Employers | | Page 6

IRS Changing Individual Taxpayer ID Number Application Requirements

June 22, 2012

Interim Changes Intended To Promote Better Integrity of the ITIN Process

On June 21, 2012, the Internal Revenue Service announced interim changes to its procedures for issuing Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) from now through the end of the year. Designed specifically for tax-administration purposes, ITINs are only issued to people who are not eligible to obtain a Social Security Number. ITINs play a critical role in the tax administration process and assist with the collection of taxes from foreign nationals, non-resident aliens and others who have filing or payment obligations under U.S. law. Businesses with foreign workers or service providers, others who may be impacted by rules should encourage early action to avoid difficulties in reporting later.

During this interim period, the IRS will only issue ITINs when applications include original documentation, such as passports and birth certificates, or certified copies of these documents from the issuing agency. During this interim period, ITINs will not be issued based on applications supported by notarized copies of documents. In addition, ITINs will not be issued based on applications submitted through certifying acceptance agents unless they attach original documentation or copies of original documents certified by the issuing agency. The changes, which are effective immediately, are designed to strengthen and protect the integrity of the ITIN process while minimizing the impact on taxpayers.

The procedures apply to most applicants submitting Form W-7, Application for IRS Individual Taxpayer Identification Number. ITINs for most individuals generally are issued during the tax filing season with the submission of a Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return. Because the April 17 filing deadline has passed, the IRS anticipates that a small number of taxpayers will need ITINs between now and the end of the year for these purposes.

According to today’s announcement, the IRS will issue final rules before the start of the 2013 filing season when most ITIN requests come in. The IRS will be gathering feedback and suggestions during the summer from stakeholders on what permanent procedures are appropriate as it reviews procedures for the ITIN program. The IRS says it will look to make long-term improvements to the program while minimizing barriers to individuals reporting their income and filing their tax returns.

During this interim period, people who need ITINS to get their tax return processed can do so by submitting by mail their original documentation or certified copies of their documentation. Documentation will be accepted at IRS walk-in sites but will be forwarded to the ITIN centralized site for processing. The IRS also has an additional set of questions and answers for ITIN applicants available.

Some categories of applicants are not impacted by these interim changes, including spouses and dependents of U.S. military personnel who need ITINs. People who should follow the current procedures outlined in the Form W-7 instructions include:

Military spouses and dependents without an SSN who need an ITIN (Military spouses use box e on Form W-7 and dependents use box d). Exceptions to the new interim document standards will be made for military family members satisfying the documentation requirements by providing a copy of the spouse or parent’s U.S. military identification, or applying from an overseas APO/FPO address.
Nonresident aliens applying for ITINs for the purpose of claiming tax treaty benefits (use boxes a and h on Form W-7). Non-resident alien applicants generally need ITINs for reasons besides filing a U.S. tax return. This is necessary for nonresident aliens who may be subject to third-party withholding for various income, such as certain gaming winnings or pension income, or need an ITIN for information reporting purposes. While existing documentation standards will be maintained only for these applicants, scrutiny of the documents will be heightened. ITIN applications of this category that are accompanied by a US tax return will be subject to the new interim document standards.

The IRS may require some taxpayers who have already filed applications to furnish additional documentation directly to the IRS. No additional action is required for people who have already filed ITIN requests unless they are contacted by the IRS.

More information about ITINs can be found at 2012 ITIN Review Frequently Asked Questions.

The changes may impact a wide range of employers and the individuals who provide service to them. Employers dealing with service providers who may be impacted by these rules should act early to request and encourage delivery of taxpayer identification numbers from individuals that may be impacted by these requirements.

For Help or More Information

If you need help with labor and employment or other human resource, performance management, internal controls or compliance and risk management matters, please contact the author of this article, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Board Certified in Labor & employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization,management attorney, author and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping private and governmental organizations and their management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; schools and other governmental agencies and others design, administer and defend innovative compliance, risk management, workforce, compensation, employee benefit, privacy, procurement and other management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers carry out, audit, manage and defend worker classification,union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, procurement, conflict of interest, discrimination management, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions.

Widely published on worker classification and other workforce risk management and compliance concerns, the immediate past-Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Plan Committee, Vice Chair of the ABA TIPS Section Employee Benefits Committee, a Council Representative of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on management, worker classification, re-engineering, investigations, human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and risk management, federal sentencing guideline and other enforcement resolution actions, and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

THE FOLLOWING DISCLAIMER IS INCLUDED TO COMPLY WITH AND IN RESPONSE TO U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR 230 REGULATIONS. ANY STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE NOT INTENDED OR WRITTEN BY THE WRITER TO BE USED, AND NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN CAN BE USED BY YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON, FOR THE PURPOSE OF (1) AVOIDING PENALTIES THAT MAY BE IMPOSED UNDER FEDERAL TAX LAW, OR (2) PROMOTING, MARKETING OR RECOMMENDING TO ANOTHER PARTY ANY TAX-RELATED TRANSACTION OR MATTER ADDRESSED HEREIN.

Comments Off on IRS Changing Individual Taxpayer ID Number Application Requirements | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: reporting, Tax, taxpayer identification numbers, Withholding | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

NLRB Moves To Promote Non-Union Employee Use of Collective Action Rights By Launching Webpage

June 18, 2012

The National Labor Relations Board is launching a new website page focused on promoting awareness and encourage the exercise of rights to employees to act together for their mutual aid and protection, even if they are not in a union, under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

As part of its aggressive commitment to promote and support union organizing and other collective action by employees under the Obama Administration, the NLRB in recent years has stepped up investigatory and enforcement activities on behalf of non-union employees. The right to engage in certain types of concerted activity was written into the original 1935 National Labor Relations Act’s Section 7, which states that: “Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities.”

Non-union concerted activity accounts for more than 5% of the agency’s recent caseload.

The new webpage launched June 18, 2012 here seeks to promote awareness and use of these and other collective action rights under the NLRA by sharing stories of more than a dozen recent cases involving protected concerted activity. Examples of these cases include stories of A construction crew fired after refusing to work in the rain near exposed electrical wires; a customer service representative who lost her job after discussing her wages with a coworker; an engineer at a vegetable packing plant fired after reporting safety concerns affecting other employees; a paramedic fired after posting work-related grievances on Facebook; and poultry workers fired after discussing their grievances with a newspaper reporter.

“A right only has value when people know it exists,” said NLRB Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce. “We think the right to engage in protected concerted activity is one of the best kept secrets of the National Labor Relations Act, and more important than ever in these difficult economic times. Our hope is that other workers will see themselves in the cases we’ve selected and understand that they do have strength in numbers.”

In addition to the new webpage, the NLRA also has undertaken efforts to promote employee awareness of NLRA rights by imposing new employer poster requirements, has attacked the use of mandatory arbibtration provisions by employers as prohibited under the NLRA, and has pursued a wide range of regulatory and enforcement policy changes that seek to strengthen the power of organized labor. In light of this growing activism, employers should continue to strengthen their labor-management policies and practices to mitigate the growing labor exposures that result from this activist agenda.

For Help or More Information

Widely published on worker classification and other workforce risk management and compliance concerns, the immediate past-Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Plan Committee, Vice Chair of the ABA TIPS Section Employee Benefits Committee, a Council Representative of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on management, worker classification, re-engineering, investigations, human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and risk management, federal sentencing guideline and other enforcement resolution actions, and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For more information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on NLRB Moves To Promote Non-Union Employee Use of Collective Action Rights By Launching Webpage | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: NLRA, NLRB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Making Wellness Work On A Shoestring Budget

May 28, 2012

With tight budgets preventing many businesses from investing in wellness consulting resources, a tight budget doesn’t mean your company, church, or other group can’t have a thriving wellness program. Wellness is a culture. While the resources and advice of consultants and bells and whistles can be helpful sometimes, the inability to afford them doesn’t mean that your organization or group can’t have a healthy and effective wellness program.

The key to promoting wellness in your workplace, organization or community is to promote a culture of healthy eating, movement and lifestyles. Establish the culture by leading the way. Make healthy food choices available at meetings. Require or urge your leadership to model good eating behavior. Have a healthy pot luck and challenge employees to bring and share their tastiest, healthy dish.

Encourage leaders and others to incorporate movement into the day. Walking meetings and other inexpensive activities can help promote health with very little cost. Encourage employees to walk in walk-a-thons, participate in running groups, walk or skip to lunch, take the stairs, participate in sports leagues or other similar activities.

Don’t overlook the wealth of available free resources. Project COPE”s Play For Life Program relies upon a host of free often government provided resources. Many great wellness tools are available from NIH and other government sources at little or no cost including the newly released NIH and the Weight of the Nation resources just made available by NIH here.

Project COPE: Coalition On Patient Empowerment & Coalition For Responsible Health Care Quality

Project COPE: Coalition on Patient Empowerment & the Coalition for Responsible Health Care Quality are coalitions of individuals and organizations that share the belief that every American and American organization has a stake, and something to contribute to our ability to find and implement the best options for ensuring that the U.S. health care system provides quality, affordable health care.

Health care impacts every individual and every organization in America. Consequently, every American citizen and organization including but not limited to health care providers, employers, insurer, and community organizations should take part. The government, health care providers, insurers and community organizations can help by providing education and resources to make understanding and dealing with the realities of illness, disability or aging easier for a patient and their family, the affected employers and others. At the end of the day, however, caring for people requires the human touch. Americans can best improve health care by not waiting for someone else to step up or speak up.

Project COPE urges and invites each individual and organization speak up to help communicate and act to make health care work for themselves, their families and others when you can and share your input to help preserve and continue to develop real meaningful improvements to our health care system by joining Project COPE: Coalition for Patient Empowerment here by sharing ideas, tools and other solutions and other resources.

Other Helpful Resources & Other Information

We hope that this information is useful to you. If you found these updates of interest, you also be interested in one or more of the following other recent articles published on the Coalition for Responsible Health Care Reform electronic publication available here, our electronic Solutions Law Press Health Care Update publication available here, or our HR & Benefits Update electronic publication available here .

Wellness is a culture. While the resources and advice of consultants and bells and whistles can be helpful sometimes, the inability to afford them doesn’t mean that your organization or group can’t have a healthy and effective wellness program.

The key to promoting wellness in your workplace, organization or community is to promote a culture of healthy eating, movement and lifestyles. Establish the culture by leading the way. Make healthy food choices available at meetings. Require or encourage your leadership to model good eating behavior. Have a healthy pot luck and challenge employees to bring and share their tastiest, healthy dish.

Encourage leaders and employees and others to incorporate movement into the day. Walking meetings and other inexpensive activities can help promote health with very little expense. Encourage employees to walk in walk-a-thons, participate in running groups, participate in sports leagues or other similar activities.

The key to wellness is getting started and keeping going. Making healthy living part of your culture can pay big benefits in health and absentee savings, increased productivity and workforce retention. What are you waiting for? Get moving!

Other Helpful Resources & Other Information

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing and updating, administering or defending your group health or other employee benefit, human resources, insurance, health care matters or related documents or practices, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on cutting edge health and managed care, employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials concerning regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Recognized in Who’s Who In American Professionals and both an American Bar Association (ABA) and a State Bar of Texas Fellow, Ms. Stamer serves on the Editorial Advisory Board of Employee Benefits News, the editor and publisher of Solutions Law Press HR & Benefits Update and other Solutions Law Press Publications, and active in a multitude of other employee benefits, human resources and other professional and civic organizations. She also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, Modern and many other national and local publications. You can learn more about Ms. Stamer and her experience, review some of her other training, speaking, publications and other resources, and register to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns from Ms. Stamer here.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Making Wellness Work On A Shoestring Budget | Claims Administration, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: ADA, Affordable Care Act, Employers, group health plan, Health, Health Insurance, Health Plans, HIPAA, Mental Health Benefits, Mental Health Parity, Substance Abuse Benefits, weight loss, Wellness, Wellness Programs | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Tighten Defensibility of Criminal & Other Background Check Practices In Light of Labor Department Non-Discrimination Regulation & Enforcement Emphasis

May 25, 2012

Employers, job banks, recruiters and other parties that conduct and rely upon criminal background checks for purposes of screening applicants or making other employment decisions should check and update their practices in response to the announced plans of the U.S. Department of Labor to expand and enforce limitations on employment discrimination against individuals with criminal records as well as the criminal background check requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and other applicable laws.

While criminal or other background checks often are mandated or otherwise business justified, employers and others conducting or using background check information need to understand and comply with legal requirements about the use and administration of criminal or other background checks.

