by Lindy Z. Kerr, Esq.

The Georgia legislature is in session and among the proposed bills is HB971 which seeks to amend the Georgia Workers’ Compensation Act. The bill has already passed the House vote by a large margin of 159-3 and it is expected to be adopted by the Senate. The bill includes amendments to the Act that would:

  1. Require the inclusion of “Hartman” language (language prorating the lump sum settlement over the course of the claimant’s life for use in SSDI) in a settlement agreement at the request of either party. Many claimants’ attorneys already request the inclusion of this language;
  2. Provide the employer and insurer with defenses against payment of a 20% late payment if benefits payable after an award are not paid within 20 days. The amendment provides a defense in the event the Board forgets to notify the employer/insurer a settlement agreement is approved. Penalties would not be owed if “nonpayment is excused by the board after a showing by the employer that due to conditions beyond the control of the employer the income benefits could not be paid within the period prescribed.” The act of filing of an appeal within 20 days remains another valid defense;
  3. Simplify the insurer’s responsibilities when producing production of modification calculation factors;
  4. Change guardianship guidelines; and
  5. Expand the definition of hearing loss to include loss of frequencies of up to 3,000 cycles per second as constituting hearing loss.

The two most widely anticipated changes were an amendment that would increase the maximum TTD rate and another that would clarify the scope of employer/insurer communications with medical treatment providers post-McRae. These changes were not included in the version of the bill that passed in the House. The proposed TTD amendment would have increased the weekly maximum TTD rate to $525. The proposed amendment to medical communication statute would have created a new provision that explicitly permitted employers, insurers, and servicing agents to “communicate orally, in writing, or electronically, directly with an employee’s medical provider without affirmative consent of the employee where the purpose of communication is to assess, plan, implement, coordinate, monitor, or evaluate options and healthcare services reasonably related to the condition for which such employee claims compensation.” However these amendments were dropped from the current version. We will update you on the status of this bill at the close of the legislative session, or sooner if the bill becomes law prior to that date.