United we stand’

The power struggle between the folks over at OSHA and the insurance industry has reached a new level. OSHA’s Ergonomic Program Standard which took effect on Jan. 16 with an implementation date of Oct. 15 is casting an ominous shadow over the year, but insurers aren’t wasting time sitting around hoping it will go away. As the American Insurance Association, the Alliance of American Insurers, a group of big carriers, and many others file lawsuits against OSHA, it’s becoming clear that there are two things we need right now: a unified front and adequate research.

There is strength in numbers, as demonstrated by proven competitors such as AIG and Chubb banding together to stand up to the OSHA menace. The Independent Insurance Agents of America are the latest to jump into the fray, filing a lawsuit on Jan. 12 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, labeling the new rules “onerous.”

But if OSHA’s new standard is as bad as all that, why aren’t the big guns over at the National Association of Insurance Commissioners stepping up to fight as well? NAIC’s Workers’ Compensation Task Force recommended that NAIC not participate in the pending litigation-igniting some feelings of abandonment from the industry.

The task force found that “there clearly appear to be strong arguments on both sides of the issues relating to the new OSHA standard.” OSHA estimates the cost of the new program to be approximately $250 per job annually, adding up to an estimated $4.4 billion annually. But getting down to an independent agency level, the IIAA estimates cost for agency owners at more than $2,000 per employee to implement the new rule-pretty steep. However, if the cost of the new program will really be outweighed by a significant savings attributed to a reduction in injuries and job downtime, then the standard is definitely worth some continued research.

Even the recently released National Academy of Sciences report agrees that more research and evaluation are necessary. The report calls for “more comprehensive surveillance of work-related MSDs by obtaining from employers specific information about jobs, workplace illnesses, and the characteristics of workers performing certain jobs.”

But whether it was the right or wrong decision, the NAIC’s hesitation to back the other associations at this crucial time strikes me as an indication of how far we still have to go to become a united industry.

With a new President in office, the insurance industry needs to make a good first impression and present a unified, well-prepared front; whether the power struggle is with OSHA or with anyone else.

Topics Workers' Compensation