Potential Employment Discrimination Exposures From Criminal Background Checks

Over the past several months, Labor Department officials have identified protection of individuals with criminal backgrounds against employment discrimination as a policy and enforcement priority.

In keeping with this goal, the Labor Department Employment and Training Administration (ETA), with the Civil Rights Center (CRC). on May 25, 2012 published updated training guidance for about exclusions based on criminal records, and how they are relevant to the existing nondiscrimination obligations for the public workforce system and certain other entities that receive federal financial assistance to operate Job Banks, to provide assistance to job seekers in locating and obtaining employment, and to assist employers by screening and referring qualified applicants in Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 31-11 (TEGL) along with the following accompanying guidance documents:

Meet FCRA Criminal & Other Background Check Requirements

When conducting such a criminal or other background check using a third-party or the internet, care should be taken to comply with the applicable purpose, notice and consent requirements for conducting third-party conducted background checks under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and otherwise applicable law.

Since criminal and other background investigations generally qualify as a credit check for purposes of the FCRA, employers, recruiters, job banks and other parties conducting background checks for employment related purposes risk significant liability for conducting these activities without providing the proper notifications and obtaining necessary consents. Additional requirements often also may apply under applicable state laws, labor-management contracts, government contracting requirements or other similar requirements. Consequently, before doing any credit or other background check, employers or others should ensure that they have the policies, disclosures, data security and written consents required to comply with the FCRA and other laws.

With these procedures in place, employers or others planning to use criminal or other background checks then should work to manage discrimination and other potential risks associated with potential challenges to their use of the information.

Among other things, businesses should carefully document the business justification for their use of the background check and restrict the data they request and receive to information relevant to that purpose. The collection and receipt of this information should be structured and managed in such a way to mitigate employment discrimination, privacy and other legal risks and to promote defensibility. For instance, proper procedures should be used to lower the risk of a pattern of prohibited discrimination on race, national origin, disability or other similar employment discrimination laws. Likewise, collection or receipt of information such as bankruptcy history or other liability sensitive information should be avoided unless a legally defensible need and appropriate procedures governing use can be demonstrated in operation. Care also should be taken to apply the criteria uniformly. Given ADA, GINA, FACTA and other privacy concerns, employers also should specifically check their data collection and protection procedures for adequacy.

To help with these and other concerns, consider defining and documenting in advance the relevant criteria for the position and why it is relevant. Where possible, try to avoid getting information beyond that defined as relevant which could raise sensitivities. Since the FCRA requires notice if adverse hiring decisions are made, employers also should carefully evaluate and document the basis of their decisions when deciding not to hire or promote individuals based on this information and appropriately safeguard this information against improper use or disclosure.

For Help Or Additional Information

If you need help reviewing and updating, administering or defending your background check or other employee benefits, human resources, health care or insurance matters, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law, a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on human resources, recruitment, employee benefits, compensation, credentialing, promotion and discipline and related workforce and risk management matters.

Widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend employment and other services arrangements and assocaited employee benefit, compensation, reductions in force and other severance and other human resources, employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s r management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials about regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Tighten Defensibility of Criminal & Other Background Check Practices In Light of Labor Department Non-Discrimination Regulation & Enforcement Emphasis | ADA, Affirmative Action, Bankruptcy, Civil Rights, Corporate Compliance, Disability, EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employers, GINA, Government Contractors, Internal Controls, Labor Management Relations, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Nonresident aliens, OFCCP, Rehabilitation Act, Tax | Tagged: background check, criminal background check, Discrimination, Employer, FCRA, job bank | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Review & Update Health Plan Mental Health Coverage As DOL Supplements Guidance On Health Plan Mental Health Parity Rules

May 23, 2012

Group health plans and health insurers subject to the mental health parity requirements of the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA) have extra guidance about the effect of these requirements on utilization management and copayment requirements. As the Labor Department and other federal agencies celebrate Mental Health Awareness Month, plan sponsors, administrators and fiduciaries should review and update their plans to comply with the current requirements and tighten administration and other documentation to position decisions for defensibility against growing scrutiny.

In conjunction with its marking of Mental Health Awareness month in May, the Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) recently updated its guidance and resources about the MHPAEA. The updated resources include:

New Mental Health Parity webpage, available here; and
Understanding (and Common Misunderstandings Related to) Implementation of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008, available here.

This new guidance supplements a growing list of guidance concerning the interpretation and enforcement of the MHPAEA by the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Labor and the Treasury (the Departments). On November 17, 2011, the Departments jointly published more FAQs that share insights on how the MHPAEA requirements impact certain common copayments and utilization review arrangements historically used by plans and insurers. The new FAQ guidance here provides more clarification about the meaning of the interim final rules implementing MHPAEA the Departments jointly issued on February 2, 2010, and earlier FAQ guidance published on June 30, 2010 and December 22, 2010 as applied to these practices.

For group health insurers and group health plans subject to its provisions, MHPAEA generally requires that insurer or plan:

Cannot impose financial requirements and treatment limitations on mental health and substance use disorder benefits that are more restrictive than the predominant financial requirements and treatment limitations that apply to substantially all medical and surgical benefits; and
Cannot impose separate financial requirements or treatment limitations that are applicable only to mental health or substance use disorder benefits.

Insurers, plan sponsors, fiduciaries and administrators also should consider the potential implications of various other federal requirements on the design and administration of mental health and substance abuse coverage and benefits under their programs. For example, the express reference to mental health and substance abuse benefits as included within the definition of “essential benefits” for purposes of the Affordable Care Act requires additional consideration of the effect of the Affordable Care Act’s annual and lifetime limit and other mandates relating to essential benefit coverage be evaluated and addressed. In addition, specific attention should be devoted to the potential effects of the Affordable Care Act’s independent review and other rules concerning the processing and payment of health benefit claims by non-grandfathered health plans.

Along with considering the potential implications of these emerging requirements, health insurers, group health plans and those involved in their design and administration also should verify that their eligibility and other program terms or practices do not inappropriately violate the nondiscrimination rules of laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act or other laws and that their plan and those involved in its administration are properly safeguarding the confidentiality of sensitive information about mental health , substance abuse or other health information about covered persons or their family. Learn more here.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Review & Update Health Plan Mental Health Coverage As DOL Supplements Guidance On Health Plan Mental Health Parity Rules | Claims Administration, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: ADA, Affordable Care Act, group health plan, Health Insurance, Health Plans, HIPAA, Mental Health Benefits, Mental Health Parity, Substance Abuse Benefits | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Western Mixers & Officers Ordered To Pay $1.2M+ For Improperly Using Benefit Plan Funds For Company Operations, Other ERISA Violations

May 23, 2012

Businesses owners and managers should treat last week’s judgment against a California fruit and nut supplier Western Mixers Inc. and its officers as a wake-up call to meet employee benefit funding obligations, not to use plan monies for company operations and to take other required steps to make sure that retirement, health and other employee benefit plans moneys and other responsibilities are properly handled.

Under a judgment entered in Solis v. Frank L. Rudy et. al. and Western Mixers Inc. Money Purchase Pension Plan, Western Mixers Inc., its owners and officers will pay a total of $1,287,901 to the company’s pension plan, plus a 20 percent penalty to the Department of Labor.

Following an investigation by the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), the Department of Labor sued Western Mixers Inc. and two officers who served as trustees of the plan for failing to make approximately $952,511 in mandatory employer contributions for the benefit of participants and beneficiaries and improperly using plan monies in the company’s business operations. Investigators also found that the same two officers as well as the company’s chief financial officer made $565,000 in unauthorized withdrawals from the plan accounts, commingling those funds in the company’s general accounts and using them for the benefit of the business.

Labor Department officials sued the company, and the officers for violation of the fiduciary responsibility rules of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). ERISA generally requires that plan trustees and other plan fiduciaries carry out duties with respect to an employee benefit plan assets prudently for the exclusive benefit of participants.

Pursuant to the consent judgment, the company and its officers admitted to violation of ERISA. During the course of the investigation leading up to the lawsuit, the company previously repaid to the plan $485,000 of the total funds identified as missing by the Labor Department. According to an announcement of the U.S. Department of Labor on May 14, 2012, Midwest Mixers Inc.’s officers agreed to repay $802,901 to participants’ accounts within 10 day of the judgment.

In addition to repaying the missing funds with interest, defendants also must pay a penalty equal to 20 percent of the recovered amount. The court also has appointed an independent fiduciary to terminate the plan and to collect, marshal, pay out and administer plan assets. Frank L. Rudy and David H. Bolstad, owners of the company, are removed as plan trustees and fiduciaries. Together with Robert J. Fischer, Western Mixers, Inc.’s chief financial officer, they are permanently enjoined and restrained from violating ERISA and from serving as fiduciary or service providers to any ERISA-covered plan in the future.

The Western Mixer’s judgement demonstrates that owners, operators and managers of businesses that exercise discretion and control over the funding, investment or administration of employee benefit plans or their assets face significant liability for failing to properly fulfill their responsibilities with respect to their employee benefit plans. Businesses, their owners, board members, officers, and other members of management making decisions about the maintenance, funding, administration, termination, hiring or appointment of fiduciaries or service providers or other matters impacting the employee benefit plan should ensure that they understand the potential implications and responsibilities associated with these activities for themselves and their companies. individuals who have authority or responsibility for employee benefit plans who also perform or take part in the performance of other company management functions also should pre-educate themselves about when ERISA may require that their plan responsibilities be put before otherwise applicable responsibilities to their company, appropriate processes for documenting decisions and activities and other procedures that can help position activities to mitigate exposures and promote defensibility.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing and updating, administering or defending your employee benefit, human resources, insurance, health care matters or related documents or practices or with other employee benefits, human resources, health care or insurance matters, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on leading health and managed care, employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials about regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Western Mixers & Officers Ordered To Pay $1.2M+ For Improperly Using Benefit Plan Funds For Company Operations, Other ERISA Violations | Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: Bankruptcy, ERISA, fee disclosure, Fiduciary, plan investiments, prohibited traansaction, Prudence | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Plan Administrator Faces Civil & Criminal Prosecution For Allegedly Making Prohibited $3.2 Million Real Estate Investment

May 22, 2012

The U.S. Department of Labor has filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho against Matthew D. Hutcheson alleging that he violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) by imprudently investing retirement plan assets in a now-failed real estate venture. Hutcheson also faces a separate criminal indictment, which was filed in the same court on April 10, in connection with the same transaction.

The Labor Department civil complaint alleges that, toward the end of 2010, Hutcheson used more than $3.2 million representing the retirement plan savings of workers from multiple employers for his own personal expenses and in an attempt to buy an interest in the Tamarack Resort – a failed ski and golf resort in Idaho.

Labor Department officials charge this imprudent prohibited transaction has left affected retirement plans without sufficient funds to pay participants all the benefits owed to them.

The Labor Department also has filed an application for a temporary restraining order seeks to remove Hutcheson and other named defendants as fiduciaries of the affected plans, and seeks to appoint an independent fiduciary to administer the plans. In addition to Hutcheson, defendants include Hutcheson Walker Advisors LLC; Green Valley Holdings LLC; and the Retirement Security Plan and Trust, formerly known as the Pension Liquidity Plan and Trust.

Appropriate management of retirement and other employee benefit plan assets is a key obiligation of employee benefit plan investment advisors and other fiduciaries that have authority over plan assets. Plan fiduciaries generally are required by ERISA 404 to invest prudently and for the exclusive benefit of plan participants and beneficiaries. Additionally, ERISA generally prohibits plan fiduciaries from investing in or involving the plan or its assets in certain prohibited transactions or dealing with plan assets for the benefit of themselves or other third parties.

Because violations of ERISA’s fiduciary responsibility rules can create personal liability, employer and other plan sponsors, plan fiduciaries and others participating in decisions or administration of a rebate exercise care in dealing with any rebate. Many plan sponsors also may want to consider reviewing and tightening as warranted existing plan, trust, insurance policy, plan communications and other documentation to lower risks and promote desired characterization of rebates and other amounts paid into or with respect to their plans.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing and updating, administering or defending your group health or other employee benefit, human resources, insurance, health care matters or related documents or practices or with other employee benefits, human resources, health care or insurance matters, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on leading health and managed care, employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials about regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Plan Administrator Faces Civil & Criminal Prosecution For Allegedly Making Prohibited $3.2 Million Real Estate Investment | Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 404, 406, ERISA, fiduciary liabiity, Fiduciary Responsibility, investment, investment advisor, plan administrator, prohibited transactions | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Employee Plan Fee Disclosure Rules Clarified

May 22, 2012

The Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) has made a technical correction to recently released participant-level fee disclosure regulation (29 CFR § 2550.404a-5) contained in Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2012-02 (Fab 2012-02) as initially released on May 7, 2012.

