team based in Illinois 26 and who derives the majority of his or her income from playing SB0012 - 34 - LRB100 06318 KTG 16356 b 1 athletics for the professional athletic team. The expected 2 remaining duration of an employee's professional sports 3 athletic career shall continue until the employee reaches the 4 ageof35orforaperiodof5yearsfromthedateofthe 5 injury, whichever is later, unless the employer or employee is 6 able to successfully prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, 7 that the expected remaining duration of such employee's 8 professional sports athletic career has a shorter or longer 9 duration. So a rookie has career ending injury in Week 1 at 22 yrs old and is paid worker's comp until he is 35; a 33 yr old journeyman gets hurt and is paid until he is 38. This makes too much sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 So a rookie has career ending injury in Week 1 at 22 yrs old and is paid worker's comp until he is 35; a 33 yr old journeyman gets hurt and is paid until he is 38. This makes too much sense. Not to mention the fact that the greater percentage of rookies don't play until 35. So that payout, depending on percentage, would be better than what they had received just regularly playing the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 Not to mention the fact that the greater percentage of rookies don't play until 35. So that payout, depending on percentage, would be better than what they had received just regularly playing the game. So who, now, doesn't want their kid to play football? Wow, I wish I had that option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 What do layman's Workers Comp rules have to do with a change in the law regarding professional athletes? The law will still pay athletes permanent disability, should they need it, as equally as it would to you or I. Here's the text of SB12: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/100/SB/PDF/10000SB0012lv.pdf 16 For accidental injuries involving professional athletes 17 that occur on or after the effective date of this amendatory 18 Act of the 100th General Assembly, an award for wage 19 differential under this subsection shall be effective for the 20 expected remaining duration of the employee's professional 21 sports athletic career. As used in this paragraph (d)1, 22 "professional athlete" means an individual whose employer is a 23 professional athletic team that is based in Illinois, 24 including, but not limited to, any professional baseball, 25 basketball, football, soccer, or hockey team based in Illinois 26 and who derives the majority of his or her income from playing SB0012 - 34 - LRB100 06318 KTG 16356 b 1 athletics for the professional athletic team. The expected 2 remaining duration of an employee's professional sports 3 athletic career shall continue until the employee reaches the 4 ageof35orforaperiodof5yearsfromthedateofthe 5 injury, whichever is later, unless the employer or employee is 6 able to successfully prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, 7 that the expected remaining duration of such employee's 8 professional sports athletic career has a shorter or longer 9 duration. i'm not even going to pretend i understand the complexity of these laws. there are so many nuances and exceptions and quite frankly lawyer BS that it would take a month talking to a lawyer and advocates in the state and federal capacity. you obviously must understand this otherwise why post it? explain it. how does it differ with this new bill compared to the old? how will this impact the the athlete? show me current examples of professional athletes collecting these benefits. >>any single one would be helpful. what are their average salaries, how are the payments allotted, what is the duration of workers comp per individual, what is the actual percentage paid and how is it determined and by who? what is the severity of the injury? are all medical expenses paid? by whom and for how long? for partial disability? permanent disability? what references? HOW MANY of these claims are in effect? how long have former employees of these franchise owners insurance companies been paying benefits? *IMPORTANT: how is workman's comp or disability payments, IF ANY, paid after the player reaches the age of 35 and at what base salary rate? who PAYS it? if you do know the answers post them in layman's terms for discussion. if your answers to all of these questions are unknown, how can you support something you know nothing about that could effect the lives of another human being and his/her families for life? here is what i understand and/or assume: 1. state law requires every employer to carry workman's comp INSURANCE. this means the employer pays premiums for this to a private insurance group. the payments for actual workers comp do NOT come directly out of the employers coffers in a weekly or annual payment. the costs to owners are from premiums paid to insurance companies. 