Category: Workers Comp

Aug
26

BWC’s dividends and drug costs

Posted by Joe Paduda on Wednesday, August 26th, 2020 | Comments

Last week Ohio’s Bureau of Workers’ Compensation announced it will consider $1.5 billion in dividends to policyholders.

This comes on the heels of a similar payout in April;

$1.35 billion went to private employers and $184 million went to local government taxing districts, such as counties, cities, townships, and school districts.

Together, the two dividend payments amount to a refund of all premiums paid by employers in 2018 and 2019.

The Bureau’s very strong financial results were attributed to excellent investment performance, a continued decline in claim counts, and “prudent fiscal management.”

A significant piece of this “prudent fiscal management” was the audit of BWC’s pharmacy program, an audit that led to the State Attorney General suing BWC’s PBM OptumRx. Subsequently AG Dave Yost accused OptumRx of overcharging “the state on 57% of 2.3 million claims between January 2014 and September 2018.” [it is important to note that BWC’s prior PBM was acquired by Optum and operated under a separate business unit]

The suit was later amended to reflect Yost’s allegation that overcharges exceeded $16 million.

BWC switched PBMs two years ago.

BWC’s drug costs have dropped significantly over the last couple of years; while a decline in claim frequency undoubtedly contributed to that drop, it is safe to say that prices paid for drugs helped slash pharmacy expenses.

And that has helped fund the huge dividend checks BWC’s customers are getting.

What does this mean for you?

Do you know you are paying only what you should? 

How can you prove that to your policyholders and customers?

Aug
21

YAY! More COVID claims data!

Posted by Joe Paduda on Friday, August 21st, 2020 | Comments

During yesterday’s webinar on COVID19’s impact on workers’ compensation, Mark Priven and I asked the 260+ attendees to share any data they have on COVID and comp.

[As soon as we have a link to a recording of the webinar, I’ll post it.]

William Rabb of WorkCompCentral provided a summary of the presentation [subscription required] this morning, and added helpful commentary from NCCI’s Jeff Eddinger. (NCCI just updated their guide to COVID presumption laws and regulations – get it here.)

Jeff Kadison of Practical Actuarial Solutions forwarded a detailed study put out by New York’s Insurance Rating Board. Lots of detail on costs, counts, and a discussion of potential impact.  A few key takeaways:

Using the CDC’s models, NYCIRB came up with the following estimates:

  • note 97.8% of infected workers will not require hospitalization (this is an estimate)
  • for those that do need hospital care:
    • estimated COVID19 non-ICU hospitalization cost range of $20,129 to $29,948
    • depending on clinical severity, estimated COVID19 ICU costs with ventilator support range from $47,458 to $192,250
    • for claims that may have long-term health issues, the NYCIRB estimated the average incurred medical to be approximately $200,000. (note this is just an estimate)

Brandon Miller, CEO of MWCIA was kind enough to send an excellent report prepared by Minnesota’s Department of Labor and Industry’s Brian Zaidman.

Unlike California and Florida, Minnesota’s claim counts didn’t drop much over the first half of 2020, although a third of MN claims are COVID19-related. The implication is fewer non-COVID19 claims have been filed in Minnesota than one would have expected.

Similar to the Golden State, Minnesota is a “presumption state” which may well be leading to more COVID claims filed. (California’s is by regulation, Minnesota by law.)

 

COVID-specific claims

Peter Strauss, Executive Director of the Montana Self Insurers’ Association also helped out, sending a presentation delivered 10 days ago by the state’s Department of Labor & Industry.

Unlike Minnesota, Montana’s data is remarkably consistent with what we’ve seen from Florida and California. Overall claim counts’ are down sharply, while COVID claims are relatively rare. Of course, Montana is built for social distancing; the state has a very low population density.

 

What does this mean for you?

Based on the very limited research we have, it certainly appears COVID19 cases aren’t going to be that expensive.

And please forward any credible research on the claim counts, claim costs, and COVID claims in the comment field below.

Aug
18

California agriculture, COVID19, and workers comp claims

Posted by Joe Paduda on Tuesday, August 18th, 2020 | Comments

Here’s what’s puzzling me about agricultural workers, COVID infections, and workers’ comp.