Fab 2012-02 contains frequently asked questions and answers about the Department’s participant-level fee disclosure regulation. As originally released a sentence in the answer to Question 19 concerning quarterly Web site updates to “average annual total return” information inadvertently referred to the most recently completed calendar “year” rather than the most recently completed calendar “quarter.”

In its technical correction of this provision on May 17, 2012, EBSA revised the Faq to track the regulation of the regulation amd re,pved the word “calendar”from the phrase “… 10-calendar year periods …” in the same sentence. See Q-19, n.2. The Fab as revised is available at: here.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing and updating, administering or defending your group health or other employee benefit, human resources, insurance, health care matters or related documents or practices or with other employee benefits, human resources, health care or insurance matters, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on leading health and managed care, employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials about regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Employee Plan Fee Disclosure Rules Clarified | Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: ERISA, fee disclosure, Fiduciary, participant fee disclosuyrenvestment-advisor, plan investiments, prohibited traansaction, Prudence | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Labor Department Annual Self-Insured Health Plan Report To Congress Released

May 3, 2012

The U.S. Department of Labor (Labor Department) submitted to Congress its 2012 Annual Report on Self-Insured Group Health Plans (2012 HP Report) today (May 4, 2012).

The 2012 HP Report is the second the Labor Department has prepared to comply with the requirement of Section 1253 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “Affordable Care Act”) that the Labor Secretart prepare an aggregate annual report that includes certain general information on self-insured group health plans using data collected from the Annual Return/Report of Employee Benefit Plan (the “Form 5500”), as well as certain data from financial filings of self-insured employers.

The Labor Department provided the the first report, Annual Report on Self-Insured Group Health Plans, March 2011 (March 2011 Report)to Congress in March 2011.

Section I of the 2012 HP Report presents aggregate statistics describing self-insured plans that file a Form 5500 – generally, private-sector employee health plans that cover 100 or more participants or hold assets in trust.

Section II of the 2012 HP Report presents certain available financial information on employers that sponsor such plans. Section III shares various Labor Department conclusions relating to the 2012 HP Report data.

Along with the 2012 HP Report, the Labor Department also included two additional documents as Appendixes:

Appendix A, Group Health Plans Report: Abstract of 2009 Form 5500 Annual Reports Reflecting Statistical Year Filings, provides detailed statistics describing group health plans that file a Form 5500; and
Appendix B, Self-Insured Health Benefit Plans 2012, presents a study that explores statistical issues associated with Form 5500 health plan data and analyzes available data on the financial status of employers that sponsor group health plans filing the Form 5500.

The 2012 HP Report shares and discusses various implications of statistics relating to practices and other elements of self-insured plans. Among other things, the 2012 HP Report indicates that Sponsors of self-insured plans generally bear the risk associated with paying their plans’ covered health expenses. In contrast, sponsors of fully-insured plans generally pay premiums to insurers and transfer all such risk to them. Some sponsors retain the risk for a subset of benefits, but transfer the risk for the remaining benefits to health insurers – that is, they finance their plans’ benefits using a mixture of self-insurance and insurance.

A complete copy of the Report is available for review here.

For Help or More Information

If you need additional information about Affordable Care Act or other help with reviewing and updating, administering or defending your group health or other employee benefit, human resources, insurance, health care matters or related documents or practices, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Recognized in Who’s Who In American Professionals and both an American Bar Association (ABA) and a State Bar of Texas Fellow, Ms. Stamer serves on the Editorial Advisory Board of Employee Benefits News, the editor and publisher of Solutions Law Press HR & Benefits Update and other Solutions Law Press Publications, and active in a multitude of other employee benefits, human resources and other professional and civic organizations. She also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, Modern Health Care and many other national and local publications. You can learn more about Ms. Stamer and her experience, review some of her other training, speaking, publications and other resources, and register to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns from Ms. Stamer here.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

For important information concerning this communication click here. THE FOLLOWING DISCLAIMER IS INCLUDED TO COMPLY WITH AND IN RESPONSE TOU.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR 230 REGULATIONS. ANY STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE NOT INTENDED OR WRITTEN BY THE WRITER TO BE USED, AND NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN CAN BE USED BY YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON, FOR THE PURPOSE OF (1) AVOIDING PENALTIES THAT MAY BE IMPOSED UNDER FEDERAL TAX LAW, OR (2) PROMOTING, MARKETING OR RECOMMENDING TO ANOTHER PARTY ANY TAX-RELATED TRANSACTION OR MATTER ADDRESSED HEREIN.

Comments Off on Labor Department Annual Self-Insured Health Plan Report To Congress Released | Affordable Care Act, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Uncategorized | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, Health Plans, self-insured health plans | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

NLRB Challenges Mandatory Arbitration Provisions

May 1, 2012

Employers should check handbooks or other policies include provisions that require employees to agree to mandatory individual arbitration or other waivers of rights to sue, file regulatory charges or seek other remedies should evaluate the advisability of updating those policies in light of recent National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) actions like those announced yesterday (April 30, 2012) against 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. (24-Hour Fitness).

In D.R. Horton, Inc., 357 NLRB No. 184, the Board earlier this year found that the employer, a home building company, violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by maintaining, as a condition of employment, a mandatory arbitration agreement that did not allow its employees to file joint, class, or collective employment-related claims in any forum, arbitral or judicial.

As a follow-up to that decision, the NLRB now is charging 24-Hour Fitness with violating federal labor law by insisting that all employment-related disputes be resolved by individual arbitration. A California-based corporation which operates fitness centers across the country, 24-Hour Fitness requires employees to agree in writing, as a condition of employment, to forego any rights to “collective or class action” lawsuits or arbitrations. Applying the rule it adopted earlier this year in D.R. Horton, Inc., 357 NLRB No. 184, the NLRB is charging this violates the collective bargaining and organizational rights of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

The charges against 24-Hour Fitness stem from a charge filed by an employee at the 24 Hour Fitness center in San Ramon, California. Since at least the summer of 2010, the NLRB claims that the company has enforced its no-class-action policy by asserting it in litigation brought by employees in many cases, seven of which are cited in the complaint. In each case, employees, sought to bring workplace-related claims, such as wage and hour violations, on a class-wide basis. In response, 24-Hour Fitness sought to compel the employees to submit their common claims to individual arbitrations, citing the policy in its handbook.

The complaint calls for a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge on June 11, and seeks an order requiring the company’s fitness centers nationwide to stop maintaining and enforcing that portion of the policy that prohibits collective and class action, and to notify all judicial and arbitral forums in which it has opposed such action.

The NLRB position regarding mandatory arbitration policies is of a series of activist positions that it has taken over the past year. In light of this growing activism, employers should continue to strengthen their labor-management policies and practices to mitigate the growing labor exposures that result from this activist agenda.

For Help or More Information

Widely published on worker classification and other workforce risk management and compliance concerns, the immediate past-Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Plan Committee, Vice Chair of the ABA TIPS Section Employee Benefits Committee, a Council Representative of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on management, worker classification, re-engineering, investigations, human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and risk management, federal sentencing guideline and other enforcement resolution actions, and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters.Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on NLRB Challenges Mandatory Arbitration Provisions | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: NLRA, NLRB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

EEOC Sues Wendy’s Franchisee For Disability Discrimination

April 18, 2012

Killeen Fast-Food Restaurant Refused to Hire Hearing-Impaired Applicant Despite His Qualifications, Federal Agency Charges

Wendy’s franchisee, CTW L.L.C., (Texas Wendy’s) is being sued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for allegedly violating the Americans With Disabililties Act by denying employment to a hearing-impaired applicant. In its suit against Texas Wendy’s, the EEOC seeks injunctive relief, including the formulation of policies to prevent and correct disability discrimination as well as an award of lost wages and compensatory damages for Harrison and punitive damages against CTW L.L.C. An example of a growing number of disability discrimination enforcement actions taken against employers and others on behalf of hearing impaired or other persons with disabilities under the Obama Administration, the case against Texas Wendy’s highlights the growing enforcement exposures of U.S. businesses to disability discrimination claims under the Obama Administration.

Wendy’s Suit

The EEOC charges in its suit against Texas Wendy’s, Case No. 6:12-CV-00091-WSS in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Waco Division, that the general manager of a Killeen, Texas Wendy’s refused to hire Michael Harrison, Jr. for a cooker position, despite his qualifications and experience, upon learning that Harrison is hearing-impaired.

According to the EEOC, Harrison, who had previously worked for a different fast-food franchise for over two years, was denied hire by the general manager. Harrison said that after successfully interviewing with the Wendy’s shift manager, he attempted to complete the interview process by interviewing with Wendy’s general manager via Texas Relay, a telephonic system utilized by people with hearing impairments. Harrison’s told the EEOC that during the call he was told by the general manager that “there is really no place for someone we cannot communicate with.”

Expanding Disability Discrimination Exposures

As illustrated by the suit against Texas Wendy’s, employers must exercise care when making hiring, promotion or other employment related decisions relating to persons with hearing or other conditions that could qualify as a disability under the ADA.

The ADA generally prohibits disability discrimination and requires employers to make reasonable accommodations to employees’ and applicants’ disabilities as long as this does not pose an undue hardship.

In recent years, amendments to the original provisions of the ADA have made it easier for plaintiffs and the EEOC to establish disabled status of an individual. Businesses should exercise caution to carefully document legitimate business justification for their hiring, promotion and other employment related decisions about these and other individuals who might qualify as disabled. Provisions of the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) that expand the definition of “disability” under the ADA, As signed into law on September 25, 2008, the ADAAA amended the definition of “disability” for purposes of the disability discrimination prohibitions of the ADA to make it easier for an individual seeking protection under the ADA to establish that that has a disability within the meaning of the ADA. The ADAAA retains the ADA’s basic definition of “disability” as an impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a record of such an impairment, or being regarded as having such an impairment. However, provisions of the ADAAA that took effect January 1, 2009 change the way that these statutory terms should be interpreted in several ways. Most significantly, the Act:

Directs EEOC to revise that portion of its regulations defining the term “substantially limits;”
Expands the definition of “major life activities” by including two non-exhaustive lists: (1) The first list includes many activities that the EEOC has recognized (e.g., walking) as well as activities that EEOC has not specifically recognized (e.g., reading, bending, and communicating); and (2) The second list includes major bodily functions (e.g., “functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions”);
States that mitigating measures other than “ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses” shall not be considered in assessing whether an individual has a disability;
Clarifies that an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active;
Changes the definition of “regarded as” so that it no longer requires a showing that the employer perceived the individual to be substantially limited in a major life activity, and instead says that an applicant or employee is “regarded as” disabled if he or she is subject to an action prohibited by the ADA (e.g., failure to hire or termination) based on an impairment that is not transitory and minor; and
Provides that individuals covered only under the “regarded as” prong are not entitled to reasonable accommodation.

The ADAAA also emphasizes that the definition of disability should be construed in favor of broad coverage of individuals to the maximum extent permitted by the terms of the ADA and generally shall not require extensive analysis.In adopting these changes, Congress expressly sought to overrule existing employer-friendly judicial precedent construing the current provisions of the ADA and to require the EEOC to update its existing guidance to confirm with the ADAAA Amendments. Under the leadership of the Obama Administration, the EEOC and other federal agencies have embraced this charge and have sigificantly stepped up enforcement of the ADA and other federal discrimination laws.

Violations of the ADA can expose businesses to substantial liability. Violations of the ADA may be prosecuted by the EEOC or by private lawsuits. Employees or applicants that can prove they were subjected to prohibited disability discrimination under the ADA generally can recover actual damages, attorneys’ fees, and up to $300,000 of exemplary damages (depending on the size of the employer).

The ADAAA amendments coupled with the Obama Administration’s emphasis on enforcement make it likely that businesses generally will face more disability claims from a broader range of employees and will possess fewer legal shields to defend themselves against these claims. These changes will make it easier for certain employees to qualify as disabled under the ADA. Consequently, businesses should act strategically to mitigate their ADA exposures in anticipation of these changes.

To help mitigate the expanded employment liability risks created by the ADAAA amendments, businesses generally should act cautiously when dealing with applicants or employees with actual, perceived, or claimed physical or mental impairments to minimize exposures under the ADA. Management should exercise caution to carefully and appropriate the potential legal significance of physical or mental impairments or conditions that might be less significant in severity or scope, correctable through the use of eyeglasses, hearing aids, daily medications or other adaptive devices, or that otherwise have been assumed by management to fall outside the ADA’s scope. Employers should no longer assume, for instance, that a visually impaired employee won’t qualify as disabled because eyeglasses can substantially correct the employee’s visual impairment.

Likewise, businesses should be prepared for the EEOC and the courts to treat a broader range of disabilities, including those much more limited in severity and life activity restriction, to qualify as disabling for purposes of the Act. Businesses should assume that a greater number of employees with such conditions are likely to seek to use the ADA as a basis for challenging hiring, promotion and other employment decisions. For this reason, businesses generally should tighten job performance and other employment recordkeeping to enhance their ability to demonstrate nondiscriminatory business justifications for the employment decisions made by the businesses.

Businesses also should consider tightening their documentation regarding their procedures and processes governing the collection and handling records and communications that may contain information regarding an applicant’s physical or mental impairment, such as medical absences, worker’s compensation claims, emergency information, or other records containing health status or condition related information. The ADA generally requires that these records be maintained in separate confidential files and disclosed only to individuals with a need to know under circumstances allowed by the ADA.

As part of this process, businesses also should carefully review their employment records, group health plan, family leave, disability accommodation, and other existing policies and practices to comply with, and manage exposure under the new genetic information nondiscrimination and privacy rules enacted as part of the Genetic Information and Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) signed into law by President Bush on May 21, 2008. Effective November 21, 2009, Title VII of GINA amends the Civil Rights Act to prohibit employment discrimination based on genetic information and restricts the ability of employers and their health plans to require, collect or retain certain genetic information. Under GINA, employers, employment agencies, labor organizations and joint labor-management committees face significant liability for violating the sweeping nondiscrimination and confidentiality requirements of GINA concerning their use, maintenance and disclosure of genetic information. Employees can sue for damages and other relief like currently available under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other nondiscrimination laws. For instance, GINA’s employment related provisions include rules that will:

Prohibit employers and employment agencies from discriminating based on genetic information in hiring, termination or referral decisions or in other decisions regarding compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment;
Prohibit employers and employment agencies from limiting, segregating or classifying employees so as to deny employment opportunities to an employee based on genetic information;
Bar labor organizations from excluding, expelling or otherwise discriminating against individuals based on genetic information;
Prohibit employers, employment agencies and labor organizations from requesting, requiring or purchasing genetic information of an employee or an employee’s family member except as allowed by GINA to satisfy certification requirements of family and medical leave laws, to monitor the biological effects of toxic substances in the workplace or other conditions specifically allowed by GINA;
Prohibit employers, labor organizations and joint labor-management committees from discriminating in any decisions related to admission or employment in training or retraining programs, including apprenticeships based on genetic information;
Mandate that in the narrow situations where limited cases where genetic information is obtained by a covered entity, it maintain the information on separate forms in separate medical files, treat the information as a confidential medical record, and not disclosure the genetic information except in those situations specifically allowed by GINA;
Prohibit any person from retaliating against an individual for opposing an act or practice made unlawful by GINA; and
Regulate the collection, use, access and disclosure of genetic information by employer sponsored and certain other health plans.

These employment provisions of GINA are in addition to amendments to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Public Health Service Act, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and Title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act that are effective for group health plan for plan years beginning after May 20, 2009.

If you have any questions or need help reviewing and updating your organization’s employment and/or employee practices in response to the ADAAA, GINA or other applicable laws, or if we may be of assistance with regard to any other workforce management, employee benefits or compensation matters, please do not hesitate to contact the author of this update, Curran Tomko Tarksi LLP Labor & Employment Practice Chair Cynthia Marcotte Stamer at 214.270.2402.

About The Author

Management attorney and consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer helps businesses, governments and associations solve problems, develop and implement strategies to manage people, processes, and regulatory exposures to achieve their business and operational objectives and manage legal, operational and other risks. Board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, with more than 20 years human resource and employee benefits experience, Ms. Stamer helps businesses manage their people-related risks and the performance of their internal and external workforce though appropriate human resources, employee benefit, worker’s compensation, insurance, outsourcing and risk management strategies domestically and internationally. Recognized in the International Who’s Who of Professionals and bearing the Martindale Hubble AV-Rating, Ms. Stamer also is a highly regarded author and speaker, who regularly conducts management and other training on a wide range of labor and employment, employee benefit, human resources, internal controls and other related risk management matters. Her writings frequently are published by the American Bar Association (ABA), Aspen Publishers, Bureau of National Affairs, the American Health Lawyers Association, SHRM, World At Work, Government Institutes, Inc., Atlantic Information Services, Employee Benefit News, and many others. For a listing of some of these publications and programs, see here. Her insights on human resources risk management matters also have been quoted in The Wall Street Journal, various publications of The Bureau of National Affairs and Aspen Publishing, the Dallas Morning News, Spencer Publications, Health Leaders, Business Insurance, the Dallas and Houston Business Journals and a host of other publications. Chair of the ABA RPTE Employee Benefit and Other Compensation Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and the Legislative Chair of the Dallas Human Resources Management Association Government Affairs Committee, she also serves in leadership positions in numerous human resources, corporate compliance, and other professional and civic organizations. For more details about Ms. Stamer’s experience and other credentials, contact Ms. Stamer, information about workshops and other training, selected publications and other human resources related information, see here or contact Ms. Stamer via telephone at 214.270.2402 or via e-mail here.

Other Helpful Resources & Other Information

If you found these updates of interest, you also be interested in one or more of the following other recent articles published in this electronic Solutions Law publication available for review here. If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail- by creating or updating your profile at here.

For important information concerning this communication click here. If you do not wish to receive these updates in the future, send an e-mail with the word “Remove” in the Subject to support@solutionslawyer.net.

Comments Off on EEOC Sues Wendy’s Franchisee For Disability Discrimination | ADA, Corporate Compliance, EEOC, Employers, GINA, Human Resources, OFCCP, Retaliation | Tagged: ADA, Corporate Compliance, Disability Discrimination, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment, Health Insurance, Health Plans, Human Resources | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Brokerage Firm To Pay $630,000+ To Benefit Plans To Settle DOL Charges It Wrongfully Steered Clients To Investments

April 18, 2012

News that Memphis-based brokerage firm Morgan Keegan and Co., Inc. will pay more than $600,000 to settle charges it violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) reminds employee benefit plan fiduciaries and brokerage or other providers of investment advice or services to employee benefit plans.

The Employee Benefit Security Administration (EBSA) announced April 16, 2012 that Morgan Keegan has agreed to pay $633,715.46 to 10 ERISA-covered pension plans to settle EBSA charges that it violated ERISA when it recommended certain hedge funds of funds as investments to its ERISA-covered employee benefit plan clients. These recommendations resulted in the hedge funds of funds paying Morgan Keegan revenue-sharing and other fees.

Following an investigation by EBSA’s Atlanta Regional Office as part of EBSA’s “Consultant/Adviser Project,” EBSA charged Morgan Keegan violated ERISA between April 2001 and November 2008 by accepting undisclosed compensation to steer employee benefit plan investments. The Consultant/Advisor Project focuses on the receipt of improper or undisclosed compensation by employee benefit plan consultants and other investment advisers.

Under the terms of the settlement, Morgan Keegan has agreed to disclose to its ERISA plans clients whether the company will act as a fiduciary to those plans. If the company is acting as a fiduciary, Morgan Keegan has agreed to specify the services that it is providing as a fiduciary and to provide the ERISA plan clients a description of all compensation and fees received, in any form, from any source, involving any investment or transaction related to them. Morgan Keegan also agrees not to collect commissions or, if it does collect them, to refund to its ERISA plans clients 100 percent of the amount collected from third parties.

Meanwhile, EBSA also increasingly has focused regulatory and enforcement attention on broker or other service provider arrangements involving compensation arrangements that might involve a brokerage or other fiduciary service provider in a conflict of interest in contravention of these ERISA duty of loyalty requirements.

ERISA Section 404 generally requires that plan fiduciaries act prudently and for the exclusive benefit of plan participants and beneficiaries when dealing with plan assets or conducting other plan related responsibilities.

As part of this general fiduciary duty, plan fiduciaries selecting service providers for the plan generally are required to conduct due diligence and prudently review the fees and other compensation received by a service provider. To help support the ability of plan fiduciaries to carry out these responsibilities, EBSA fee disclosure regulations also generally require plan consultants and investment advisors to disclose compensation they receive as a result of plan related transactions and activities.

Along side their fee disclosure obligations, where investment advisor and other service provider acts as employee benefit plan fiduciary, ERISA Section 404 also requires that service provider to conduct its duty prudently and “for the exclusive benefit” of the plans and their beneficiaries. Additionally, ERISA Section 406 generally prohibits plan fiduciaries and other parties in interest from acting for the benefit of a party other than the plan and from engaging in certain other enumerated “party-in-interest” transactions except in certain narrowly proscribed circumstances.

The Morgan Keegan investigation and settlement highlights the readiness of the EBSA to enforce these requirements against broker or other service providers who abuse these rules. “The law is very clear: If you accept a fee to give investment advice to a retirement plan, you are a fiduciary and must therefore act solely in the best interests of the participants in that plan,” said Phyllis C. Borzi, assistant secretary of labor for employee benefits security. “Third-party payments should never be the motivating factor behind which investments brokers and advisers steer retirement clients into.”

To mitigate liability risks arising from fee related violations like those charged against Morgan Keegan, employee benefit plan fiduciaries and brokerage other service providers to employee benefit plans should carefully review and update existing fee and other practices to ensure that the fee disclosure, fiduciary responsibility, prohibited transaction and other requirements of ERISA and other applicable federal law are met. Documented analysis should be conducted and retained to position the parties to demonstrate that the service provider and its fees were prudently determined and disclosed, and that the transaction is free from any prohibited conflicts of interests.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing and updating, administering or defending your group health or other employee benefit, human resources, insurance, health care matters or related documents or practices or with other employee benefits, human resources, health care or insurance matters, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on leading health and managed care, employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials about regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Brokerage Firm To Pay $630,000+ To Benefit Plans To Settle DOL Charges It Wrongfully Steered Clients To Investments | Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: ERISA, fee disclosure, Fiduciary, investment advisor, plan investiments, prohibited traansaction, Prudence | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Latest $100,000 HIPAA Resolution Agreement Nails Physician Group,

April 17, 2012

The $100,000 settlement with an Arizona-based physician group announced today by the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Office of Civil Rights (OCR) under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) demonstrates the need for all health care providers, health plans, health care clearinghouses (covered entities) and their business associates to maintain appropriate HIPAA compliance and risk management procedures and documentation.

Arizona-based Phoenix Cardiac Surgery, P.C. (PCS) will pay the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Civil Rights (OCR) a $100,000 settlement and take corrective action to implement policies and procedures to safeguard the protected health information of its patients to settle OCR charges PCS violated the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) Privacy and Security Rules. Health care providers and other HIPAA-covered entities should heed the PSC and other recent settlements as the latest signal of the risks that health care providers and other covered entities run by failing to adequately implement and administer appropriate HIPAA compliance practices.

The PCS settlement follows an extensive OCR investigation of a report that PCS posted clinical and surgical appointments for its patients on a publically accessible Internet-based calendar. Among other things, the Resolution Agreement documenting the PCS settlement states that OCRâ€™s investigation found that the persistent failure by PCS to adopt HIPAA required policies and safeguards, maintain required business associate agreements, and conduct necessary workforce training resulted in the prohibited posting of more than 1,000 separate entries of ePHI on a publicly accessible, Internet-based calendar and business associates improperly receiving and maintaining PHI and ePHI without the protection of required business associate agreements.

Under the PCS HHS Resolution Agreement available here, PCS will pay a $100,000 settlement amount and a corrective action plan that includes a review of recently developed policies and other actions taken to come into full compliance with the Privacy and Security Rules. Like the $1,500,000 Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee (BCBST) Resolution Agreement announced last month, the PCS shows OCRâ€™s readiness to sanction health care providers and other covered entities of all sizes for violations of HIPAA.

Enforcement Actions Highlight Growing HIPAA Exposures For Covered Entities

Like the BCBST Resolution Agreement and other previously announced OCR Resolution Agreements, the PCS provides more evidence of the growing exposures that health care providers, health plans, health care clearinghouses and their business associates need to carefully and appropriately manage their HIPAA responsibilities. See $1.5 Million HIPAA Settlement Reached To Resolve 1st OCR Enforcement Action Prompted By HITECH Act Breach Report; HIPAA Heats Up: HITECH Act Changes Take Effect & OCR Begins Posting Names, Other Details Of Unsecured PHI Breach Reports On Website. Covered entities are urged to heed these warning by strengthening their HIPAA compliance and adopting other suitable safeguards to minimize HIPAA exposures.

In the face of rising enforcement and fines, OCRâ€™s initiation of HIPAA audits and other recent developments, covered entities and their business associates should tighten privacy policies, breach and other monitoring, training and other practices to reduce potential HIPAA exposures in light of recently tightened requirements and new enforcement risks.

In response to these expanding exposures, all covered entities and their business associates should review critically and carefully the adequacy of their current HIPAA Privacy and Security compliance policies, monitoring, training, breach notification and other practices taking into consideration OCRâ€™s investigation and enforcement actions, emerging litigation and other enforcement data; their own and reports of other security and privacy breaches and near misses, and other developments to determine if additional steps are necessary or advisable.

For more information about the PCS Resolution Agreement and HIPAA compliance and risk management tips, see here.

For Representation, Training & Other Resources

If you need assistance monitoring HIPAA and other health and health plan related regulatory policy or enforcement developments, or to review or respond to these or other health care or health IT related risk management, compliance, enforcement or management concerns, the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer may be able to help.

Vice President of the North Texas Health Care Compliance Professionals Association, Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Section and the former Board Compliance Chair of the National Kidney Foundation of North Texas, Ms. Stamer has more than 24 years experience advising health industry clients about these and other matters. Ms. Stamer has extensive experience advising and assisting health care providers, health plans, their business associates and other health industry clients to establish and administer medical privacy and other compliance and risk management policies, to health care industry investigation, enforcement and other compliance, public policy, regulatory, staffing, and other operations and risk management concerns. She regularly designs and presents HIPAA and other risk management, compliance and other training for health plans, employers, health care providers, professional associations and others.

Scheduled to serve as the scribe for the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits agency meeting with OCR, Ms. Stamer also regularly works with OCR and other agencies, publishes and speaks extensively on medical and other privacy and data security, health and managed care industry regulatory, staffing and human resources, compensation and benefits, technology, public policy, reimbursement and other operations and risk management concerns. Her publications and insights appear in the Health Care Compliance Association, Atlantic Information Service, Bureau of National Affairs, World At Work, The Wall Street Journal, Business Insurance, the Dallas Morning News, Modern Health Care, Managed Healthcare, Health Leaders, and a many other national and local publications. For instance, Ms. Stamer for the second year will serve as the appointed scribe for the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Agency meeting with OCR. Her insights on HIPAA risk management and compliance frequently appear in medical privacy related publications of a broad range of health care, health plan and other industry publications Among others, she has conducted privacy training for the Association of State & Territorial Health Plans (ASTHO), the Los Angeles Health Department, the American Bar Association, the Health Care Compliance Association, a multitude of health industry, health plan, insurance and financial services, education, employer employee benefit and other clients, trade and professional associations and others.

You can get more information about her HIPAA and other experience here.

If you need assistance with these or other compliance concerns, wish to inquire about arranging for compliance audit or training, or need legal representation on other matters please contact Ms. Stamer at (469) 767-8872 or via e-mail here.

You can review other recent publications and resources and additional information about the other experience of Ms. Stamer here. Examples of some recent publications that may be of interest include:

DC Court Enjoins Implementation of NLRB Poster Rule

Orthofix Medical Device Exec Awaits Sentencing After Pleading Guilty To Violating Anti-Kickback Law

Health Care Providers Also Should Guard Against Rising Exposures To State Health Care Fraud & Other Enforcement Risks

Director of Texas Office of e-Health Coodination To Discuss Texas HIE Strategy in 3/14 HHS Sponsored Teleconference

Halfway House Owner Gets 24 Months Imprisonment For Health Care Fraud & Kickback Conviction

Health Plans Should Act Quickly To Prepare Affordable Care Act Required Summary of Benefits & Communications & Update Other Health Plan Communications

NLRB Report Shows Rise In Unfair Labor Practice Complaints & Formal Proceedings

Sullivan University System to Pay $483,000 in Back Wages Overtime Violations Stemming From Worker Misclassifications

New DOL Final Rules Tighten Requirements For Employers To Hire Alien Workers Using H-2B Visas

OSHA $1Million Award Against AirTran Airways Highlights Retaliation Risks

HHS Chides Trustmark Life Insurance Company For â€œExcessiveâ€ Health Premium Increases After Affordable Care Act Rate Audit

Labor Department Final Rule Defines Recreation Vehicle For Longshore & Harbor Workersâ€™ Compensation Act

Portion of Health Care Costs Paid By Government Programs Rose As Employer Provided & Other Private Health Care Coverage Declined In 2010

Help Careflite Celebrate New Facility 1/11

Careflite Dedicates New Facility January 11, 2012

Manufacturerâ€™s Excessive I-9 Documentation Triggers Discrimination Liability

If you need help investigating or responding to a known or suspected compliance, litigation or enforcement or other risk management concern, assistance with reviewing, updating, administering or defending a current or proposed employment, employee benefit, compensation or other management practice, wish to inquire about federal or state regulatory compliance audits, risk management or training, or need legal representation on other matters please contact Ms Stamer here or at (469) 767-8872.

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information â€“ including your preferred e-mail â€“ by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here. If you do not wish to receive these updates in the future, send an e-mail with the word â€œRemoveâ€ in the Subject to here.

Comments Off on Latest $100,000 HIPAA Resolution Agreement Nails Physician Group, | Employers, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Insurance | Tagged: Health Plans, HIPAA, OCR, Privacy | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

DC Court Enjoins Implementation of NLRB Poster Rule

April 17, 2012

The District Court for the District of Columbia today (April 17, 2012) granted employers a temporary reprieve from the obligation to comply with a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) poster mandate scheduled to take effect April 30, 2012.

The NLRB rule that was scheduled to take effect on April 30 would dictate that most private sector employers post a 11-by-17-inch notice informing workers of certain union organizing and other labor-management relations rights under the National Labor Relations Act using language dictated by the NLRB. The notice is available at no cost from the NLRB through its website, which has more information on posting requirements and NLRB jurisdiction.

Facing litigation challenging the rule, the NLRB announced on December 23, 2011 that it would delay the deadline to comply with the rule until April 30, 2012. Today’s court ruling enjoins the NLRB from enforcing the new requirement pending additional litigation.

In addition to the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision, a South Carolina Court also recently issued rulings questioning the NLRB’s enforcement mechanisms under the impending rule.

In response to today’s D.C. Circuit Court decision, NLRB Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce said of the recent decisions, “We continue to believe that requiring employers to post this notice is well within the Board’s authority, and that it provides a genuine service to employees who may not otherwise know their rights under our law.” Nevertheless, the NLRB announced today thaat it plans to delay further implementation of the poster rule by its regional offices pending the outcome of the impending litigation.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on DC Court Enjoins Implementation of NLRB Poster Rule | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Independent Contractor, Overtime, payroll tax, Wage & Hour, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Small Employers Should Evaluate Eligibility For Small Business Health Care Tax Credit

March 14, 2012

Small employers that provide health insurance coverage to their employees should consider whether they qualify for and should claim the small business health care tax credit authorized by Congress as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act).

The small business health care tax credit enacted two years ago may provide a tax credit for certain small employers that pay at least half of the premiums for employee health insurance coverage under a qualifying arrangement may be eligible for this credit. The credit is specifically targeted to help small businesses and tax-exempt organizations provide health insurance for their employees.

Depending upon how they are structured, eligible small employers are likely subject to one of the following three tax-filing deadlines, which fall in coming weeks:

March 15: Corporations that file on a calendar year basis can figure the credit on Form 8941 and claim it as part of the general business credit on Form 3800, both of which are attached to their corporate income tax return.
April 17: Individuals have until April 17 to complete and file their returns on Form 1040. This includes Sole proprietors, as well as people who have business income reported to them on Schedules K-1—partners in partnerships, S corporation shareholders and beneficiaries of estates and trusts. They also attach Forms 8941 and 3800 to their return. The resulting credit is entered on Form 1040 Line 53.
May 15: Tax-exempt organizations that file on a calendar year basis can use Form 8941 and then claim the credit on Form 990-T, Line 44f.

Taxpayers needing more time to determine eligibility might consider obtaining an automatic tax-filing extension, usually for six months. See Form 4868 for individuals, Form 7004 and its instructions for businesses and Form 8868 for tax-exempt organizations.

Businesses that have already filed and later find that they qualified in 2010 or 2011 can still claim the credit by filing an amended return for one or both years. Corporations use Form 1120X, individuals use Form 1040X and tax-exempt organizations use Form 990-T.

Some businesses and tax-exempt organizations that already locked into health insurance plan structures and contributions may not have had the opportunity to make any needed adjustments to qualify for the credit for 2010 or 2011. These employers can still make the necessary changes to their health insurance plans so they qualify to claim the credit on 2012 returns or in years beyond. Eligible small employers can claim the credit for 2010 through 2013 and for two additional years beginning in 2014.

The recently-revamped Small Business Health Care Tax Credit page on IRS.gov provides additional information and resources designed to help small employers see if they qualify for the credit and then figure the amount of the credit, if any, that the employer qualifies to claim. These include a step-by-step guide for determining eligibility, examples of typical tax savings under various scenarios, answers to frequently-asked questions, a YouTube video and a webinar.

For More Information Or Assistance

If you need help reviewing or updating your health benefit program for compliance with ACA or other laws or with any other employment, employee benefit, compensation or internal controls matter, please contact the author of this article, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A 2011 inductee to the American College of Employee Benefits Council, immediate past-Chair and current Welfare Benefit Committee Co-Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPPT Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements, an ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Council Representative, the ABA TIPS Employee Benefit Plan Committee Vice Chair, former ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group Chair, past Southwest Benefits Association Board Member, Employee Benefit News Editorial Advisory Board Member, and a widely published speaker and author, Ms. Stamer has more than 24 years experience advising businesses, plans, fiduciaries, insurers. plan administrators and other services providers, and governments on health care, retirement, employment, insurance, and tax program design, administration, defense and policy. Nationally and internationally known for her creative and highly pragmatic knowledge and work on health benefit and insurance programs, Ms. Stamer’s experience includes extensive involvement in advising and representing these and other clients on ACA and other health care legislation, regulation, enforcement and administration.

Widely published on health benefit and other related matters, Ms. Stamer’s insights and articles have appeared in HealthLeaders, Modern Health Care, Managed Care Executive, the Bureau of National Affairs, Aspen Publishers, Business Insurance, Employee Benefit News, the Wall Street Journal, the American Bar Association, Aspen Publishers, World At Work, Spencer Publications, SHRM, the International Foundation, Solutions Law Press and many others.

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on Small Employers Should Evaluate Eligibility For Small Business Health Care Tax Credit | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: ACA, Health Plans, small business health plan credit | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Health Plan BCBST To Pay $1.5 Million In 1st OCR Enforcement Action Prompted By HITECH Breach Report

March 13, 2012

Resolution Agreement Also 1^st Announced With Health Plan

Health plans and other covered entities beware and prepare! Health plans and other covered entities that report large breaches of unsecured protected health information to the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Office of Civil Rights and face potential civil monetary penalties (CMPs) for violating the Privacy & Security Rules of the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA).

The HIPAA investigation and exposures to CMPs likely to result following the report of a large breach of unsecured protected health information is demonstrated by a new Resolution Agreement announced March 13, 2012 by OCR.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee (BCBST) has agreed to pay the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) $1,500,000 and to take certain other actions specified in a corrective action plan to settle potential violations of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) Privacy and Security Rules. The BCBST Resolution Agreement is particularly significant, both as:

The first reported enforcement action directly resulting from the filing by a covered entity of a breach report required by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act Breach Notification Rule; and
The first reported resolution agreement reached with a covered entity that is a health plan.

These notable enforcement firsts prove both the importance the HITECH Breach Notification Rule’s significance as an OCR HIPAA enforcement tool, and the readiness of OCR to sanction health plans that breach HIPAA’s Privacy or Security Rules.

The OCR investigation that lead to the BCBST settlement began in response to the submission by BCBST of a notice required under the Breach Notification Rule of the theft of 57 unencrypted computer hard drives from a leased facility in Tennessee, which contained the protected health information (PHI) of over 1 million individuals. Read more details here.

The Breach Notification Rule requires covered entities to report an impermissible use or disclosure of protected health information, or a “breach,” of 500 individuals or more to HHS and the media as well as an annual consolidated report of smaller breeches to HHS.[1]

To resolve being officially sanctioned for HIPAA violations stemming from these findings under the strengthened enforcement rules and sanctions enacted as part of the HITECH Act, BCBST has agreed to pay $1,500,000 and adopt other corrective actions detailed in a corrective action plan.

Enforcement Actions Highlight Growing HIPAA Exposures For Covered Entities

The BCBST Resolution Agreements, like the 1^st-ever $4.3 million HIPAA CMP that OCR imposed against Cignet Health of Prince George’s County, Md. (Cignet) in 2011 and a series of high dollar Resolution Agreements OCR has announced against various health care providers over the past few years highlight the significance of the HITECH Act amendments to HIPAA’s enforcement and CMP rules, as well as use of its Breach Notification Rule as a tool in OCR’s investigation and enforcement efforts.

“This settlement sends an important message that OCR expects health plans and health care providers to have in place a carefully designed, delivered, and monitored HIPAA compliance program,” said OCR Director Leon Rodriguez. “The HITECH Breach Notification Rule is an important enforcement tool and OCR will continue to vigorously protect patients’ right to private and secure health information.”

BCBST’s breach notification report clearly prompted the investigation that lead to the Resolution Agreement. The opening of the investigation in response to the BCBST Breach Notification report reflects the need for covered entities to be prepared to respond to an investigation when these reports are made. OCR officials previously have stated that it is the practice of OCR to conduct an investigation into all breaches of the protected health information of 500 individuals or more reported to it under the Breach Notification Rule.

The BCBST Resolution Agreement provides yet another reminder to covered entities and their business associates of the need to carefully and appropriately manage their HIPAA responsibilities. See HIPAA Heats Up: HITECH Act Changes Take Effect & OCR Begins Posting Names, Other Details Of Unsecured PHI Breach Reports On Website. Covered entities are urged to heed these warning by strengthening their HIPAA compliance and adopting other suitable safeguards to minimize HIPAA exposures. For more tips, see here.

[1] The Breach Notification Rule also requires that covered entities report smaller breaches annually to OCR as part of a consolidated disclosure.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Health Plan BCBST To Pay $1.5 Million In 1st OCR Enforcement Action Prompted By HITECH Breach Report | Claims Administration, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 36B, Affordable Care Act, exchanges, group health plan, health care exchanges, Health Insurance, Health Plans, HIPAA, Mental Health Benefits, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, premium subsidies, Substance Abuse Benefits | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

March 21 New Deadline To Comment On Proposal To Extend Minimum Wage, Overtime Rules To In Home Care Workers

March 9, 2012

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has extended until March 12 the comment period for its proposed rule to provide minimum wage and overtime protections for nearly 2 million workers who provide in-home care services. See here.

In December, 2011, the WHD published a proposed rule that would expand minimum wage and overtime protections to all home care workers employed by third parties, such as staffing agencies. It also would clarify that individuals performing skilled in-home care work are entitled to minimum wage and overtime pay. However, individuals engaged by families for true companionship or fellowship activities, such as visiting with friends or pursuing hobbies, still would be considered “companions” and not be required to meet the act’s labor standards provisions. See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [1] (NPRM).

Among other things, the NPRM proposes to revise the companionship and live-in worker regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):

To more clearly define the tasks that may be performed by an exempt companion;
To limit the companionship exemption to companions employed only by the family or household using the services; and
To provide that third party employers, such as in-home care staffing agencies, could not claim the companionship exemption or the overtime exemption for live-in domestic workers, even if the employee is jointly employed by the third party and the family or household.

When Congress expanded protections to “domestic service” workers in 1974, it exempted casual babysitters and companions for the aged and inform from both the minimum wage and overtime pay requirements of the FLSA and exempted live-in domestic workers from the overtime pay requirement only. While WHD has left regulations governing this exemption substantially unchanged since first issued in 1975, it now believes the in-home care service industry. workers employed by in-home care staffing agencies are not the workers that Congress envisioned in enacting the companionship exemption (i.e., neighbors performing elder sitting).

As a result of these determines, WHD is moving to modify its existing rules to broaden protections for professionally employed home care workers as well as outreaching to inform employers and workers about the requirements that it perceives employers of these workers must meet.

The proposed tightening of regulations for home health workers follows a general toughening by WHD of its regulation and enforcement of wage and hour laws in the health care industry. See, e.g. Home health care company in Dallas agrees to pay 80 nurses more than $92,000 in back wages following US Labor Department investigation; US Department of Labor secures nearly $62,000 in back overtime wages for 21 health care employees in Pine Bluff, Ark.; US Department of Labor initiative targeted toward increasing FLSA compliance in New York’s health care industry; US Department of Labor initiative targeted toward residential health care industry in Connecticut and Rhode Island to increase FLSA compliance; Partners HealthCare Systems agrees to pay 700 employees more than $2.7 million in overtime back wages to resolve U.S. Labor Department lawsuit; US Labor Department sues Kentucky home health care provider to obtain more than $512,000 in back wages and damages for 22 employees; and Buffalo, Minn.-based home health care provider agrees to pay more than $150,000 in back wages following US Labor Department investigation.

Many have expressed concerns about the potential added costs that changes proposed in the NPRM would trigger in providing in home health and companion care for aging and disabled family members. The extension of the comment deadline provides added time for members of the public concerned about these rules to share their input.

Whether or not the proposed rule is adopted, the growing aggressiveness of the WHD and private plaintiffs to bring actions against employers violating minimum wage and overtime rules means health care and others employing home care workers should take well-documented steps to manage their risks. These employers should both confirm the adequacy of their practices under existing rules, as well as evaluate and begin preparing to respond to the proposed modifications to these rules. In both cases, employers of home care or other health care workers are encouraged to critically evaluate their classification or workers, both with respect to their status as employees versus contractor or leased employees, as well as their characterization as exempt versus non-exempt for wage and hour law purposes. In addition, given the nature of the scheduled frequently worked by home care givers, their employers also generally should pay particular attention to the adequacy of practices for recordkeeping.

For Help or More Information

If you need help with these and other human resources or health care concerns controls matters, please contact the author of this article, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Board Certified in Labor & employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization,management attorney, author and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping private and governmental organizations and their management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; schools and other governmental agencies and others design, administer and defend innovative compliance, risk management, workforce, compensation, employee benefit, privacy, procurement and other management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers carry out, audit, manage and defend worker classification,union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, procurement, conflict of interest, discrimination management, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on March 21 New Deadline To Comment On Proposal To Extend Minimum Wage, Overtime Rules To In Home Care Workers | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Independent Contractor, Overtime, payroll tax, Wage & Hour, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

NLRB Report Shows Rise In Unfair Labor Practice Complaints & Formal Proceedings

March 9, 2012

The National Labor Relations Board Summary of Activities for Fiscal Year 2011 (Summary) released by NLRB Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon this week reflects the increased activism and streamlined handling of matters by the NLRB in 2011

Statistics in the Summary reflect an increase in unfair labor practice complaints as well as an increase in the number of complaints that NLRB Regional offices found to merit formal prosecutions. According to the Summary, In FY 2011, the Regional Offices issued 1,342 complaints as compared to 1,243 in FY 2010. In addition to issuing almost 100 more complaints, the percentage of unfair labor practice cases in which a Regional Director determined that formal proceedings were warranted (the merit factor) rose from 35.6% in FY 2010 to 37%. Since 1980, the merit factor has fluctuated between 32% and 40%.

In addition to these results, the General Counsel chose to highlight accomplishments by the NLRB in expediting the handling of investigations and proceedings in several areas. NLRB cut its working inventory of cases by moving matters through faster. The working inventory of cases at the end of FY 2011 was 4,421, compared to 4,063 at the end of FY 2010. Other processing efficiency highlights included:

91.7% of all initial elections were conducted within 56 days of the filing of the petition.
Initial elections in union representation elections were conducted in a median of 38 days from the filing of the petition.
A 93% settlement rate was achieved in the Regional Offices in meritorious unfair labor practice cases.
The Regional Offices won 87% of Board and Administrative Law Judge unfair labor practice and compliance decisions in whole or in part in FY 2011.
A total of $60,514,922 was recovered on behalf of employees as backpay or reimbursement of fees, dues, and fines, with 1,644 employees offered reinstatement.
The Agency exceeded two of its three ambitious overarching goals and came close to achieving the third, closing 84.7% of all representation cases within 100 days (target 85%), 72.5% of all unfair labor practice cases within 120 days (target 71.2%), and 83.2% of all meritorious unfair labor practice cases within 365 days (target 80.2%). The target for each 2011 overarching goal was higher than in FY 2010 and has been increased for FY 2012.
Agency representatives participated in over 600 outreach events during FY 2011.

Other statistics of note include:

The NLRB”s total case intake during FY 2011 declined to 24,990, compared to 26,585 cases in FY 2010, representing a 5.9% decrease in overall intake. Unfair labor practice case intake declined 5.1% compared to 2010..Total representation case intake declined 2,813, a 12.2% decrease from the FY 2010.
Petitions filed in certification and decertification decreased 11.2% from 2,969 in FY 2010 to 2,634 in FY 2011. Petitions filed in unit deauthorization, unit amendment and unit clarification (UD, AC and UC) cases decreased by 23.8% from the previous year’s intake, with the filing of 179 petitions in FY 2011 compared to 235 filed in FY 2010.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on NLRB Report Shows Rise In Unfair Labor Practice Complaints & Formal Proceedings | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Independent Contractor, Overtime, payroll tax, Wage & Hour, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Sullivan University System to Pay $483,000 in Back Wages Overtime Violations Stemming From Worker Misclassifications

March 8, 2012

Sullivan University System, Inc. learned the hard way that U.S employers that misclassify workers as independent contractors, as exempt for wage and hour law purposes or otherwise increasingly risk investigation and enforcement from federal and state agencies targeting perceived misclassification abuses.

Following an investigation by the Labor Department’s Wage and Hour Division, Kentucky based Sullivan University System Inc. will pay $483,201 in back wages to 248 employees who the Department found it wrongfully denied overtime pay while working as admissions officers and high school representatives. The investigation found that employees were incorrectly classified as exempt from the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the employer failed to keep accurate records of the employees’ hours.

The Sullivan University System, Inc. settlement provides another example of the growing risks that U.S. employers face from misclassifying workers as exempt employees for purposes of wage and hour and overtime laws. As a result of the mischaracterization of workers as contractors that the Labor Department determined to qualify as employees for purposes of wage and hour and overtime laws, the Labor Department found the employer failed to pay required overtime and to maintain required time records in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Wage and hour laws are only one of a myriad of areas in which the Department of Labor, Internal Revenue Service and other federal and state regulators increasingloy are scrutinizing worker classifications to uncover violations of applicable law resulting from the mischaracterization of workers as exempt or as non-employee service providers.

The Obama Administration is targeting employers that misclassify workers for enforcement.

Meanwhile, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) continues to conduct worker classification audits while encouraging employers to self correct existing payroll tax misclassifications by participating in a new Voluntary Worker Classification Settlement Program (“Settlement Program”) announced in September. However the limited scope of the relief provided makes use of the program challenging for most employers. See New IRS Voluntary IRS Settlement Program Offers New Option For Resolving Payroll Tax Risks Of Misclassification But Employers Also Must Manage Other Legal Risks; Medical Resident Stipend Ruling Shows Health Care, Other Employers Should Review Payroll Practices; Employment Tax Takes Center Stage as IRS Begins National Research Project , Executive Compensation Audits.

While these and other agencies continue to keep the heat up on employers that misclassify workers, Congress also continues to consider legislation that would further clarify and tighten worker classification rules. See e.g., Review & Strengthen Defensibility of Existing Worker Classification Practices In Light of Rising Congressional & Regulatory Scrutiny; New IRS Worker Classification Settlement Program and Its Risks.

In her November 3, 2011 testimony to the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. Labor Department Wage & Hour Division (WHD) Deputy Administrator (WHD) Nancy Leppink confirmed that the Labor Department is joining a growing list of federal and state agencies that are making ending employee misclassification an audit and enforcement priority. Ms Leppink testified that “employee misclassification is a serious and, according to all available evidence, growing problem” that the Obama Administration is “committed to working to end.” See Testimony of Nancy J. Leppink, Deputy Wage and Hour Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor before the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives (November 3, 2011).