2. every owner of every franchise allots this cost paid in insurance premiums as operating business expenses from day one. it is FACTORED into their profit/loss margin. the ONLY difference if this law is changed is the cost of the premiums would now be less because their obligation is deferred to someone ELSE besides them. instilling a higher profit margin for owners *at the state and federal tax payers expense. this ALSO benefits the insurance company providing the coverage premiums. now they are limited for how long their bottom line payout to the insured is actually PAID out. more profits for them, again, at the expense of the average tax payer. this law is the poster boy for corporate welfare and GREED!! 3. *if the law changes and 35 is the cutoff how is it determined what the athlete should be paid IF AT ALL after this allotment??? do the benefits just disappear? if not what salary model is it based on? if the athlete has a college degree how in the hell could it be used to determine his future earnings if he has never even worked in the field of his degree because he was drafted out of college? does it revert to some minimum salary he worked at before college? where is the build up of equity for this determination of how much 'workers comp' he should receive if the ONLY significant amount of earnings were as a professional athlete? he could literally be paid the disability comp wages of a person with no reported income at all and could virtually be getting poverty level benefits!!! once this age restriction takes effect, where does the money come from to pay him for his disability? i will tell you.... it comes out of every taxpayer in the united states pocket. he/she would be subject to social security disability benefits or some other form of state or federal assistance. 4. here is another twist to your GREAT law... many times a player is 'bought out' that becomes injured. in other words he is paid a lump sum in lieu of workers comp and is terminated from the team and or nfl. these players, many of them young, low round draft picks or walk-on's (although not all if the injury is significant) that would have incurred an injury whether in a permanent nature or temporarily, would now get virtually a pittance in these settlements. the cost factor would now have a LIMIT on the years that could be paid out in workers comp and the franchise can then low ball the offer. great huh? at least if you are an owner. but then that's GREAT for the bears 'franchise' as a whole if that is your only concern. happy richer billionaires are always a good thing for the fan. what effect does this have for players in free agency or walk-on's etc.? if it's a close choice between chicago and another team that does have protection for the players health i go to the place where the owners hopefully care about me and my health as a human being rather than pinch pennies to buy another rolls royce. sayanara chicago. finally you stated: "What do layman's Workers Comp rules have to do with a change in the law regarding professional athletes?" how else are you going to determine how much and if you are going to pay the pro athletes? where is the touchstone for that once they reach 35? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 i'm not even going to pretend i understand the complexity of these laws. there are so many nuances and exceptions and quite frankly lawyer BS that it would take a month talking to a lawyer and advocates in the state and federal capacity. you obviously must understand this otherwise why post it? explain it. how does it differ with this new bill compared to the old? how will this impact the the athlete? show me current examples of professional athletes collecting these benefits. >>any single one would be helpful. what are their average salaries, how are the payments allotted, what is the duration of workers comp per individual, what is the actual percentage paid and how is it determined and by who? what is the severity of the injury? are all medical expenses paid? by whom and for how long? for partial disability? permanent disability? what references? HOW MANY of these claims are in effect? how long have former employees of these franchise owners insurance companies been paying benefits? *IMPORTANT: how is workman's comp or disability payments, IF ANY, paid after the player reaches the age of 35 and at what base salary rate? who PAYS it? if you do know the answers post them in layman's terms for discussion. if your answers to all of these questions are unknown, how can you support something you know nothing about that could effect the lives of another human being and his/her families for life? here is what i understand and/or assume: 1. state law requires every employer to carry workman's comp INSURANCE. this means the employer pays premiums for this to a private insurance group. the payments for actual workers comp do NOT come directly out of the employers coffers in a weekly or annual payment. the costs to owners are from premiums paid to insurance companies. 2. every owner of every franchise allots this cost paid in insurance premiums as operating business expenses from day one. it is FACTORED into their profit/loss margin. the ONLY difference if this law is changed is the cost of the premiums would now be less because their obligation is deferred to someone ELSE besides them. instilling a higher profit margin for owners *at the state and federal tax payers expense. this ALSO benefits the insurance company providing the coverage premiums. now they are limited for how long their bottom line payout to the insured is actually PAID out. more profits for them, again, at the expense of the average tax payer. this law is the poster boy for corporate welfare and GREED!! 