Well, (or rather, HELL!) it’s snowing in upstate New York…hopefully it’s a bit brighter where you are. Lots happened this week, so here we go.
First, this really needs a series of posts, but it’s so important that better fast than thorough. There is yet more evidence that the earning power of the vast lower-middle class (and poorer folks too) has been steadily declining. And that’s a major issue for workers’ comp. Here’s the money quote from Neil Irwin’s piece in the NYTimes:
there really is a shift away from the sectors where less-educated workers can earn a decent living. [emphasis added] In 1990, 40 percent of the prime-age male workers without a high school degree worked as operators and laborers, a number that declined to 34 percent in 2013. Jobs in food service, cleaning and groundskeeping nearly doubled in the same span, to 21 percent from 11 percent. But it wasn’t an even trade: Pay for operators and labors was $25,500 in 2013, compared with $20,400 for the food, cleaning and groundskeeping category.
You’re not imagining it. The jobs that are being created for less-educated workers really do pay less than the ones that are being lost. [emphasis added]
What does this mean for work comp? A few things come to mind.
- if good-paying jobs continue to disappear, it is going to be increasingly hard to re-employ injured workers in positions where they earn the same pay they did pre-injury
- comp premiums may decline slightly due to lowered covered payroll
- we may see more longevity and less movement among workers currently in those jobs, meaning there are fewer opportunities for experienced workers to get re-employed
- it’s theoretically possible that people working at jobs that are disappearing may see workers’ comp as a safety net
The net is the work comp system is going to be dramatically affected by this economic trend. We need to be talking about it now, thinking about the potential implications, and seeking solutions – now.
The Catamaran acquisition of Healthcare Solutions was followed almost immediately by United Healthcare’s announcement that the company is going to buy Catamaran. Personally, I think HCS was the linchpin of the Catamaran – Optum deal; HCS’ unique position in the WC PBM, bill review, network, and related businesses made Catamaran so darn attractive UNH ponied up $14 billion just to get in the WC game.
Well, maybe not. More seriously, UNH will own the third largest PBM, trailing only CVS/Caremark and Express Scripts, Inc. The combination of OptumRx and Catamaran will fill about a billion scripts this year. Catamaran itself was a relatively small player a decade ago; it grew rapidly via acquisition and diversification (along with ESI it is the only PBM active in the work comp and auto sectors).
With this transaction, UNH continues to diversify; the chart on page 2 provides a rather striking view into just how diversified this former HMO company has become. For some, $14 billion seems like a lot of cash. Not to UNH; this is a company with revenues that will likely hit close to $150 billion this year. For you work comp folks, that is about 180% of total US WC premiums.
(full disclosure – I owned a tiny bit of equity in HCS from a prior role on the Advisory Board of predecessor Cypress Care)
The good folks at Washington Labor & Industry (and other state agencies) are asking for public comment on their revised Prescribing Guidelines for Opioids. The pdf briefly summarizes changes from current guidelines, and is well worth your perusal. Kudos to the Agency Medical Directors’ Group; they continue to lead the way for the rest of the country.
There’s a rather troubling piece in the latest Health Affairs about the cost and implications of over-diagnosis and over-treatment of breast cancer. As one who is somewhat troubled by the proliferation of pink everything everywhere (cue the calls for my summary execution as insensitive and uncaring), I see this as evidence of a movement in danger of running amok. From the article:
The average expenditures for each false-positive mammogram, invasive breast cancer, and ductal carcinoma in situ in the twelve months following diagnosis were $852, $51,837 and $12,369, respectively. This translates to a national cost of $4 billion each year. The costs associated with false-positive mammograms and breast cancer overdiagnoses appear to be much higher than previously documented. Screening has the potential to save lives. However, the economic impact of false-positive mammography results and breast cancer overdiagnoses must be considered in the debate about the appropriate populations for screening. [emphasis added]
Is breast cancer a major problem? Yes. As a major killer of women, and a disfigurer that does deep psychological damage, breast cancer is one of the major public health issues nationally. That said, telling women who DON’T have breast cancer they do, and treating them for it, is awful indeed.
Finally, Darrell Bruga of LifeTEAM asked me if there is any technology platform already being utilized in workers’ compensation that is designed with the end user being the INJURED WORKER? Does anything like that exist where the claims examiner, caae manager, etc interacts with the injured worker digitally to communicate, provide information, provide health information, etc.
I don’t know of any such app; if you do please let me know – email at jpadudaAThealthstrategyassocDOTcom or just comment below.