  • Few agricultural workers have filed WC claims for COVID.
  • COVID infections are much more prevalent among Latinx than any other ethnic group.
  • News reports indicate workers infected with COVID have spread the virus to family and co-workers
  • Infection rates in the ag heartland in the Central Valley are much higher than in population-dense urban centers.

Here’s the data.

Latinx people are much more likely to contract COVID19 than any other ethnic group – more than twice as likely as White people.

Agriculture employs a lot of Latinx folks; average monthly employment was 422,000 in 2019 (downloadable files).

About 45% of ag workers nationally are Latinx. [if you have data specific to California please share]

So far this year, only 0.2% of California’s agricultural workers have filed a work comp claim for COVID19.

While news reports allege some employers are failing to implement adequate COVID19 safety protections, there’s another side to this, one that requires serious consideration.

This from a colleague (edited to preserve confidentiality):

I can attest to the Latino population being hit extra hard.  The reasons are fairly simple.

Number 1 reason:   The work ethic demonstrated by our workforce is hurting them and their co-workers.  The Mexican culture has long had excellent work ethic.  Their mantra is always, “I have to work.  I have to work.  I HAVE to work.”  They often do not safeguard their own health as a result.  Many when told they are positive respond with, “Well yeah.  I knew.  I haven’t felt good for a week.”  Which means that they’ve been spreading the virus daily.

Another factor for Ag workers is the common practice of transporting workers by vans or small buses.  Probably the worst thing they can do.

We found out most of them refused to comply with wearing a mask.  They’d have them on in front of the supervisor, but as soon as the vehicle left the yard, most all of them would take the masks off.

The third problem is the comorbidity factor of diabetes.  Their diets frequently lead to diabetes.  Every one of our fatalities had instant blood sugar levels of 700+.  Each of the deaths were investigated, and without exception, we found that there had been a diabetes dx years before but they had failed to comply.  Most of the diabetes dx’s were for men who refused to ignore or rethink the macho feelings of being able to drink beer and eat as many carbs as they want along with refusing to take meds.

Of course this does not apply to the entire Latinx population.  But it is sadly true of more than half and probably true of at least 75%.

What does this mean for you?

  1. Don’t be surprised if we see a significant increase in workers’ comp claims from agricultural workers.
  2. Cultural norms and biases MUST be considered, factored into, and made part of any and all prevention solutions.
  3. There are NO simple answers, and all of us are part of the problem – and can be part of the solution.

REMINDER – sign up for Pandemic, Premiums, and Profit: Is it the Sky That’s Falling…or the Floor? a free webinar on COVID19’s impact on workers’ compensation here. Mark Priven of Bickmore Actuarial and I will be weighing in this Thursday at 1 pm Eastern, 10 am Pacific.

Aug
17

COVID’s costs; 3 P&C insurers report

Posted by Joe Paduda on Monday, August 17th, 2020 | Comments

We are starting to see the impact of COVID on P&C insurers’ financials; so far its not all gloom and doom.

AIG’s COVID costs totaled $458 million for the first half of 2020; Chubb announced $1.16 billion in COVID related costs for Q2, while Travelers‘ “pre-tax insurance losses directly related to the pandemic amounted to $114 million.” for Q2. (note AIG’s numbers are for six months, Chubb and Travelers for 3 months)

Travelers’s results are especially notable as it is the largest writer of workers’ comp insurance. Several quotes from the Q2 conference call merit attention:

  • beyond the healthcare sector, data from some of the state workers’ comp systems suggest that the COVID related claim rate is low relative to the infection rate.
  • That’s likely partly attributable to the fact that the population most seriously affected by COVID-19 skews older and is not the workforce.
  • [there were] fewer traditional workers’ comp claims as more people work from home.

It doesn’t look like workers’ comp is the biggest contributor, as COVID’s costs arose from travel insurance, personal auto refunds, reduced premiums, and lower renewals.

One example – AIG’s travel insurance business got crushed in the second quarter as “you had not only no new sales. You had cancellations…”

According to CEO Evan Greenberg, the $1.16 billion loss “is an estimate of our ultimate loss from the pandemic.”  Chubb’s net premiums written fell by $191 million, mainly from workers’ compensation and commercial casualty payments, including refunds on auto policies.’