3. *if the law changes and 35 is the cutoff how is it determined what the athlete should be paid IF AT ALL after this allotment??? do the benefits just disappear? if not what salary model is it based on? if the athlete has a college degree how in the hell could it be used to determine his future earnings if he has never even worked in the field of his degree because he was drafted out of college? does it revert to some minimum salary he worked at before college? where is the build up of equity for this determination of how much 'workers comp' he should receive if the ONLY significant amount of earnings were as a professional athlete? he could literally be paid the disability comp wages of a person with no reported income at all and could virtually be getting poverty level benefits!!! once this age restriction takes effect, where does the money come from to pay him for his disability? i will tell you.... it comes out of every taxpayer in the united states pocket. he/she would be subject to social security disability benefits or some other form of state or federal assistance. 4. here is another twist to your GREAT law... many times a player is 'bought out' that becomes injured. in other words he is paid a lump sum in lieu of workers comp and is terminated from the team and or nfl. these players, many of them young, low round draft picks or walk-on's (although not all if the injury is significant) that would have incurred an injury whether in a permanent nature or temporarily, would now get virtually a pittance in these settlements. the cost factor would now have a LIMIT on the years that could be paid out in workers comp and the franchise can then low ball the offer. great huh? at least if you are an owner. but then that's GREAT for the bears 'franchise' as a whole if that is your only concern. happy richer billionaires are always a good thing for the fan. what effect does this have for players in free agency or walk-on's etc.? if it's a close choice between chicago and another team that does have protection for the players health i go to the place where the owners hopefully care about me and my health as a human being rather than pinch pennies to buy another rolls royce. sayanara chicago. finally you stated: "What do layman's Workers Comp rules have to do with a change in the law regarding professional athletes?" how else are you going to determine how much and if you are going to pay the pro athletes? where is the touchstone for that once they reach 35? I'm not a lawyer, and I don't have time to read, decipher, or breakdown a 136 page document for you. If you're inclined (you're obviously not), however, just about everything you're asking for is probably in the link AZ provided. Regarding the bolded/underlined section, if you admit to not knowing about it and being confused about it, why are you so adamantly defending it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 I'm not a lawyer, and I don't have time to read, decipher, or breakdown a 136 page document for you. If you're inclined (you're obviously not), however, just about everything you're asking for is probably in the link AZ provided. so what you are saying is you want to implement a new law that you know nothing about that effects OTHER peoples lives (not yours). correct? no need for the state and franchise owners to show the detailed cause and effects in a public forum? just what 'sounds' right to you in a one paragraph byline by someone you may never have heard of before who gives nothing in detail or an informative synopsis to base an educated decision on? Regarding the bolded/underlined section, if you admit to not knowing about it and being confused about it, why are you so adamantly defending it? hmmm let's see... the system in place has been in effect what? 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, 40 years, longer? it has protected injured workers and their families without much complaint that has surfaced to my knowledge. have these lawmakers, billionaires and lobbyists explain it in great detail why it's a better system than the one in effect and maybe i will change my mind. you obviously must not ever question ANY laws that are passed or rescinded and assume 'they' (whoever 'they' are) are just doing it for the good of all to make our lives better when in reality it usually just makes them richer at our expense. the 1%er's love guys like you. win me over to your side. what happens after age 35 and WHO PAYS FOR IT?