We at the Law Offices of Bradford & Barthel LLP understand that the busy holiday season can make it quite difficult to remember what new laws the California Legislature passed in 2015. That’s why we’ve decided to concisely summarize the latest legislative developments for your reading pleasure as you ring in the New Year with your family and friends.
AB 1124: The Formulary
The most important bill signed into law during the 2015 legislative session mandated a new prescription formulary by July 1, 2017. We’ve summarized the impact of this bill in our most recent blog post, which is available at this link.
But if you’re in a hurry to get to your 2016 calendar, here are the basics you need to know:
- It will likely list drugs okay to prescribe without meeting special criteria, such as preauthorization. A committee will help determine what those drugs are.
- We should have a better idea of what those drugs are after the DWC announces the proposed regulations in mid-to-late 2016.
- It will encourage generic drugs, which are cheaper.
- Compound pharmacies will likely adapt their drug recipes to include drugs that do not require special criteria.
- It should reduce the amount of prescription/pharmacy lien disputes and make those cases easier to settle.
- Current projections show payers will save at least $100 million a year thanks to the formulary.
Read the bill here.
SB 542: MPNs and Continuity of Care Provisions
Senate Bill 542 is a bit of a housekeeping bill that took care of some messy statutory language and helped give the DWC some needed authority to make its home health care fee schedule. However, a closer look reveals that carriers and administrators will want to be up-to-speed on their MPN’s continuity of care provisions. These provisions usually arise in cases where a doctor was terminated from a MPN, but the applicant still wants to continue treatment with that doctor.
For practitioners, the most notable things about this bill are that:
- It requires MPNs to post continuity of care policies online. In some cases, those policies will allow doctors who are removed from the MPN to finish their treatment plans. (See the LC 4616.2 portion of the bill.)
- It requires MPNs to post contact information on their website for medical access assistants. This should make it easier to contact the MPN with questions.
SB 542 also changed statutory language in LC 4616.4 to clarify the differences between:
- Utilization review “second opinions” provided Medical Provider Networks.
- Reviews performed by Independent Medical Review providers (Maximus).
If that sounds confusing – that’s because it is. The statutory language confused people, and raised questions about the vague usage of the word “review”.
The other thing this bill did is it gave the DWC the authority to rely on the home health care fee schedule used by the federal Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs and Medi-Cal. That may seem rather obvious in light of the fact that the DWC has already released proposed home health care fee schedule regulations that is reliant upon both of these programs.
Read the bill here.
AB 202: Cheerleaders are Employees too
This bill required sports teams to classify cheerleaders as employees. This means that cheerleaders are now eligible for workers’ compensation benefits. Because this is a rather short synopsis, here’s a bit of cheerleader trivia I gleaned from the Internet:
As of 2015, seven teams do not have cheerleading squads: Buffalo Bills, Chicago Bears, Cleveland Browns, Detroit Lions, Green Bay Packers, New York Giants, and the Pittsburgh Steelers. The February 2011 meeting of the Packers and Steelers at Super Bowl XLV was the first time a Super Bowl featured no cheerleaders. — Source: Wikipedia
Why is this notable? Well, it means all of California’s professional football teams have cheerleaders. And if the St. Louis Rams move to California, it would be logical to assume they will bring their cheerleaders with them.
Read the bill here.
AB 621: Keep on Truckin’
AB 621 allows drayage companies to enter into wage and hour settlements with allegedly misclassified truckers. In return, the state will give these drayage companies a pass on statutory or civil penalties, thus creating an extra incentive for these companies to settle with their truckers.
If you are like me, you pretend to know what the word “drayage” means and Google it later. To save you a few clicks, a drayage truck is the kind of truck that can carry a shipping container. These are the trucks that drive to the huge container ships at the huge ports, drop a huge shipping container on their trailer, and drive it to its next huge location.
Read the bill here.
AB 438: Translation Bill
This bill requires the DWC and the DIR to translate state forms into Spanish. It also requires the DWC and DIR to translate numerous forms into Chinese, Korean, Tagalog, and Vietnamese by Jan. 1, 2018, including:
- Fact sheets
- SJDB forms
- RTW program forms
- Claim forms
Read the bill here.
AB 623: Prevents Two Major Funds from Discriminating Against Immigrants
Assembly Bill 623 would prevent the Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund or the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund from refusing to give immigrants benefits based on citizenship or immigration status.
Read the bill here.
AB 822: CIGA clarifications
This bill states that a claim covered by an insolvent insurer can be submitted to CIGA, even if the claim does not have a final order. For non-workers’ compensation claims, it also creates a one year statute of limitations to appeal CIGA’s denial of a claim.
Read the bill here.
Have a Happy New Year
As our friends at Looney Tunes would say, “That’s all, folks!” We’ll have more legislative updates on the 2016 legislative session on our website in the coming months.
Bradford & Barthel wishes you and yours a safe and happy holiday season. We look forward to seeing you in 2016!
John P. Kamin is a workers’ compensation defense attorney at Bradford & Barthel’s Woodland Hills location. Mr. Kamin previously worked as a journalist, where he reported on legislative developments in workers’ compensation law across all 50 states. Feel free to contact John at jkamin@bradfordbarthel.com or at (818) 654-0411.
Viewing this website does not form an attorney/client relationship between you and Bradford & Barthel, LLP or any of its attorneys. This website is for informational purposes only and does not contain legal advice. Please do not act or refrain from acting based on anything you read on this site. This document is not a substitute for legal advice and may not address every factual scenario. If you have a legal question, we encourage you to contact your favorite Bradford & Barthel, LLP attorney to discuss the legal issues applicable to your unique case. No website is entirely secure, so please be cautious with information provided through the contact form or email. Do not assume confidentiality exists in anything you send through this website or email, until an attorney/client relationship is formed.