IS THE WORK-RELATED TEST DESIRABLE FOR ALL DISEASES THAT DISABLE WORKERS?
Every developed country has multiple programs providing cash benefits, medical care, and rehabilitation services to workers with disabilities. In most countries, one of the programs is workers' compensation, which limits benefits to workers who experience work-related injuries or diseases. Work...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Comparative labor law & policy journal 2017-01, Vol.39 (1), p.247-271 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 271 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 247 |
container_title | Comparative labor law & policy journal |
container_volume | 39 |
creator | Burton, John F |
description | Every developed country has multiple programs providing cash benefits, medical care, and rehabilitation services to workers with disabilities. In most countries, one of the programs is workers' compensation, which limits benefits to workers who experience work-related injuries or diseases. Workers' compensation programs share several basic characteristics.1 First, workers are eligible for benefits without having to establish fault by their employers. Second, benefits primarily compensate for economic losses, principally loss of actual earnings or earning capacity and the cost of medical care. Third, benefits are prescribed by statute. Common but not universal features of workers' compensation are that the program is entirely financed by employers and that workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy of workers against their employers for work-related injuries. Williams described several models of workers' compensation that provide variations on these features.2 Germany enacted the first modem workers' compensation law in 1884. The German model relies on collective responsibility of Industrial Injuries Institutes (Berufsgenossenschaften), which are non-profit corporations, to administer the program subject to limited statutory requirements for coverage and benefits and to government supervision. The costs are shared among employers and employees. The United Kingdom's workers' compensation law of 1897 was similar to the German model in providing no-fault benefits, but differed by not providing for medical care or rehabilitation services, by assigning responsibility to individual employers rather than industrial associations, and by not requiring employers to insure their risks. The 1897 law also gave the employee the option to accept workers' compensation benefits or sue the employer for damages. The U.K. model was modified in 1948 to allow the injured worker to both receive workers' compensation benefits and sue the employer for damages, although any recovery in a tort suit reduces the workers' compensation benefits. The United Kingdom also now provides medical benefits to injured workers under the National Health Service. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2617556895</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2617556895</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_26175568953</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYeA0NLA01TUzMzXhYOAqLs4yMDC0NLCw5GTw9AxWCPFwVQj3D_LWDXL1cQxxdVEIcQ0OUXBxDfYMcnTycVVw8w9ScPTxUXDxDHZ1DHYFaXAMAfHAsiCdrkHB9jwMrGmJOcWpvFCam0HZzTXE2UO3oCi_sDS1uCQ-K7-0KA8oFW9kZmhuampmYWlqTJwqAEJvNEw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2617556895</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>IS THE WORK-RELATED TEST DESIRABLE FOR ALL DISEASES THAT DISABLE WORKERS?</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>ProQuest Central</source><creator>Burton, John F</creator><creatorcontrib>Burton, John F</creatorcontrib><description>Every developed country has multiple programs providing cash benefits, medical care, and rehabilitation services to workers with disabilities. In most countries, one of the programs is workers' compensation, which limits benefits to workers who experience work-related injuries or diseases. Workers' compensation programs share several basic characteristics.1 First, workers are eligible for benefits without having to establish fault by their employers. Second, benefits primarily compensate for economic losses, principally loss of actual earnings or earning capacity and the cost of medical care. Third, benefits are prescribed by statute. Common but not universal features of workers' compensation are that the program is entirely financed by employers and that workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy of workers against their employers for work-related injuries. Williams described several models of workers' compensation that provide variations on these features.2 Germany enacted the first modem workers' compensation law in 1884. The German model relies on collective responsibility of Industrial Injuries Institutes (Berufsgenossenschaften), which are non-profit corporations, to administer the program subject to limited statutory requirements for coverage and benefits and to government supervision. The costs are shared among employers and employees. The United Kingdom's workers' compensation law of 1897 was similar to the German model in providing no-fault benefits, but differed by not providing for medical care or rehabilitation services, by assigning responsibility to individual employers rather than industrial associations, and by not requiring employers to insure their risks. The 1897 law also gave the employee the option to accept workers' compensation benefits or sue the employer for damages. The U.K. model was modified in 1948 to allow the injured worker to both receive workers' compensation benefits and sue the employer for damages, although any recovery in a tort suit reduces the workers' compensation benefits. The United Kingdom also now provides medical benefits to injured workers under the National Health Service.