attorney to set the ground rules and, at the very least, not be a mere specta- tor. Nowhere in the WC laws is a claimant required to consent to the insurer’s choice of VR counselor. Al- though the insurer and I are usually able to agree on which counselor will be retained, I have twice gone to hear- ings to avoid the involvement of the insurer’s “pet” counselor with whom it has an exclusive contract.
I rarely
forget when someone has intention- ally abused a client and I never give the person another chance. Now that the Commission has assumed full au- thority over the selection of providers, if the parties cannot agree, the Com- mission will happily appoint one. Any questions about the process can be ad- dressed to Fran Salbeck in the VR Division of the Workers’ Compensa- tion Commission.
It is important to be present during the
claimant’s first meeting with the VR counse- lor and, at least for a few minutes, during the vocational testing. Always hold the meeting
in your office or, if that’s not possible, use a location where the claimant will feel comfort- able. Take control of the meeting from the be- ginning as you make introductions and explain to your client why the counselor is there. I always make a point of differentiat- ing between the role of a nurse case manager (who legally owes nothing to the claimant and works wholly for the insurer) and a VR coun- selor (who must work for the benefit of the claimant). I also explain that (a) because the Insurer will save money on permanent dis- ability benefits in direct relationship to the quality of job the claimant finds and (b) the counselor will get more referrals from a happy adjuster, the counselor shares my client’s de- sire to find the best-paying employment available. To have both the counselor and my client happily nodding along with this explanation not only helps break the ice and give them a moment of mutual appreciation, it establishes who is in control.
After evaluating the claimant, the coun- selor will prepare a vocational plan for the parties to sign. Although each plan is sup-
posed to be individually crafted, they are usu- ally mere forms letters. Be careful to ensure that the agreement covers the possibility of services other than a simple job search pro- gram. For the past year, I have had the good for- tune of being MTLA’s representative on Maryland’s Joint Task Force for the Rehabili- tation of the Injured Worker. Through that group, I found that the single most powerful tool to unlocking the mysteries of VR is a small book— the Good Practice Manual for the Rehabilitation of the Injured Worker. Al- though the Manual itself is not technically an authoritative regulatory tome, since its contents were derived from VR training ma- terials and developed by Task Force representatives from the Plaintiff and Defense Bars, Insurance Claims Association, Private and Public Rehabilitation Providers and the Workers’ Compensation Commission, its provisions are universally respected. I recom- mend that all workers’ compensation attorneys obtain a copy of this resource.
Summer 2000
Trial Reporter
23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52