Montana labor news., 1948-07-29
COMPENSATION
FOR W0RKMEN
By MATTHEW L

BY MATTHEW VOL
Workmen's compensation was the
first type OF social insurance adopted
in the United States. During the period
from 1910 to 1929 the federal govern
ment, f~orty-iour states, and the terri
tories OF Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto
Rico enacted compensation laws. At
the present time Mississippi is the only
| state in which a compensation law has
not been adopted.
Unsatisfactory as the workmen's
compensation laws are in a number OF
states, few workers OF today can realize
the tremendous progress these laws
represent over the earlier laws avail
able to the injured workmen. Under
the employers liability laws, for ex-
ample, the worker was required to bring
suit at law against the employer. The
cost OF such a suit was not only pro-
hibitive in most cases but 1t was vir-
tually impossible to secure damages
unless the worker could prove that
neither he himself nor a fellow worker
was responsible for the accident result
ing in the injury. Further, it was nee
essary Tor him to prove that the injury
was not due to an accident which might
be considered a normal risk OF the in
dustry. These laws resulted i'll much
unnecessary hardship.
Europe Pioneers in Legislation
Germany first recognized the need ior
legislation OF the compensation type
with the passage OF a compulsory acci-
dent insurance act in 1854. Great
Britain passed its first workmen's com
pensation act in 1897, about Is year:
before enactment Of the first state law
in this country.
However, in spite OF the fact thai
since 1910 every state in the Unlor
with the exception OF Mississippi ha'
enacted compensation laws. there ar,
wide discrepancies in the extent O
coverage and amoun OF benefits pro
vided for injured workers under thu
various laws. Because OF such discrep
ancies legislatures in almost every STATE
OF the Union are regularly confronted
with amendments designed Il
strengthen the compensation law.
In the first place, there are nor,
states in which compensation insuranc,
laws are still elective rather than com
pulsory. A compulsory law is n un
der which all employers covered ar
required to accept the act and Obtain
necessary insurance. Under an electiv'
act the employer has the option OF &C
ccpting or rejecting it. Although il
rejecting it an employer loses the pro
, lection Of common law defenses in suit
! brought by injured workers it is obviou
| that unless such an employer is finan
/ cially responsible there is no certaint.
that workers will actually be paid ben
, Gifts. 1t is clear therefore that chang
! ing elective to compulsory laws woul'
: benefits more certain.
All Jobs Should Be Covered
! Further, the laws in all states shoul,
! be applicable to all e%mployments, re
j, gardless OF their type and the numbe
OF persons employed. Workers in ag
riculture, domestic workers. and EN-
ployes Of charitable institutions are ex
cluded under most state laws, Will
certain states also exclude other occu
/ pations or industries for no apparen
: reason. The exemption Of employers 0
c less than a stated number OF worker
also seriously limits the covcrage i
twenty-nine states. In South Carolina
for example. an employer with fewe
than IS employees is exempt from GOV
erage under the state law. In ninetcel
states such numerical exemptions ar
not in effect, although covcrage in Ger
tain Of these states is limited to liste'
industries which may or may not b
termed hazardous" or 'cxtra-hazard
Gus" cmployments.
1t is now generally recognized tina
occupational diseases should be covere'
unled compensation laws. Some stat
i. laws list only specific diseases in
schedule; others provide covcrage 70
: al %loccupational diseases. The America
Federation Of Labor and affiliated stat
; declarations are wholehcartedly behin'
the campaign to replace the schedul
!. providing for only specific diseases wit
full coverage in all state laws.
Increased Benefits Needed
Finally, with present high living cost
it will be necessary to revise upwar'
both minimum and maximum benefit
} which have been in many cases mad
equate.
In at least twenty-eight of the state
and territories the maximum week..
benefit to the worker with permancn
= disability ranges from S903 to S2'
weekly; in only four states does tn
, benefit exceed SIS weekly.
Extension Of coverage, %compulsor,
application Of the law, and increase il
benefits therefore are all matters t
t which our A. +. of l.. affiliatcs cal
: devote increased attention.
Workers should be thoroughly con
versant with their rights under thci
state w%orkmen's compensation law an'
should also keep informed as to thei
state federation of labor program 70