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1095-6654</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Champaign: Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal</publisher><subject>Benefits ; Companies ; Disability ; Disability recipients ; Disease ; Employees ; Employers ; Employment ; Health care expenditures ; Health services ; Injuries ; Institutes ; Insurance coverage ; Labor law ; Law ; Occupational diseases ; Occupational safety ; Responsibility ; Settlements & damages ; Statutes of limitations ; Supervision ; Torts ; Vocational rehabilitation ; Work ; Workers compensation ; Workers with disabilities</subject><ispartof>Comparative labor law & policy journal, 2017-01, Vol.39 (1), p.247-271</ispartof><rights>Copyright Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2617556895/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2617556895?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21388,27866,33744,43805,74302</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Burton, John F</creatorcontrib><title>IS THE WORK-RELATED TEST DESIRABLE FOR ALL DISEASES THAT DISABLE WORKERS?</title><title>Comparative labor law & policy journal</title><description>Every developed country has multiple programs providing cash benefits, medical care, and rehabilitation services to workers with disabilities. In most countries, one of the programs is workers' compensation, which limits benefits to workers who experience work-related injuries or diseases. Workers' compensation programs share several basic characteristics.1 First, workers are eligible for benefits without having to establish fault by their employers. Second, benefits primarily compensate for economic losses, principally loss of actual earnings or earning capacity and the cost of medical care. Third, benefits are prescribed by statute. Common but not universal features of workers' compensation are that the program is entirely financed by employers and that workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy of workers against their employers for work-related injuries. Williams described several models of workers' compensation that provide variations on these features.2 Germany enacted the first modem workers' compensation law in 1884. The German model relies on collective responsibility of Industrial Injuries Institutes (Berufsgenossenschaften), which are non-profit corporations, to administer the program subject to limited statutory requirements for coverage and benefits and to government supervision. The costs are shared among employers and employees. The United Kingdom's workers' compensation law of 1897 was similar to the German model in providing no-fault benefits, but differed by not providing for medical care or rehabilitation services, by assigning responsibility to individual employers rather than industrial associations, and by not requiring employers to insure their risks. The 1897 law also gave the employee the option to accept workers' compensation benefits or sue the employer for damages. The U.K. model was modified in 1948 to allow the injured worker to both receive workers' compensation benefits and sue the employer for damages, although any recovery in a tort suit reduces the workers' compensation benefits. The United Kingdom also now provides medical benefits to injured workers under the National Health Service.</description><subject>Benefits</subject><subject>Companies</subject><subject>Disability</subject><subject>Disability recipients</subject><subject>Disease</subject><subject>Employees</subject><subject>Employers</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Health care expenditures</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Injuries</subject><subject>Institutes</subject><subject>Insurance coverage</subject><subject>Labor law</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Occupational diseases</subject><subject>Occupational safety</subject><subject>Responsibility</subject><subject>Settlements & damages</subject><subject>Statutes of limitations</subject><subject>Supervision</subject><subject>Torts</subject><subject>Vocational rehabilitation</subject><subject>Work</subject><subject>Workers compensation</subject><subject>Workers with disabilities</subject><issn>1095-6654</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpjYeA0NLA01TUzMzXhYOAqLs4yMDC0NLCw5GTw9AxWCPFwVQj3D_LWDXL1cQxxdVEIcQ0OUXBxDfYMcnTycVVw8w9ScPTxUXDxDHZ1DHYFaXAMAfHAsiCdrkHB9jwMrGmJOcWpvFCam0HZzTXE2UO3oCi_sDS1uCQ-K7-0KA8oFW9kZmhuampmYWlqTJwqAEJvNEw</recordid><startdate>20170101</startdate><enddate>20170101</enddate><creator>Burton, John F</creator><general>Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170101</creationdate><title>IS THE WORK-RELATED TEST DESIRABLE FOR ALL DISEASES THAT DISABLE WORKERS?