Reading between the lines, it doesn’t look like Chubb’s investment income was significantly affected by COVID-related interest rate cuts; the huge insurer’s $112 billion in cash and investments increased by $3.4 billion in Q2 2020. (see CFO Phil Bancroft’s discussion in the transcript)

Takeaways

  1. COVID’s costs aren’t devastating P&C insurers.
  2. While interest rates have dropped, so far this hasn’t had much of an impact on insurers’ investment income.
  3. Insurers with less exposure in the US are doing better; other countries have handled COVID far better than we have.
Aug
12

Claim counts, COVID, and (premature) conclusions

Posted by Joe Paduda on Wednesday, August 12th, 2020 | Comments

We know a LOT about how COVID and the COVID economy are affecting workers’ comp – and that’s what Mark Priven and I will dive into next week as we discuss “Pandemic, Premiums and Profits: Is It the Sky That’s Falling … or the Floor?” .

The free webinar (register here) is happening August 20 at 10 am Pacific, 1 pm Eastern. (attendance is limited, so sign up now to make sure you get a spot).

Mark is Vice President and Principal of Bickmore Actuarial, a highly regarded Actuary, and a very insightful analyst of all things workers’ comp. I’m honored to be on the virtual dais with Mark.

What triggered our decision to work together was a shared concern that there’s been way too much discussion about the potential, theoretical, possible, hypothetical costs of COVID itself – and (with one major exception) no discussion, analysis, projections, or discussion of the huge drop in workers’ comp claims – and the effects of that drop..

Frankly, prognostications about the damage COVID could do to profits just don’t stand up to scrutiny.  How an industry with a combined ratio of 85 and investment income of 11% will go from a 26% profit margin to a loss when COVID claims are not that common and all evidence indicates they aren’t that expensive is…puzzling.

One can – and some do – argue that we don’t have data on claim counts yet – and therefore it’s premature to discuss the impact.

But you can’t have it both ways – we know little about COVID, so making assumptions or statements about how the disease will affect workers’ comp is equally presumptuous.

Fact is we are fast approaching budget season for employers, insurers, TPAs, and service companies – and it is incumbent on those with data and expertise to share that information.

So, sign up, send us your questions, and Mark and I will do our best.

What does this mean for you?

Sign up here.

Aug
10

COVID’s fallout for workers comp – the picture gets clearer

Posted by Joe Paduda on Monday, August 10th, 2020 | Comments

70,000+ small businesses have permanently closed their doors.

The demise of big retailers has accelerated, with JCPenney, Men’s Wearhouse, and Brooks Brothers all entering bankruptcy.

Prom wear companies were also hit hard, with Occasion Brands also a victim.

The airline industry is mired in a deep slump, with passenger volumes down to a quarter of pre-COVID levels.

That’s driven by both far fewer flights, and far fewer passengers on each plane.

Air travel reductions affect other businesses…

  • taxi ridership and rideshare services
  • on-airport concessions, food, retail, and services (these account for 2/5ths of airport revenue)
  • hotel and restaurant activity is lower with far fewer business travelers and vacationers
  • airplane maintenance requirements are greatly reduced – along with the need for mechanics, spare parts, and consumables (fuel, lubricants, etc)
  • airplane orders are way down and many have been cancelled, impacting the airplane industry  – and the thousands of suppliers dependent on it.
    • In June, Boeing had a single order for one jet, while losing 183 orders due to cancellations or likely cancellations.

And energy – in a slump to begin the year, got crushed with fallout continuing.

Its not all bad news; in general larger companies are doing better – if they aren’t in retail, energy, air travel or tourism. Of course exceptions abound; WalMart is doing just fine, thank you as are big box home improvement stores.

For workers comp, the implications are significant;

  • lower premiums due to lower payroll
  • tougher to return injured employees to work due to cutbacks
  • fewer claims require fewer services
  • insurers focused on energy, Main Street businesses and retail will be hit hardest

 

 

Aug
5

COVID is crushing work comp claim counts.

Posted by Joe Paduda on Wednesday, August 5th, 2020 | Comments

Thank you, CWCI. Due to it’s diligence and foresight, we now know:

  • through June 30 there were 14,487 COVID claims reported to California’s DWC;
  • this amounts to 6.3% of all confirmed COVID cases (data from JHU);
  • the vast majority of COVID claims reported have been accepted;
  • and perhaps the most important data point…

Total claims (COVID and non-COVID) dropped 28.8% from the first half of 2019 to the first half of 2020. (note this is corrected from my original 36.4%)

Kudos to the fine folk at CWCI; they have produced the first data-based report on all things COVID. It is quite user-friendly, highly credible, and interactive, allowing users to analyze California-specific on COVID and non-COVID claims.  The tool enables comparison by industry, body part, nature and cause of injury, class code and region for claims (both filed claims and accepted claims) with dates of injury from 1/1/2020 to 6/30/2020.

The tool also allows users to compare actual claim counts for the same time period in 2019 to current and projected counts for 2020.

Claim counts, dear readers, is WAAAAAY more important than the rather minor financial impact COVID claims have had on workers’ comp. As I’ve reported previously, work comp COVID claims to date are not expensive; despite the prognostications of others, it is unlikely indeed COVID’s costs will have any material impact on work comp financials.

What WILL have an impact – and a very positive one – is the massive drop in total claim counts we’ve seen so far this year.

grey – 2019; green – 2020

Yeah, I know, this is California-specific, and only for half a year, and not fully developed, and all that stuff. I also know a 36% drop in total claim counts is the biggest thing to hit the workers’ comp industry in…forever. 

What does this mean to you?

Everything.

Aug
4

Mitchell’s Coventry acquisition – implications abound

Posted by Joe Paduda on Tuesday, August 4th, 2020 | Comments

The implications of Mitchell’s acquisition of Coventry’s workers’ comp business are broad, from insight into the future of M&A in workers’ comp services to impact on competitors. (press release is here) Today we’ll dive into a few of the top-line implications.

M&A

The $850 million price was likely driven largely by the network’s profits and sustained position as the work comp PPO industry leader… the PPO is by far the biggest revenue and margin generator for CWC (Coventry Workers’ Comp). The transaction also represents yet another step in the rapid consolidation in the work comp services industry.

Mitchell now owns the number 2 bill review application (by customer base), the largest medical management entity (Genex + Coventry), the largest case management business (a mixed blessing these days), and the dominant network. If it holds onto both PBMs, it will gain the number three position in that sector.

As I noted yesterday, Mitchell is likely off the major acquisition field for a good while. It has to fix its PBM business, integrate Coventry, develop and implement a customer outreach that ideally will result in more stuff being bought by more customers, ensure Coventry’s distributors (including bill review rivals Medata and Conduent) continue to offer Coventry’s network, all while dealing with COVID19’s impact on work comp and auto claims.

The other big players left in this business are OptumWC (network, PBM, ancillary services), Paradigm (cat case services and management, case management, some network and ancillary businesses), and One Call. The next tier includes bill review/document management company Conduent; physical medicine expert MedRisk and myMatrixx (number 2 PBM, both are HSA consulting clients).

I don’t see any of these entities scrambling to react to the deal; they’ve known about it for months, and outside of Optum and Conduent any impact is tangential.

Networks

Coventry’s PPO is the industry leader – and has been for decades. It has the most market share, is rated highest by customers, and its policy of demanding top billing in any state (primary network status) remains secure. Expect Genex to invest heavily in the PPO. This will secure its leadership position and hold off competition from newer entrants – primarily Optum.

Bill review

The market’s perception of Coventry’s bill review function indicates room for improvement. The chart below shows how BR buyers rated the top bill review entities’ customer service in a survey I conducted two years ago; service is THE key metric. [shoot me a comment if you want a copy of the survey, the comment won’t be published]

As I noted yesterday Conduent handles much of Coventry’s bill review; How Mitchell will address this is an interesting question.

If you’ve got additional questions, leave them in the comments section and I’ll do my best to get answers posted.

What does this mean for you?

Smart acquisition at a very good price makes Mitchell the leading entity in workers’ comp services. I wouldn’t worry too much about Mitchell gaining too much market power.

Aug
3

It’s done; Mitchell owns Coventry work comp

Posted by Joe Paduda on Monday, August 3rd, 2020 | Comments

After almost 5 months of negotiations and COVID19-related delays, Mitchell International owns Coventry Workers’ Comp.

The price was around $875 million, with most of the value based on Coventry’s work comp PPO. The network is a cash machine, has been the industry leader since it started the work comp PPO business, and so far is holding off a new competitor – Optum – without too much difficulty. Press release is here.

