47 Comments - Are Ya Kiddin' Me? - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:10 pm: No different than the R’s saying no revenue without “reforms”. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:10 pm: === Carrigan and he said he wasn’t nixing all talks, but that they had to be part of a formalized agreed bill process. That process is usually very time-consuming.=== Yep. It’s called process. Governors and legislators been doin’ it for years… up to now. - Annonin' - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:14 pm: Time consuming? Since the BigBrain has wasted the better part of two years and achieved zip, zero nada the Carrigan Path to Prosperity makes a ton of sense - Good to Know - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:24 pm: ====Yep. It’s called process. Governors and legislators been doin’ it for years… up to now.==== …with astounding success, right? Or is it the opposite of success? What do you call massive exodus of manufacturing jobs and 7th highest costs in the country? If stakeholders want to give input, fine. Don’t think everyone needs to agree. All that does it protect the status quo. Which, I think, is the opposite of the whole point here… - Just Me - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:25 pm: No surprise here. The current system is just fine for him and his members. Of course he’ll throw up road blocks to changing it. - out of touch - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:29 pm: –No surprise here. The current system is just fine for him and his members. Of course he’ll throw up road blocks to changing it— Negotiation is not a roadblock. It’s give and take, not being dictated by a billionaire demogogue. That’s how progress is achieved. If Rauner wants 60 and 30, he must negotiate to get there. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:30 pm: ===Don’t think everyone needs to agree. All that does it protect the status quo. Which, I think, is the opposite of the whole point here…=== Still need 60 and 30… That’s the point. If stakeholders help get 60 and 30… It’s not “with us or you’re 100% against us” to point out an agreed bill can make life easier for all. - Harvest76 - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:32 pm: =What do you call massive exodus of manufacturing jobs= A Red Herring. The US has lost some 4.5 million manufacturing jobs to other countries since NAFTA. This is not an Illinois problem. If fact, the US has been making the transition away from a manufacturing economy since the late 70s. The fact that conservatives still trumpet manufacturing as the saving grace of the state and US economy is a testament to their rigid adherence to moving anywhere but into the future. - Precinct Captain - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:33 pm: Good to Know - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:24 pm: Mike Madigan and the international economy he controls! - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:33 pm: (Nods a knowing nod to - out of touch -) - Just Me - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:33 pm: Out of Touch — I wasn’t suggesting that Rauner didn’t need to negotiate or compromise on his positions, but what I was saying is that it is no surprise that the people who benefit from the current system would want to try and delay changing the system as long as possible, and uncoupling the Workers Comp change from the budget is definitely a great strategy for them. - AC - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:35 pm: I’d like to see the good government groups get on board with this. - RNUG - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:37 pm: == That process is usually very time-consuming. == It’s also how things get done in a divided government. - Illannoyed - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:44 pm: So “he’s not interested” and therefore the process must accommodate his group, huh? Isn’t giving credence to an interest group yelling “nyet” on passing any reforms opposed by that group exactly what is wrong with Illinois government? Well, I hope that the GA can get permission from his interest group to change a law. - phocion - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:48 pm: Good to know who gets to call the shots in Illinois. I forget…What public office does Carrigan hold? - Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:48 pm: However you want to do it, just get it done. Do the =doable=. - Very fed up - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:49 pm: As long as Madigan and Rauner have cheerleaders such as this the standoff will continue. - AC - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:51 pm: ==As long as Madigan and Rauner have cheerleaders such as this the standoff will continue.== Forever? - Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:52 pm: That is, assuming Mr Carrigan is willing to reform the workers’ comp program. If he is not, then it is just obstructionism. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:52 pm: - phocion - Now you’re a victim to compromise? That’s fun, lol. - FKA - Yep. Do the doable. - RNUG - Would be nice to see some real governing within the given parameters of the rules of a working divided government. Now, those rules mean “100% with me or 100% against me”. Ugh. - JDuc - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:53 pm: It may continue for a looooonnnnggggg time… - chi - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:54 pm: =Well, I hope that the GA can get permission from his interest group to change a law.= The GA doesn’t need his interest group’s permission. The Gov needs the GA’s permission. Please someone tell the Gov this. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:56 pm: Disappointing. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 12:59 pm: - Louis G Atsaves - If the Governor can get 60 and 30, and a bill he likes enough to sign, then it’s not disappointing… … it’s the reason campaigns are hard and governing is difficult. - Georg Sande - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:07 pm: It is disappointing … but also clearly self-serving. Legislators will have to see beyond that if a deal is to be accomplished. - Johnny Pyle Driver - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:20 pm: OMG, people are motivated by selfish interests? Shocking. I know nobody here is in this just to see a property tax freeze or to see the income tax stay where it is. Everybody is just looking out for the well being of the abstract state duh - kimocat - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:20 pm: =mass exodus of manufacturing jobs == Really? How about you ask the Carrier and United Technologies guys next door in “right to work land” about losing their jobs to Mexico? Losing their union protections got them squat. - Triple fat - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:33 pm: Good to know… Think about this… Since Work Comp is soooo high, let’s do away with it completely. We can then allow employees to sue their employers in court. That would be most fair. After all work comp was established to favor the employer. Yes sir. The most fair way to treat an injured worker is to not set any limits on the amount of their claim. - Joe M - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:44 pm: I’d much rather the usual long process of bills and hearings and regular votes take place, rather than back-room deal bills rushed through at the last second. I get nervous about back-room deals. - Joe M - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:46 pm: Besides, with our Constitution’s single subject bill requirement, bills on Worker’s Compensation should not be tied in with a budget bill anyway. - Triple fat - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:47 pm: Here’s a novel thought… Manufacturers interested in lowering their work comp cost could start emphasizing worker safety over short term profits. - Demoralized - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:50 pm: I’m really getting tired of this “my way or nothing” attitude. We’ve dealt with this kind of nonsense for more than a year now. - Honeybear - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:53 pm: From yesterday, - But Madigan’s fiery speech last week to a massive union rally made it pretty clear that he was siding with the unions and against everyone else. - Just occurred to me. Is Madigan driving a wedge between Rauner and business in the same manner that Rauner is trying to drive a wedge between Labor and social services? - Cubs in '16 - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 1:55 pm: ===Here’s a novel thought… Manufacturers interested in lowering their work comp cost could start emphasizing worker safety over short term profits.=== Excellent point. - CrazyHorse - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 2:00 pm: Good to know… Think about this… Since Work Comp is soooo high, let’s do away with it completely. ==We can then allow employees to sue their employers in court. That would be most fair. After all work comp was established to favor the employer. Yes sir. The most fair way to treat an injured worker is to not set any limits on the amount of their claim.== Agreed 100%. - Anonymous - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 2:16 pm: ===Here’s a novel thought… Manufacturers interested in lowering their work comp cost could start emphasizing worker safety over short term profits.=== Here’s another novel thought: your thought only results in lower costs when the work comp system has a fair causation standard. So you’re all for that change in our system? - Fred - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 2:42 pm: If you want to understand why this is a hot button for employers, Google illinois workers compensation and look at all the attorney ads that pop up.”how much is your injury worth? Available 24/7″ I can’t prevent injuries that don’t happen at work. It should be a problem to solve, not a lottery ticket. - DuPage - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 3:11 pm: @1:55 ==Excellent point== Yes, they should emphasize safety. OSHA thinks that the WC insurance companies fight legitimate WC claims so hard to make the injured person give up and go on SS disability. This transfers the cost from an unsafe employer to taxpayers. OSHA says the only way to cut these costs is to prevent them by stronger OSHA enforcement. https://www.dol.gov/osha/report/20150304-inequality.pdf - Matt Belcher - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 3:16 pm: == Fred == Who gets the lottery ticket in this case? –Because the employer violated OSHA’s fall prevention regulations, the roofer sustained a traumatic brain injury and is permanently and totally disabled. His grand total lottery winnings? $466.67 per week for life, after being totally disabled due to a TBI. It is alternatively called the “Employers’ Limited Liability Act” for good reason. http://www.illinoiscourts.gov/opinions/workerscomp/2014/1130974wc.pdf - Norseman - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 3:34 pm: As others have said, if real negotiations had started last year, things would be a lot better. - My button is broke... - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 3:37 pm: 10 years ago when workers received an increase in work comp benefits, I doubt that legislation was a result of the agreed bill process. The work comp reform from 4 years ago was not a result of an agreed bill process. After two big bills are passed, it isn’t easy to go back to the agreed bill process. You can’t only use it when it benefits you… - Maximus - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 3:44 pm: Nobody is arguing to do away with Workers Compensation which is what some people are alluding to. Bringing Workers Compensation in line with other states will make Illinois competitive since the liability insurance will now have premiums that are reasonable. This is why so many small businesses will avoid Illinois due to the liability insurance costs. - Cubs in '16 - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 3:47 pm: ===OSHA thinks that the WC insurance companies fight legitimate WC claims so hard to make the injured person give up and go on SS disability.=== In my experience, OSHA is right. Many ins. companies employ the ’starve them out’ strategy. Many injured people do give up because the process is so frustrating and dehumanizing. Settling for far less than they’re entitled to is worth it to keep their dignity. The lucky ones are approved for SS disability. That process alone can take 2-3 years or more. I’ve seen WC cases drag out 5-6 years. It’s ludicrous. - Former State Employee - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 6:47 pm: How arrogant is it for Carrigan to admit he has the power to “nix” all discussions at will. - Triple fat - Tuesday, May 24, 16 @ 9:27 pm: By the way, I am an advocate of doing away with the whole workers comp system. If an injured worker has to go to the trouble of hiring an attorney to reach a settlement from an insurance company; if settling a claim already takes years… A court of law should make the decision… Not a profit motivated insurance company. - Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, May 25, 16 @ 1:39 am: @triple fat, the IWCC acts as a court of law, not insurance companies. The IWCC awards (or denies) compensation following trials and has its own appeal process. All settlements must also be approved by the IWCC, including cases where claimants have no lawyers. Try to keep up. - Triple fat - Wednesday, May 25, 16 @ 10:26 am: Louis, It is my understanding (and perhaps I’m mistaken) that most cases are resolved through a compromise settlement. Yes the settlement contract needs to be approved by the arbitrator - but who does the negotiating. Regardless of the quasi-judicial trappings, the whole process favors the employer already. Why are they trying to squeeze more out of the little guy? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.