Search      Advanced Search | Browse By Topic
Magazine Content
Home
Features
Columnists
Industry Risk Reports
In-Depth Series
Special Reports
Point/Counterpoint
R&I One® Content
News & Analysis
Editor's Choice Stories
Resources and Tools
Power Broker® Directory
Risk InnovatorTM
Emerging Risks
Top Employee Benefits Consultant
Executives To Watch
Insights
Industry Events
WorkersComp Forum
Award Nominations
Webinars
RSS
R&I Information
Subscription Center
Advertiser Information
About Us
Contact Us
 

Newsletter Sign-up

Click on the name of the free newsletter below to preview:

R&I One®
WORKERSCOMP Forum TM Update
HTML Text
E-Mail Address:


Click here to unsubscribe
Privacy Policy
Preferences

 

Safety/Return to Work Programs: A Boon to Profit

It's easy for corporations to justify the implementation of safety and return-to-work programs. Just do the math.

Print Email Add to Facebook Add to Twitter Add to LinkedIn Write to the Editor Reprints

By DAN REYNOLDS, senior editor of Risk & Insurance®

The argument over whether safety and return-to-work programs really benefit the bottom line really isn't an argument. That is, of course, unless you don't believe the basic tenets of mathematics.

To stay with the simplest of interpretations, what is really at work here? An injured employee is an employee that isn't producing. Therefore, for that employee's production to resume, another employee must be hired to take that employee's place until he or she can recover.

But wait, there's a catch. The injured employee has this thing called insurance, which must be paid for by an employer's premiums to a state fund or carrier.

How to erase this double bind? Bring the injured employee back to work as soon as she or he is able. If they can't do the job they were hired for, train them for some different task so that they can still produce and somewhere down the line, somewhere in your operations, you won't have to hire an employee number two.

And that's just the mercenary, my bottom line-only approach to it. What about the difference it makes to a human being to be able to work and feed and clothe his or her family, to not languish in some opiated state on the couch, gaining weight and watching reruns of Seinfeld?

There is the material there, but there is also the intangible asset of the spiritual and psychological well being of the worker, the person who can proudly say, "I make a difference in this world because of what I do."

We give awards at this magazine to companies and individuals who not only get the above spiritual and material mathematics, but believe in it passionately.

Think the folks at the Mayo Clinic are smart? They achieved $840,000 in savings through their return-to-work section in 2007. Think that sort of dough doesn't add up?

This is how humanistic that division is. It helps workers who are injured with their legal issues and the bills they've accrued so they can get their lives back as they recover.

Not only does Mayo help its own, but it partners with other big employers in its region to share the knowledge it has gained.

What about the Los Angeles Unified School District? In fiscal 2005-2006, the district saw a $236.9 million swing in its workers' compensation costs, in the main, by instituting a return-to-work program.

Think Minnesotans and Californians are that different than anyone else? Think I need to say anymore about this?

(Read the CounterPoint argument "Safety/Return to Work Program: A Drag on Profit.")

November 1, 2010

Copyright 2010© LRP Publications

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RISK logo
 

Back to top

Entire contents copyright © 2013 Risk and Insurance® All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without written permission.