Sources indicate Coventry will report up thru Genex, with current president and CEO Art Lynch staying on in that role.

Long time readers will recall Aetna tried to sell Coventry six years ago, an effort that failed due to what can only be described as ignorance on the part of Aetna; whoever was responsible for the deal didn’t understand that network contracts were the linchpin.

What’s next?

Way back in March I dug into this in detail, here’s an edited excerpt:

Now that Coventry will be owned by a workers’ comp entity run by people who know workers’ comp, I’d expect a pretty significant investment into the core asset – the PPO.

That will undoubtedly include building and staffing a network contracting and management capability – from scratch. In the interim, one can assume M/G will use Aetna’s technology and perhaps contracting/credentialing resources until it has completed building a network management capability. M/G will do everything possible to build that network management capability quickly and well.

Quick takes

Mitchell is likely out of the acquisition game for some time. Digesting Coventry while battling thru a no-end-in-sight COVID crisis is going to consume management’s time and focus.

If anything, the company might sell it’s PBM business, a move that would free up management time that’s been focused on a business that has been rather challenged – and generate cash to pay down older and quite expensive debt.

I know, combining Coventry’s PBM – First Script – with Mitchell Pharmacy Solutions would create a third significant player to compete with Optum and myMatrixx. But…

  • First Script has suffered from chronic under-investment,
  • Express Scripts (myMatrixx’ parent company) provides First Script’s pharmacy network,
  • the work comp PBM business is brutally competitive,
  • selling the PBM businesses would free up cash to help lower debt, and
  • management time is needed to
    • integrate the rest of Coventry’s assets,
    • strengthen the network,
    • figure out what to do about Coventry’s bill review operation (most is handled by Mitchell competitor Conduent) (myMatrixx is an HSA consulting client), and
    • manage thru COVID.

It is possible Mitchell will hold onto the PBM, but there isn’t a compelling business case. And no, the “bill review and PBM synergy” argument isn’t it.

Bill review

Coventry’s bill review function runs mostly on Conduent’s platform. This will (very) likely change – the question is when.

Mitchell will want to cut costs and increase cash flow by switching customers over to a Mitchell platform. That is no simple task; systems connections and data feeds are business-critical; state reporting; integration with UR, claims, and financial systems as well as external vendors and other entities are notoriously complex and will take quite a while to build out.

This:

  • in an industry that chronically under-invests in IT, and
  • at a time when insurers and TPAs are staring a in the face of a 20% reduction in claims volume and accompanying drop in premiums.

What does this mean for you?

Consolidation continues, Coventry’s network should get better.

Tomorrow – a deeper dive into implications.

Jul
31

COVID update – vaccines, denier death, and prognostications

Posted by Joe Paduda on Friday, July 31st, 2020 | Comments

Lots of news COVID-related this week…

Three vaccines seem to be the most promising; all are entering Phase 3 trials with tens of thousands of test subjects involved.  Moderna and Pfizer look to be the furthest along, with AstraZenica/Oxford University’s vaccine also showing some promise.

Before we pop the champagne, remember…

  • trials are just that – they are used to assess safety, effectiveness (how much protection the vaccine provides) durability (how long the vaccine provides immunity)
  • the history of vaccine development is not exactly encouraging, and
  • once a vaccine is proven, we’ll need tens of millions of needles, syringes, vials, and a delivery system to ensure it all gets to the people who need it most.

There’s another problem with these trials – too few people of color are involved – far too few. That’s really troubling, as Black and Latinx people are suffering much more than Caucasians.

So, keep doing smart stuff until you get vaccinated. Fortunately, more of us are now accepting that masks make a big difference.

The death of former GOP Presidential candidate Herman Cain from coronavirus and the infection of Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert (R) may be changing minds; these two gentlemen dismissed the news about COVID19 and refused to wear masks.

Mr Cain is wearing the red tag.

Meanwhile, I’ve been engaging with NCCI and experts from the Insurance Information Institute in an effort to better understand the financial impact of COVID on workers’ comp. Stay tuned for more; key takeaway so far is that NCCI and III are focused on potential costs of COVID itself; they have not done any work assessing the impact of the sharp decline in claims.

There’s also a lot of talk about how bad COVID may be for profitability, a position I’m still struggling with.

What does this mean for you?

Wear a mask.