Act 147 adopted in October 2006, amended the Act to include provisions for case management and mandatory mediation. Since the settlement conferences had become a common occurrence here in Western Pennsylvania, with regard to mediation, many asked the questions “what for?” Is there really a difference between a settlement conference and a mediation? Alternative dispute tools have gained great popularity in the last few years, so where does this fit in to the workers’ compensation system.
Under section 401 of the new Act, mediation is defined as follows:
“a conference conducted by a workers’ compensation judge, but not necessarily the judge assigned to the actual case involving the parties, and shall require the attendance in person or by teleconference of all parties including the claimant and employer, and their respective counsel. The representative from the employer must have requisite authority to bring about settlement of the case or must have the ability to obtain said authority during the course of the mediation.”The new Act then goes on in section 401.1 dealing with the new mandatory trial schedules, to provide:
Every trial schedule shall include a specific time and date for a mediation conference shall take place no later than 30 days prior to the date set for filing proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law or legal briefs or memoranda, unless, upon good cause shown, the workers compensation judge determines mediation would be futile.”Mediation as a tool is generally understood to be significantly different than a settlement conference. The Uniform Mediation Act defines mediation as “
a process in which a mediator facilitates communication and negotiation between parties to assist them in reaching a voluntary agreement regarding their dispute.” While often thought of as a tool for resolving cases and avoiding costly litigation, it is really a tool to resolve issues. Resolution of the case is often just the by-product of the issue resolution. Remove one or two major issues and the case can become very simple. Clearly the legislative intent of this provision was to expedite the adjudication of these cases.The question arises for the claimant, “Do I still need an attorney?” Despite the seemingly agreeable nature of the mediation, a claimant should still acquire the services of counsel. Preparation is key to an effective mediation, and that includes research into the potential legal issues that will arise in the case. Knowledge of the judge, doctors and other experts involved with the case is also important to analyzing your position. Finally, the insurance carrier will always be represented by counsel and so should you. Give the insurance company an opportunity to exploit you and they will.
We were pleased to notice that the Law Marketing Portal, one of the top online resources for legal marketing, reprinted the Pittsburgh Post Gazette article on January 18th, 2008. At this early stage in our history, it is an honor to be getting this type of attention. This outside attention from the top legal marketers in the legal profession has us even more convinced that our virtual model represents something of value for our clients. http://www.lawmarketing.com/pages/articles.asp?Action=Article&ArticleCategoryID=13&ArticleID=711
The United States Department of Justice has released new Median Income Figures. This is the sixth time since the adoption of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA) that the figures have been adjusted.The figures are applicable to all cases filed on or after February 1, 2008.For the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, new median income figures are as follows:1 Earner - $43,166
2 Persons - $50,628
3 Persons - $63,491
4 Persons - $76,182$6,900 is to be added for each individual in excess of 4The old figures were:1 Earner - $41,971
2 Persons - $49,226
3 Persons - $61,733
4 persons - $74,072