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 i'm not even going to pretend i understand the complexity of these laws. there are so many nuances and exceptions and quite frankly lawyer BS that it would take a month talking to a lawyer and advocates in the state and federal capacity. you obviously must understand this otherwise why post it? explain it. how does it differ with this new bill compared to the old? how will this impact the the athlete? show me current examples of professional athletes collecting these benefits. >>any single one would be helpful. what are their average salaries, how are the payments allotted, what is the duration of workers comp per individual, what is the actual percentage paid and how is it determined and by who? what is the severity of the injury? are all medical expenses paid? by whom and for how long? for partial disability? permanent disability? what references? HOW MANY of these claims are in effect? how long have former employees of these franchise owners insurance companies been paying benefits? *IMPORTANT: how is workman's comp or disability payments, IF ANY, paid after the player reaches the age of 35 and at what base salary rate? who PAYS it? if you do know the answers post them in layman's terms for discussion. if your answers to all of these questions are unknown, how can you support something you know nothing about that could effect the lives of another human being and his/her families for life? here is what i understand and/or assume: 1. state law requires every employer to carry workman's comp INSURANCE. this means the employer pays premiums for this to a private insurance group. the payments for actual workers comp do NOT come directly out of the employers coffers in a weekly or annual payment. the costs to owners are from premiums paid to insurance companies. 2. every owner of every franchise allots this cost paid in insurance premiums as operating business expenses from day one. it is FACTORED into their profit/loss margin. the ONLY difference if this law is changed is the cost of the premiums would now be less because their obligation is deferred to someone ELSE besides them. instilling a higher profit margin for owners *at the state and federal tax payers expense. this ALSO benefits the insurance company providing the coverage premiums. now they are limited for how long their bottom line payout to the insured is actually PAID out. more profits for them, again, at the expense of the average tax payer. this law is the poster boy for corporate welfare and GREED!! 3. *if the law changes and 35 is the cutoff how is it determined what the athlete should be paid IF AT ALL after this allotment??? do the benefits just disappear? if not what salary model is it based on? if the athlete has a college degree how in the hell could it be used to determine his future earnings if he has never even worked in the field of his degree because he was drafted out of college? does it revert to some minimum salary he worked at before college? where is the build up of equity for this determination of how much 'workers comp' he should receive if the ONLY significant amount of earnings were as a professional athlete? he could literally be paid the disability comp wages of a person with no reported income at all and could virtually be getting poverty level benefits!!! once this age restriction takes effect, where does the money come from to pay him for his disability? i will tell you.... it comes out of every taxpayer in the united states pocket. he/she would be subject to social security disability benefits or some other form of state or federal assistance. 4. here is another twist to your GREAT law... many times a player is 'bought out' that becomes injured. in other words he is paid a lump sum in lieu of workers comp and is terminated from the team and or nfl. these players, many of them young, low round draft picks or walk-on's (although not all if the injury is significant) that would have incurred an injury whether in a permanent nature or temporarily, would now get virtually a pittance in these settlements. the cost factor would now have a LIMIT on the years that could be paid out in workers comp and the franchise can then low ball the offer. great huh? at least if you are an owner. but then that's GREAT for the bears 'franchise' as a whole if that is your only concern. happy richer billionaires are always a good thing for the fan. what effect does this have for players in free agency or walk-on's etc.? if it's a close choice between chicago and another team that does have protection for the players health i go to the place where the owners hopefully care about me and my health as a human being rather than pinch pennies to buy another rolls royce. sayanara chicago. finally you stated: "What do layman's Workers Comp rules have to do with a change in the law regarding professional athletes?" how else are you going to determine how much and if you are going to pay the pro athletes? where is the touchstone for that once they reach 35? Sadly I have a full time job and a family so I'm not going to research case law on Workman Comp as it relates to NFL player claims. Every single case is different so expecting some standard answer as to WC benefits paid, number of years, etc. is not realistic. Some things to know: Much of what is paid in disability claims has long been established by the courts. Lose a finger at work and you'll get whatever the going rate is ($10k maybe $20k now). Lose an eye and the payment you will get is also somewhat standardized. In general those things don't stop you from working. If you become permanently disabled in a way that prevents