The Cordova daily times., 1921-01-22
FEW COMMENT ON PROPOSED
 INSURANCE ACT

Despite the fact that copies of the | proposed workmen's compensation act for Alaska have been mailed out to all | parts of the territory with requests for comment, up to the present time, not word either of condemnation or approval has been received from any Alaska source, according to a state- ment made by Gov. Thomas Riggs Copies of the proposed law were sent | out under instructions contained in a | resolution adopted at the last session | of the territorial legislature for the l purpose of obtaining the sentiment of Alaska workmen and employees by | submitting such comments as should | be made to the coming legislature.
 Several requests have been re- ceived at the governors office for copies of the proposed bill from per sons and corporations outside of Alas ka. An analysis and criticism of the plan embodied in it have been made | by the workmen's compensation pub licity, of New York City, which sug- gests that system modelled after the Virginia compensation act would be more satisfactory both to employees and employers.
 The bureau also states the com pensation law should be fair to both the employe and the employer" The measure under consideration it is claimed, has been adopted by North Dakota only, although 43 states have enacted compensation laws.
 Nine specific objections are brought against the bill by the bureau, in it's analysis which fills five pages of closely typewriter matter The first listed in what is said to be a mono polistic state insurance" which it is alleged is created under the provi- sions of the proposed act. The second point raised against the measure is an allegation of unfairness toward the employers, it being claimed "em- ployers have no right to be heard as to awards for compensation-they must simply pay up whatever the 1 board, commission or bureau chooses to assess them to cover the costs; whereas, from a denial of his claim, a Workingman has the right of appeal to the courts" Third, that this act provides that in arriving at its awards
 the bureau or board shall not be bound by common law or statutory
 rules of evidence"
 1 In the fourth objection found by the
 bureau it is alleged Tt is provided
 in this act that no compensation shall
 be paid for the first seven days of dis l ability unless disability exceeds seven days, in which case compensation
 shall be paid from the date of in jury. That means, practically that If workman is disabled for two (2l days, he will not return to work on the third day but will take a vacation over the seventh day since that will make his compensation for the seven days equal to what he would have earned as wages had he returned to
 work on the third day. Adverse ex- perience has thoroughly discredited provisions like this"
 1 Fifth, it is claimed that the act con tains no provisions for notice of acci- dent, it being sufficient that the in- jured employee make his claim within
 sixty days after injury, thus depriv- ing, it is stated the employer to in
 vestigate the circumstance of the ac- cident and to apply prompt first aid and timely medical care to reduce the consequences of the injury
 The sixth objection states that this act covers "all injuries arising in the course of employment" The far bet ter and more common rule, it is said, "ts to cover only injuries by accident arising out of and in the course of employment" Further, 1t is declared:
 Tt was never the thought in enact ing the sound compensation law pre- cedents to make the employer the absolute insurer of the lives and health of employees during the hours they are engaged to work, regardless