Workers comp

[mckeetree]

I guess this is addressed to anybody in the other 49...not Texas. I got into an interesting discussion today about workers comp. Some of you may know Texas is the last holdout on mandatory comp. Many here, including me, would like to see Texas get on board with everybody else since many of us already carry comp. My ins. guy and I were wondering today what the actual compliance rate is where it is mandatory and what the process is to turn in those in violation along with what they (whoever they is?) do to those in violation. I say compliance is high. He says probably low in the green industry.

 

[Blakesmaster]

I guess this is addressed to anybody in the other 49...not Texas. I got into an interesting discussion today about workers comp. Some of you may know Texas is the last holdout on mandatory comp. Many here, including me, would like to see Texas get on board with everybody else since many of us already carry comp. My ins. guy and I were wondering today what the actual compliance rate is where it is mandatory and what the process is to turn in those in violation along with what they (whoever they is?) do to those in violation. I say compliance is high. He says probably low in the green industry.

I would say that looking to more government to solve your problems is not the solution. Most companies in my area don't have comp and they still seem to exist...Keep doing what you do, Mickey.

 

[mckeetree]

Most companies in my area don't have comp and they still seem to exist

How do they get away with it? No enforcement?

 

[Grouchy old man]

In New York-

The Workers' Compensation Law was passed by the New York State Legislature in 1914 as a compromise between employee and employer interests. As part of the compromise, employees in most instances lost the right to sue their employers for negligence resulting in injury, illness or disability. In return, employees generally receive payment from workers' compensation without regard to fault as long as the injury, illness or disability was related to work.

Liability for Claims Incurred by an Uninsured Employer
Section 26-a says an employer is liable for a penalty of $2,000 per 10-day period of noncompliance, plus the actual award (including both compensation and medical costs), plus any other penalties the Board assesses for noncompliance. In cases involving severely injured employees, the medical costs alone could be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per injury.

So either the owner of a company in this business is crazy not to have WC or he's a total slug with nothing of value to his name so he has nothing to lose if they go after him.

 

[mckeetree]

Keep doing what you do

What I do is carry comp. Do you?

 

[Blakesmaster]

How do they get away with it? No enforcement?

Pretty much. Never been asked to show proof of comp to anyone while on a jobsite. And most residential customers don't care, or just take your word for it. Generally I only need to prove insurance when doing a gov't job or when subbing for another contractor.

 

[Blakesmaster]

What I do is carry comp. Do you?

Yes. Just had an audit yesterday.

 

[Blakesmaster]

Thanks for your concern, btw. Means a lot.

 

[mckeetree]

Pretty much. Never been asked to show proof of comp to anyone while on a jobsite. And most residential customers don't care, or just take your word for it. Generally I only need to prove insurance when doing a gov't job or when subbing for another contractor.

So really, there is not much enforcement where you are.

 

[Blakesmaster]

So really, there is not much enforcement where you are.

Which is my point. Making it mandatory does not necessarily lead to an even playing field. There will still be plenty of guys without comp in Texas either way.

 

[mckeetree]

Which is my point. Making it mandatory does not necessarily lead to an even playing field. There will still be plenty of guys without comp in Texas either way.

There is no place to turn them in or anything?

 

[Blakesmaster]

There is no place to turn them in or anything?

No idea. To be honest, I try not to concern myself with the affairs of others. I just do my best to make my business better than theirs. My feeling is that I could waste A LOT of energy chasing after the guys that don't do things by the book.

 

[Kottonwood]

here in CO most areas do not require licensing however most cities do. when you get your license you have to show proof of insurance. However if you simply say you have no employees they let you get away without workers comp. Many employers get away with out it by saying all of their employees are subcontractors, this also saves them on payroll taxes etc. Technically all the subs would be required to have their own liability insurance but that is inexpensive comparatively but most don't have it anyways. I have never witnessed any level of actual enforcement. Chances are that if they made it required by law in Texas the situation would not significantly improve anyways.

 

[Grouchy old man]

In this area you need to be licensed in order to do any residental work. So in order to get that license you have to have insurance. But as others have said there are ways to say you have no employees. But the real enforcement comes when one of your "independent contractors" or illegals gets hurt and the ER asks them if they got hurt on the job.

 

[treeman75]

here in CO most areas do not require licensing however most cities do. when you get your license you have to show proof of insurance. However if you simply say you have no employees they let you get away without workers comp. Many employers get away with out it by saying all of their employees are subcontractors, this also saves them on payroll taxes etc. Technically all the subs would be required to have their own liability insurance but that is inexpensive comparatively but most don't have it anyways. I have never witnessed any level of actual enforcement. Chances are that if they made it required by law in Texas the situation would not significantly improve anyways.

I think its like that every where.

 

[Jed1124]

here in CO most areas do not require licensing however most cities do. when you get your license you have to show proof of insurance. However if you simply say you have no employees they let you get away without workers comp. Many employers get away with out it by saying all of their employees are subcontractors, this also saves them on payroll taxes etc. Technically all the subs would be required to have their own liability insurance but that is inexpensive comparatively but most don't have it anyways. I have never witnessed any level of actual enforcement. Chances are that if they made it required by law in Texas the situation would not significantly improve anyways.

In CT I have to carry comp to work as a sub which is what I primarily do. I just had to send proof of comp to the insurance co for subs I have hired for my own jobs. If the subs don't have comp you better have signed 941's and a paying you will be doing.

 

[VA-Sawyer]

What does a 941 have to do with workmens comp ? That is the form you use on a quarterly or monthly basis to report to the IRS how much you have witheld from employees paychecks, and to send that money, along with your share, to the government. You don't list who the employees are, or state if they are covered by workmens comp anywhere on the form. Also they don't sign it, just the boss does.
Rick

 

[mckeetree]

Also they don't sign it, just the boss does.
Rick

Actually my 941's are done electronically so nobody "signs" mine. I see what you mean but there is actually a place for number of employees along with of course payroll on a 941 form and comp audits will look at 941's at audit. They also look at misc. labor payments, generally these are payments totaling less than $600.00 per year per individual. The place they catch up on uninsured subs is form 1099.

 

[VA-Sawyer]

Read the form carefully, it asks for the number of employees on a given date. Department of labor uses that info towards employment figures. As there is no employee ID info on the 941 it would be of little use in a workmans comp claim or computing fees. The catch comes when the W-2's have to add up to the totals on the 941's at the end of the year.
As for you claiming the form doesn't get signed when sent electronicly, check again, there is an electronic signature attached to your form when filed under your login, and you agreed to be bound by the electronic signature when you applied for electronic filing. You may not use an ink pen to put your John Hancock on it, but you are still 'signing' it when you click send.
Rick

 

[Jed1124]

I deal with The Hartford and that is what they asked for. Being that workmans comp is based off a percentage of pay to a given employee I was assuming that is the reason.