Her testimony also makes clear that interagency coöperation and sharing of information among agencies is an increasingly valuable tool to this effort. Ms. Leppink told the Subcommittee that the Labor Department is a part of a multi-agency Misclassification Initiative that seeks to strengthen and coördinate Federal and State efforts to enforce violations of the law that result from employee misclassification.

According to Ms. Leppink, the WHD’s exchange of information about investigations with other law enforcement agencies is as “particularly important with respect to our efforts to combat the violations of our laws that occur because of employees who are misclassified as independent contractors or other non-employees.” On September 19, 2011 the Labor Department and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to share information about investigations with each other. The MOU helps the IRS investigate if employers the Labor Department has found in violation of federal labor laws have paid the proper employment taxes. Similarly, the WHD also entered into MOUs with several state labor agencies that allow the Labor Department to share information about its investigations and coordinate misclassification enforcement when appropriate.

“These agreements mean that all levels of government are working together to solve this critical problem,” she said.

Employers Urged To Audit & Strengthen Worker Classification Practices

To guard against these and other growing risks of worker classification, employers receiving services from workers who are not considered employees for purposes of income or payroll should review within the scope of attorney-client privilege the defensibility of their existing worker classification, employee benefit, fringe benefit, employment, wage and hour, and other workforce policies and consult with qualified legal counsel about the advisability to adjust these practices to mitigate exposures to potential IRS, Labor Department or other penalties associated with worker misclassification.

Review and management of these issues is particularly timely in light of the opening by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of a new settlement program for resolving payroll tax issues resulting from misclassification. Given broader labor and other risks, however, before taking advantage of a new Internal Revenue Service program offering employers the opportunity to resolve potential payroll tax liabilities arising from the misclassification of workers, employers should consider and develop a risk management their overall worker misclassification liability exposures. See “New IRS Worker Classification Settlement Program and its Risks,” in the January, 2011 issue of the Dallas Bar Journal To read her article, see page 8 of the January, 2012 Dallas Bar Journal here.

For Help or More Information

If you need help with worker classification or other human resources or internal controls matters, please contact the author of this article, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Board Certified in Labor & employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization,management attorney, author and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping private and governmental organizations and their management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; schools and other governmental agencies and others design, administer and defend innovative compliance, risk management, workforce, compensation, employee benefit, privacy, procurement and other management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers carry out, audit, manage and defend worker classification,union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, procurement, conflict of interest, discrimination management, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Sullivan University System to Pay $483,000 in Back Wages Overtime Violations Stemming From Worker Misclassifications | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Independent Contractor, Overtime, payroll tax, Wage & Hour, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

New DOL Final Rules Tighten Requirements For Employers To Hire Alien Workers Using H-2B Visas

February 21, 2012

Employers of workers relying on H-2B visas for eligibility to work will need to update their practices to comply with a new Final Rule on the H-2B program issued February 21, 2012 by the Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration and Wage and Hour Division.

Effective April 23, 2012, the Final Rule amends Labor Department regulations governing the certification of the employment of nonimmigrant workers performing temporary or seasonal non-agricultural labor or services and the enforcement of the obligations applicable to employers under the H-2B program. Among other things, the Final Rule:

Revises the process by which employers obtain a temporary labor certification from the Labor Department for use in petitioning the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to employ a nonimmigrant worker in H-2B status;
Establishes new rules providing increased worker protections for both U.S. and foreign workers;
Creates a national electronic job registry for all H-2B job orders to improve U.S. worker access to these temporary jobs;
Contains provisions to enhance recruitment of U.S. workers from across the country;
Increases the amount of time during which U.S. workers must be recruited and hired; and
Requires the rehiring of former employees when available.

U.S. employers need to exercise care to properly manage and maintain appropriate documentation showing compliance with applicable Visa, I-9 eligibility to work, and other applicable Immigration and Customs law requirements impacting their recruitment and employment of foreign and other workers. Violation of these requirements can expose employers to substantial civil and even criminal liability. At the same time, all employers also need to tread carefully to manage the significant employment discrimination liabilities that can arise from charges of improper discrimination against workers in violation of national origin, race and other federal and state nondiscrimination laws. See, e.g. Manufacturer’s Excessive I-9 Documentation Triggers Discrimination Liability.

When reviewing the adequacy of existing practices and administering these practices, employers should keep in mind the advisability of ensuring appropriate compliance and risk management of these responsibilities both with regard to workers performing services directly for their organizations in the capacity of employees, as well as workers providing services as independent contractors, leased employees or pursuant to other contracted services arrangements.

When designing and administering these processes, employers also generally should keep in mind that alien workers hired in violation of I-9 eligibility to work requirements generally still continue to enjoy the protection of the employment discrimination, wage and hour, anti-retaliation and other laws that otherwise would apply to other similarly situated employees. Accordingly, employers should exercise care to properly coördinate their responsibilities to promote their ability to demonstrate proper collection of required eligibility to work documentation, proper classification for worker classification, wage and hour and other laws, and appropriate adherence to nondiscrimination and other employment, tax and other applicable laws and regulations.

For Help or More Information

If you need help with these or other human resources, risk management or compliance or internal controls matters, please contact the author of this article, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Board Certified in Labor & employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization,management attorney, author and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping private and governmental organizations and their management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; schools and other governmental agencies and others design, administer and defend innovative compliance, risk management, I-9 and other immigration and customs, workforce, compensation, employee benefit, privacy, procurement and other management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers carry out, audit, manage and defend worker classification,union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, procurement, conflict of interest, discrimination management, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on New DOL Final Rules Tighten Requirements For Employers To Hire Alien Workers Using H-2B Visas | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Independent Contractor, Overtime, payroll tax, Wage & Hour, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

OSHA $1Million Award Against AirTran Airways Highlights Retaliation Risks

January 18, 2012

A million dollar plus backpay award announced by the Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA) reminds U.S. employer of the growing importance of taking steps to manage whistleblower and other retaliation claims when dealing with employees who have reported possible safety, discrimination or other activities protected under Federal or state whistleblower or other anti-retaliation laws.

On January 17, 2012, OSHA issued an order requiring AirTran Airways AirTran Airways, a subsidiary of Dallas, Texas-based Southwest Airlines Co., to reinstate and pay more than $1 million in backpay plis interest and compensatory damages to a former pilot who charged AriTran fired him in retaliation for his reporting numerous mechanical concerns.

According to OSHA, the reinstatement and backpay award follows an investigation by OSHA’s Whistleblower Protection Program in which OSHA found reasonable cause to believe that the termination of the pilot, whose name is withheld as part of OSHA’s policy, was an act of retaliation in violation of the whistleblower provision of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, known as AIR21.

According to OSHA, the pilot’s complaint alleged that the airline removed him from flight status on Aug. 23, 2007, pending an investigative hearing regarding a sudden spike in the pilot’s mechanical malfunction reports, or PIREPS. The airline held an internal investigative hearing on Sept. 6, 2007, that lasted 17 minutes. Seven days later, the airline terminated the pilot’s employment, claiming that he did not satisfactorily answer a question regarding the spike in reports. OSHA found that the pilot did not refuse to answer any questions during the hearing, answers to questions were appropriate, and the action taken by the airline was retaliatory.

Either party to the case can file an appeal with the Labor Department’s Office of Administrative Law Judges, but such an appeal does not stay the preliminary reinstatement order.

AirTran Airways is a subsidiary of AirTran Holdings Inc. with headquarters in Orlando. On May 2, 2011, Southwest Airlines completed the acquisition of AirTran Holdings Inc. and now operates AirTran Airways as a wholly-owned subsidiary.

OSHA enforces the whistleblower provision of AIR21, as well as 20 other statutes protecting employees who report violations of various securities, trucking, workplace health and safety, nuclear, pipeline, environmental, rail, maritime, health care, consumer product and food safety laws. Employees who believe that they have been retaliated against for engaging in protected conduct may file a complaint with the secretary of labor for an investigation by OSHA’s Whistleblower Protection Program.

These whistleblower and anti-retaliation provisions are just a small fraction of the growing list of federal and state laws that provide whistleblower or other anti-retaliation protections to employees and others for reporting known or suspected violations or engaging in other activities protected by the applicable law. Other examples include federal employment discrimination, securities, tax, customs, immigration, labor, family or military leave, employee benefits, privacy, antitrust, and a wide range of other laws. Because the prior reporting of information or other exercise or attempted exercise of protected rights often can create presumptions which employers may be required to rebut to avoid whistleblower or other liability under many of these laws, employees increasingly make claims or point to prior reports or activities as a means of challenging or disputing termination or other undesired employer actions.

To better position themselves to prevent or defend against these types of claims, employers need to be prepared both to demonstrate the appropriateness of their employment and discipline actions, as well as to rebut claims of retaliation. As part of these efforts, employers among other things should:

Carefully document and administer employee hiring, promotion, discipline and other practices to document their administration in accordance with applicable law based on valid performance based business justifications;

Clearly communicate and educate management and other employees about the employer’s policies against retaliation and procedures for reporting suspected problems;

Review employee terminations and other actions for patterns or other evidence of correlation to prior protected activities by employees that might evidence potential discrimination or other retaliation;

Establish and communicate clear procedures for reporting potential legal or policy violations that might for the basis of retaliation or whistleblower claims;

Conduct prompt, well-documented investigations of all reports of potential compliance or safety concerns, as well as retaliation claims;

Give clear, well-documented instructions to managers and others involved in investigations or other compliance efforts against retaliation or other misconduct;

Establish and administer monitoring and oversight processes and procedures for possible retaliation or other misconduct against protected parties; and

Provide exit interview and other opportunities for employees to share possible retaliation or other concerns with responsible management trained to properly investigate and redress these concerns.

For Help or More Information

If you need help with these or other human resources, internal controls or risk management matters, please contact the author of this article, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Board Certified in Labor & employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization,management attorney, author and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping private and governmental organizations and their management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; schools and other governmental agencies and others design, administer and defend innovative compliance, risk management, workforce, compensation, employee benefit, privacy, procurement and other management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers carry out, audit, manage and defend worker classification,union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, procurement, conflict of interest, discrimination management, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions.

Widely published on workforce risk management and compliance concerns, the immediate past-Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Plan Committee, Vice Chair of the ABA TIPS Section Employee Benefits Committee, a Council Representative of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on management, compliance, re-engineering, investigations, human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and risk management, federal sentencing guideline and other enforcement resolution actions and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on OSHA $1Million Award Against AirTran Airways Highlights Retaliation Risks | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employer, Employment, employment law, Health Care, Independent Contractor, OSHA, Overtime, payroll tax, Retaliation, Safety, Wage & Hour, Whistleblower, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

HHS Chides Trustmark Life Insurance Company For “Excessive” Health Premium Increases After Affordable Care Act Rate Audit

January 12, 2012

Trustmark Life Insurance Company is the latest health insurance issuer coming under fire from the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) for making what HHS views as “unreasonable” health insurance premium increases under its new “rate review” powers created by the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act).

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced today (January 12, 2012) HHS considers to be unreasonable premium rate increases proposed by Trustmark Life Insurance Company in five states—Alabama, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wyoming. According to HHS, the allegedly excessive rate hikes would affect nearly 10,000 residents across these five states.

According to HHS, a review of the health insurance premium disclosures filed by Trustmark Life Insurance Company here found that Trustmark has raised rates by 13 percent in these five states. For small businesses in Alabama and Arizona, when combined with other rate hikes made over the last 12 months, HHS claims rates have increased by 27.2 percent and 18.1 percent, respectively. According to HHS, HHS says that an independent review engaged by HHS found that the rate increases were unreasonable because the insurer “would be spending a low percent of premium dollars on actual medical care and quality improvements, and because the justifications were based on unreasonable assumptions.” HHS is calling upon Trustmark Health Insurance Company to rescind the rates and issue rebates to consumers or publically explain its refusal to do so. The new rate review procedures allow Trustmark Health Insurance Company and other carriers accused by HHS of making unreasonable rate increases various options to dispute the charges

The rate review and reduction demand by HHS reflects its efforts to use its “rate review” authority from the Affordable Care Act to discourage health insurers from raising health insurance premiums by more than 10 percent. HHS requires health insurers to notify HHS of rate increases over 10 percent and justify these increases. HHS generally views health insurance premium increases of more than 10 percent as unreasonable. Under these new rate review powers,

Under the new rate review rules, HHS has the power to review proposed rate reviews and to report its findings but does not have the direct authority to force health insurers to limit premium increases to less than 10 percent or to impose legal or administrative sanctions directly against insurers for making what HHS views as unreasonable premium increases. However, as many as 37 states have the authority to regulate or reject unreasonable premium increases. In the absence of direct authority to regulate insurer rates, HHS uses its ability to publicize its rate review determinations to invite state regulators and the public to apply pressure to insurers to keep down rate increases.