you from working (i.e. going blind) you will get workmans' comp (WC) checks the rest of your life. What is being debated is how much should be in the check. You won't get full pay when on disability. If I remember it correctly somewhere in the articles it said generally payments would be 2/3 of your paycheck. Let's just use that number. Now there's a middle ground where you are disabled enough that you can no longer work the same job (NFL RB) but you can hold other jobs like UPS delivery driver. Say you were a UPS delivery driver ($75k/yr) and lost both legs and now you can only work at a lower paying office job at UPS ($40k/yr). Illinois law says UPS must pay you some of that salary differential as part of the workers comp. You won't get full pay but maybe 2/3 of the difference. Difference is 75k - 40k = $35k. Per the law you will receive WC differential pay of 2/3 of $35k = $25k annually. On top of your new $40k salary you will receive WC $25k for a total benefit of $65k. Current Law: For an NFL player who can't play RB anymore the wage differential from say $10mil/yr to $40k/yr is about $10mil/yr. The Bears will pay that player $6.6mil/yr until he's 67 years old. New Law: Injured player gets $6.6mil/yr until he's 35yr old, after which he'll get $25k/yr just like you or I would. To answer questions 1) the WC check an NFL player would get after the age of 35 would be similar to what any other person would get. If the player graduated as a nuclear engineer and could no longer do that work then their WC check might be higher than the football player who graduated with a leisure studies degree (as many players did when I was in college). 2) The WC check and NFL player gets up to age 35 will include about 2/3 of his projected NFL salary. Keeping it simple, if he were making $10mil/yr then he'll get $6.6mil/yr until age 35. 3) WC checks are paid by companies. Small businesses will likely pay premiums to an insurance company so they can spread the risk (tough to handle a big payment when you have 5 employees). I'm not sure about this, but I think for small companies some states also setup a fund they can pay into. From my experience large companies are almost always self-insured and pay claims directly off their bottom line. It's cheaper. It is the same with health insurance. They will likely pay a company to manage their WC claims just like they pay a health insurer to manage their health care claims. Blue Cross or Aetna never pay my medical bills, my company does, they just write the checks with the company name on it. 4) Regarding premiums, if you are self -insured as the NFL teams surely are then there are none. You just pay out claims. No claims equals more profit so they have incentive to keep players safe. 5) Even self-insured businesses could set aside or allocate money for claims even if there are none. The money just goes into an account they don't touch except for future claims. It helps to keep the WC payments stable between good years and bad years. 6) A company with lower WC claims and higher profits is actually good for the state and tax payers. Many people cry about the fact the NFL doesn't pay taxes but that's because teams pay the taxes themselves as their own profit loss center. If the Bears make more profit then they pay more taxes to the State of Illinois. Most citizens will think that's a good thing. 7) Injury settlements, which you seem to think are bad for players, are actually largely standardized based on WC case history just like injuries for any of us losing a finger. It's fairly settled case law and that is why players and their lawyers negotiate it a bit but quickly settle. You can waste a lot of money paying lawyers to sue but probably won't get a dime more, might get less, and then have to pay that lawyer from your winnings. Unless your state is running it's own insurance company for small businesses, which I'm not sure of, then there is no tax payer money involved in WC regardless how long the claims last. Even then the states aren't that stupid, if there is a bad year and they need more money they will raise premiums. If a business goes bankrupt then certainly there will no longer be a WC claim paid and the individual could then fall back on disability paid by taxpayers. Another business will never pick up someone else's WC claim. Therefore taxpayers have an incentive to help businesses like the Bears stay in business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 Sadly I have a full time job and a family so I'm not going to research case law on Workman Comp as it relates to NFL player claims. Every single case is different so expecting some standard answer as to WC benefits paid, number of years, etc. is not realistic. Some things to know: Much of what is paid in disability claims has long been established by the courts. Lose a finger at work and you'll get whatever the going rate is ($10k maybe $20k now). Lose an eye and the payment you will get is also somewhat standardized. In general those things don't stop you from working. If you become permanently disabled in a way that prevents you from working (i.e. going blind) you will get workmans' comp (WC) checks the rest of your life. What is being debated