</title><author>Burton, John F</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_26175568953</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Benefits</topic><topic>Companies</topic><topic>Disability</topic><topic>Disability recipients</topic><topic>Disease</topic><topic>Employees</topic><topic>Employers</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Health care expenditures</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Injuries</topic><topic>Institutes</topic><topic>Insurance coverage</topic><topic>Labor law</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Occupational diseases</topic><topic>Occupational safety</topic><topic>Responsibility</topic><topic>Settlements & damages</topic><topic>Statutes of limitations</topic><topic>Supervision</topic><topic>Torts</topic><topic>Vocational rehabilitation</topic><topic>Work</topic><topic>Workers compensation</topic><topic>Workers with disabilities</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Burton, John F</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Access via ABI/INFORM (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Comparative labor law & policy journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Burton, John F</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>IS THE WORK-RELATED TEST DESIRABLE FOR ALL DISEASES THAT DISABLE WORKERS?</atitle><jtitle>Comparative labor law & policy journal</jtitle><date>2017-01-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>247</spage><epage>271</epage><pages>247-271</pages><issn>1095-6654</issn><abstract>Every developed country has multiple programs providing cash benefits, medical care, and rehabilitation services to workers with disabilities. In most countries, one of the programs is workers' compensation, which limits benefits to workers who experience work-related injuries or diseases. Workers' compensation programs share several basic characteristics.1 First, workers are eligible for benefits without having to establish fault by their employers. Second, benefits primarily compensate for economic losses, principally loss of actual earnings or earning capacity and the cost of medical care. Third, benefits are prescribed by statute. Common but not universal features of workers' compensation are that the program is entirely financed by employers and that workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy of workers against their employers for work-related injuries. Williams described several models of workers' compensation that provide variations on these features.2 Germany enacted the first modem workers' compensation law in 1884. The German model relies on collective responsibility of Industrial Injuries Institutes (Berufsgenossenschaften), which are non-profit corporations, to administer the program subject to limited statutory requirements for coverage and benefits and to government supervision. The costs are shared among employers and employees. The United Kingdom's workers' compensation law of 1897 was similar to the German model in providing no-fault benefits, but differed by not providing for medical care or rehabilitation services, by assigning responsibility to individual employers rather than industrial associations, and by not requiring employers to insure their risks. The 1897 law also gave the employee the option to accept workers' compensation benefits or sue the employer for damages. The U.K. model was modified in 1948 to allow the injured worker to both receive workers' compensation benefits and sue the employer for damages, although any recovery in a tort suit reduces the workers' compensation benefits. The United Kingdom also now provides medical benefits to injured workers under the National Health Service.</abstract><cop>Champaign</cop><pub>Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1095-6654 |
ispartof | Comparative labor law & policy journal, 2017-01, Vol.39 (1), p.247-271 |
issn | 1095-6654 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2617556895 |
source | PAIS Index; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; ProQuest Central |
subjects | Benefits Companies Disability Disability recipients Disease Employees Employers Employment Health care expenditures Health services Injuries Institutes Insurance coverage Labor law Law Occupational diseases Occupational safety Responsibility Settlements & damages Statutes of limitations Supervision Torts Vocational rehabilitation Work Workers compensation Workers with disabilities |
title | IS THE WORK-RELATED TEST DESIRABLE FOR ALL DISEASES THAT DISABLE WORKERS? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T17%3A28%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=IS%20THE%20WORK-RELATED%20TEST%20DESIRABLE%20FOR%20ALL%20DISEASES%20THAT%20DISABLE%20WORKERS?&rft.jtitle=Comparative%20labor%20law%20&%20policy%20journal&rft.au=Burton,%20John%20F&rft.date=2017-01-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=247&rft.epage=271&rft.pages=247-271&rft.issn=1095-6654&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2617556895%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2617556895&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |