The reaction from an employers’ group to a suggested hike in California’s advisory workers’ compensation rates of nearly 7 percent was - surprisingly - cautiously optimistic.
The insurer and public members of the Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau’s Governing Committee voted unanimously on Wednesday to authorize WCIRB to submit a Jan. 1, 2014 Advisory Pure Premium Rate Filing to California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones.
The filing will propose advisory pure premium rates that average $2.70 per $100 of payroll, 6.9 percent higher than the industry average filed pure premium rate of $2.53 as of July 1.
The deterioration is actually as a result of adverse medical loss development on pre-2012 accident years coupled with sharply increasing indemnity claim frequency, the committee stated in a release.
The Workers’ Compensation Action Network, a suite that represents the interests of employers, expressed hope that reforms ushered in last year will take hole and keep rates from continuing to move upward.
Senate Bill 863 contained several cost-saving measures intended to elevate benefits for injured workers and reduce wasteful spending.
However, a WCAN spokesman said what the group finds most distressing about what he said was a 35 percent increase in premiums since 2009 is that the both the pricetag and frequency of claims now appear trending up again in 2013 after multiple flat years.
“It’s too early to tell whether the 2012 reforms should help blunt or reverse the rage,†Azevedo said. “The system is inside the means of absorbing substantial benefit increases under SB 863. Regulators are only partially through their efforts to implement a variety of process changes intended to make the system work more efficiently. These changes, however, were really intended to offset the benefit increase, as opposed to cut costs.â€
Azevedo noted there are also “significant front-end costs†for systems created by the law, equivalent to independent medical review and bill review processes, besides the potential for unanticipated costs, like the new physician fee schedule.
In its filing the committee stated that the indicated average pure premium rate doesn't reflect any provision for the impact of the Resource-Based Relative Value Scale (RBRVS), that's currently under consideration by the Division of Workers’ Compensation.
“The margin of error in getting the SB 863 reforms right may be very small, and we still won’t know their impact for months or years,†Azevedo said. “There’s also litigation and other attacks which might undermine what the legislature was looking to achieve. We’re cautiously optimistic, but employers continue to see for methods to make the system more fair and efficient for all parties.â€
The committee will meet on Oct. 23 to contemplate the impact of any adopted changes to the fee schedule and whether an amendment to WCIRB’s proposed Jan. 1, 2014 pure premium rates is appropriate.
The indicated average 2014 pure premium rate reflects recently received June 30 experience, based on a statement from the committee. This indication is higher than the indicated $2.62 per $100 of payroll, in keeping with March 31 experience, which was reviewed by the committee at its Aug. 7 meeting.
CDI will schedule a public hearing to give thought the filing and once the notice of proposed action and spot of public hearing is issued, and the WCIRB will post a replica in the Regulatory Filings section of its webiste.