is how much should be in the check. You won't get full pay when on disability. If I remember it correctly somewhere in the articles it said generally payments would be 2/3 of your paycheck. Let's just use that number. Now there's a middle ground where you are disabled enough that you can no longer work the same job (NFL RB) but you can hold other jobs like UPS delivery driver. Say you were a UPS delivery driver ($75k/yr) and lost both legs and now you can only work at a lower paying office job at UPS ($40k/yr). Illinois law says UPS must pay you some of that salary differential as part of the workers comp. You won't get full pay but maybe 2/3 of the difference. Difference is 75k - 40k = $35k. Per the law you will receive WC differential pay of 2/3 of $35k = $25k annually. On top of your new $40k salary you will receive WC $25k for a total benefit of $65k. Current Law: For an NFL player who can't play RB anymore the wage differential from say $10mil/yr to $40k/yr is about $10mil/yr. The Bears will pay that player $6.6mil/yr until he's 67 years old. New Law: Injured player gets $6.6mil/yr until he's 35yr old, after which he'll get $25k/yr just like you or I would. To answer questions 1) the WC check an NFL player would get after the age of 35 would be similar to what any other person would get. If the player graduated as a nuclear engineer and could no longer do that work then their WC check might be higher than the football player who graduated with a leisure studies degree (as many players did when I was in college). 2) The WC check and NFL player gets up to age 35 will include about 2/3 of his projected NFL salary. Keeping it simple, if he were making $10mil/yr then he'll get $6.6mil/yr until age 35. 3) WC checks are paid by companies. Small businesses will likely pay premiums to an insurance company so they can spread the risk (tough to handle a big payment when you have 5 employees). I'm not sure about this, but I think for small companies some states also setup a fund they can pay into. From my experience large companies are almost always self-insured and pay claims directly off their bottom line. It's cheaper. It is the same with health insurance. They will likely pay a company to manage their WC claims just like they pay a health insurer to manage their health care claims. Blue Cross or Aetna never pay my medical bills, my company does, they just write the checks with the company name on it. 4) Regarding premiums, if you are self -insured as the NFL teams surely are then there are none. You just pay out claims. No claims equals more profit so they have incentive to keep players safe. 5) Even self-insured businesses could set aside or allocate money for claims even if there are none. The money just goes into an account they don't touch except for future claims. It helps to keep the WC payments stable between good years and bad years. 6) A company with lower WC claims and higher profits is actually good for the state and tax payers. Many people cry about the fact the NFL doesn't pay taxes but that's because teams pay the taxes themselves as their own profit loss center. If the Bears make more profit then they pay more taxes to the State of Illinois. Most citizens will think that's a good thing. 7) Injury settlements, which you seem to think are bad for players, are actually largely standardized based on WC case history just like injuries for any of us losing a finger. It's fairly settled case law and that is why players and their lawyers negotiate it a bit but quickly settle. You can waste a lot of money paying lawyers to sue but probably won't get a dime more, might get less, and then have to pay that lawyer from your winnings. Unless your state is running it's own insurance company for small businesses, which I'm not sure of, then there is no tax payer money involved in WC regardless how long the claims last. Even then the states aren't that stupid, if there is a bad year and they need more money they will raise premiums. If a business goes bankrupt then certainly there will no longer be a WC claim paid and the individual could then fall back on disability paid by taxpayers. Another business will never pick up someone else's WC claim. Therefore taxpayers have an incentive to help businesses like the Bears stay in business. very informative. thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'TD' Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 a fitter? Yea, local 577 out of ohio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 Yea, local 577 out of ohio both brother in-laws and a nephew are fitters working out of eastern iowa (one is retired now). not sure what their local is. just thought if you were in the area might know them. i'm a former UTU member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'TD' Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 both brother in-laws and a nephew are fitters working out of eastern iowa (one is retired now). not sure what their local is. just thought if you were in the area might know them. i'm a former UTU member. May run into them eventually, our local does a lot of travelling due to loss of factories and such around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.