In today’s announcement, HHS credits its new rate review powers with helping to prevent health insurance premium increases, According to HHS, states with the power to regulate insurer premiums increasingly are using this authority. Examples of how states have used this authority include:

In New Mexico, the state insurance division denied a request from Presbyterian Healthcare for a 9.7 percent rate hike, lowering it to 4.7 percent;
In Connecticut, the state stopped Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, the state’s largest insurer, from hiking rates by a proposed 12.9 percent, instead limiting it to a 3.9 percent increase;
In Oregon, the state denied a proposed 22.1 percent rate hike by Regence, limiting it to 12.8 percent.
In New York, the state denied rate increases from Emblem, Oxford, and Aetna that averaged 12.7 percent, instead holding them to an 8.2 percent increase.
In Rhode Island, the state denied rate hikes from United Healthcare of New England ranging from 18 to 20.1 percent, instead seeing them cut to 9.6 to 10.6 percent.
In Pennsylvania, the state held Highmark to rate hikes ranging from 4.9 to 8.3 percent, down from 9.9 percent.

Targeting health insurers proposing rate increases of 10 or more percent is likely to result in a significant number of reviews. A Kaiser Family Foundation Employer Health Benefits 2011 Annual Survey found average premiums increased 8% for single coverage and 9% for family coverage through May, 2011.

Companies that HHS finds have made excessive rate increases can either reduce their rate hikes or post a justification on their website within 10 days of the rate review determination.

For More Information Or Assistance

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on HHS Chides Trustmark Life Insurance Company For “Excessive” Health Premium Increases After Affordable Care Act Rate Audit | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Labor Department Final Rule Defines Recreation Vehicle For Longshore & Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act

January 10, 2012

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs has issued a final rule implementing the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act’s exclusion for recreational vessel workers. The rule defines what constitutes a “recreational vessel” when applying the exclusion.

The LHWCA provides workers (or their survivors in the case of death) compensation for injuries related to maritime employment on the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining areas.

Before 2009, the LHWCA excluded workers who repaired or dismantled recreational vessels fewer than 65 feet in length from coverage if they were covered by a state workers’ compensation program. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 expanded this exclusion by eliminating the 65-foot limitation. Now, workers who repair recreational vessels of any length or dismantle them for repair are excluded from LHWCA coverage if they are covered under a state workers’ compensation law.

The final rule generally uses the U.S. Coast Guard’s standards for defining a recreational vessel. However, it adds two provisions the Labor Department intends to make it easier to apply these standards in the LHWCA context. First, a manufacturer or builder may determine whether a vessel is recreational within the meaning of the regulation based on the vessel’s design rather than on its end use. Second, noncommercial vessels that are recreational by design and owned or chartered by the federal or a state government fall within the recreational vessel definition.

Read the final rule here.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Labor Department Final Rule Defines Recreation Vehicle For Longshore & Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: Employment, Longshore, Occupational Injury, workers compensation | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Portion of Health Care Costs Paid By Government Programs Rose As Employer Provided & Other Private Health Care Coverage Declined In 2010

January 9, 2012

Declining enrollment in private insurance resulted in continuing growth in government financing of health care expenditures in 2010 according to the Annual Report of National Health Expenditures (Report). The Report notes that since 2007, the economic recession and legislative changes led to a noticeable change in the shares of health care spending financed by businesses, households, and governments.

The federal government financed 29 percent of the nation’s health care spending in 2010, an increase of six percentage points from its share in 2007 of 23 percent, and reached $742.7 billion. Part of that increase came from enhanced Federal matching funds for State Medicaid programs under the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act which expired in 2011.

U.S. health care spending grew 3.9 percent in 2010 to $2.6 trillion or $8,402 per person according to the Report. Review the details of the Report here.

National Health Expenditures 2010 Highlights

U.S. health care spending grew 3.9 percent in 2010. Coupled with record slow growth of 3.8 percent in 2009; the 2009-2010 represents the two slowest rates of growth in the fifty-one year history of the National Health Expenditure Accounts. The Report reflects the following breakdown of these expenditures;

Hospital Care: Hospital spending increased 4.9 percent to $814.0 billion in 2010 compared to 6.4-percent growth in 2009. Average annual growth in hospital spending between 2007 and 2010 was 5.5 percent. CMS reports this increase was slower than the trend between 2003 and 2006, when spending increased an average of 7.4 percent per year. Growth in private health insurance spending for hospital services, which in 2010 accounted for 35 percent of all hospital care, slowed considerably in 2010. The Report states that these trends occurred at the same time median inpatient hospital admissions declined and emergency department and outpatient hospital visits grew more slowly than in 2009.
Physician and Clinical Services: Spending on physician and clinical services increased 2.5 percent in 2010 to $515.5 billion, a deceleration from 3.3-percent growth in 2009. The 2010 deceleration reflects a decline in utilization, driven by a drop in total physician visits between 2009 and 2010 and a less severe flu season than in 2009.
Other Professional Services: Spending for other professional services, which includes providers of services such as physical therapy, chiropractic medicine, and mental health, decelerated slightly in 2010, increasing 3.6 percent to $68.4 billion after growth of 3.8 percent in 2009.
Dental Services: Spending for dental services increased 2.3 percent in 2010 to $104.8 billion compared to growth of only 0.1 percent in 2009. Out-of-pocket spending for dental services (which accounts for over 40 percent of dental spending) increased 0.5 percent in 2010 following a decline of 5.2 percent in 2009.
Other Health, Residential, and Personal Care Services: Spending for other health, residential, and personal care services grew 5.3 percent in 2010 to $128.5 billion, a deceleration from growth of 7.7 percent in 2009. This category includes expenditures for medical services delivered in non-traditional settings (such as schools or community centers), ambulance providers, and residential mental health and substance abuse facilities.
Home Health Care: Spending growth for freestanding home health care services slowed in 2010, increasing 6.2 percent to $70.2 billion following growth of 7.5 percent in 2009, as Medicare and Medicaid spending growth slowed in 2010.
Nursing Care Facilities and Continuing Care Retirement Communities: Spending for freestanding nursing care facilities and continuing care retirement communities increased 3.2 percent in 2010 to $143.1 billion, a deceleration from growth of 4.5 percent in 2009, driven by slower growth in Medicare and Medicaid spending.
Prescription Drugs: Retail prescription drug spending grew only 1.2 percent to $259.1 billion in 2010, a substantial slowdown from 5.1-percent growth in 2009. The slowdown was driven by slower growth in the volume of drugs consumed, a continued increase in the use of generic medications, loss of patent protection for certain brand name drugs, fewer new drug introductions, and a substantial increase in Medicaid prescription drug rebates.
Durable Medical Equipment: Spending for durable medical equipment, which includes items such as eyeglasses, contacts and hearing aids, increased 7.3 percent to $37.7 billion in 2010 after increasing 0.8 percent in 2009.
Other Non-durable Medical Products: Spending for other non-durable medical products, such as over-the-counter medicines, reached $44.8 billion, an increase of 2.6 percent in 2010, the same rate of growth as in 2009.

Health Spending by Major Sources of Funds

The Report indicates that the portion of health care expenditures financed by private health insurance continued to decline as private health plan enrollment declined. As a result, the proportion of health care expenditures paid by government programs continued to rise. The federal government financed 29 percent of total health spending in 2010, a substantial increase from its share of 23 percent in 2007. Meanwhile, the shares of the total health care bill financed by state and local governments (16 percent), private businesses (21 percent), and households (28 percent) declined during the same time period. Specifically, the Report indicates the following:

Medicare: Medicare spending grew 5.0 percent in 2010 to $524.6 billion, a deceleration from growth of 7.0 percent in 2009. Spending for fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare grew 5.0 percent in 2010 following growth of 4.5 percent in 2009. Medicare Advantage (MA) spending increased 4.7 percent in 2010, a steep deceleration from 15.6-percent growth in 2009 that resulted from an adjustment to payment rates in 2010.
Medicaid: Total Medicaid spending grew 7.2 percent in 2010 to $401.4 billion, a deceleration from 8.9-percent growth in 2009, driven primarily by slower growth in enrollment. Federal Medicaid expenditures increased 8.9 percent, while state Medicaid expenditures grew 3.9 percent. This difference in growth was due to approximately $41 billion in enhanced federal aid to states—a result of increased Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (FMAP) mandated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).
Private Health Insurance: Growth in total spending for private health insurance premiums slowed in 2010 to 2.4 percent from 2.6 percent in 2009, continuing a deceleration that began in 2003. Growth in aggregate benefit payments also slowed, from 3.7 percent in 2009 to 1.6 percent in 2010. The slowdown reflects a decline in private health insurance enrollment, increases in cost sharing, and a shift by some consumers to plans with lower premiums. However, for the first time in seven years, growth in total premiums exceeded growth in total benefits; as a result, the private health insurance net cost ratio increased from 11.4 percent in 2009 to 12.1 percent in 2010.
Out-of-Pocket: Out-of-pocket spending grew 1.8 percent in 2010, an acceleration from growth of 0.2 percent in 2009. Faster growth in 2010 partially reflects higher cost-sharing requirements for some employers, consumers’ switching to plans with lower premiums and higher deductibles and/or copayments, and the continued loss of health insurance coverage.

The Report found household health care spending equaled $725.5 billion in 2010 and represented 28 percent of total health spending, slightly lower than its 29 percent share in 2007. Growth in total private health insurance premiums slowed in 2010 to 2.4 percent from 2.6 percent in 2009, continuing a slowdown that began in 2003. Despite this deceleration, for the first time in seven years, the growth in premiums exceeded the growth in insurer spending on health care benefits, with the net cost of insurance increasing by 8.4 percent or $11.3 billion in 2010. Out-of-pocket spending by consumers increased 1.8 percent in 2010, accelerating from 0.2-percent growth in 2009.

The state and local government share of total health spending declined from 18 percent in 2007 to 16 percent in 2010 and totaled $421.1 billion, in part due to the temporary assistance in the Recovery Act.

Project COPE: Coalition On Patient Empowerment & Coalition For Responsible Health Care Quality

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Portion of Health Care Costs Paid By Government Programs Rose As Employer Provided & Other Private Health Care Coverage Declined In 2010 | Claims Administration, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 36B, Affordable Care Act, exchanges, group health plan, health care exchanges, Health Insurance, Health Plans, HIPAA, Mental Health Benefits, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, premium subsidies, Substance Abuse Benefits | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Stamer Dallas Bar Journal Article Cautions Employers Must Take Holistic Approach To Address Worker Misclassification Risks

December 27, 2011

Cynthia Marcotte Stamer’s cautions that before taking advantage of a new Internal Revenue Service program offering employers the opportunity to resolve potential payroll tax liabilities arising from the misclassification of workers, employers should consider and develop a risk management their overall worker misclassification liability exposures.

Ms. Stamer discusses the need for employers to take a holistic approach to assessing and addressing worker classification risks in her article, “New IRS Worker Classification Settlement Program and its Risks,” in the January, 2011 issue of the Dallas Bar Journal To read her article, see page 8 of the January, 2012 Dallas Bar Journal here.

U.S employers that misclassify workers as independent contractors, as exempt for payroll or other tax, wage and hour, immigration, and a wide range of other legal purposes or otherwise increasingly risk investigation and enforcement from federal and state agencies targeting perceived misclassification abuses. While U.S. employers should review and correct as needed worker misclassifications that could result in violations laws in light of the growing enforcement emphasis and interagency coordination targeting employers that violate federal or state tax, labor and other laws by misclassifying workers, employers should evaluate and address these concerns on a holistic, rather than peice meal basis.The Obama Administration is targeting employers that misclassify workers for enforcement.

Agency officials and members of Congress have sent numerous messages to U.S. employers to clean up their worker classification practices. For instance, Labor Department enforcement actions increasingly show its employer misclassification audit and enforcement emphasis. See, e.g.Employer Charged With Misclassifying & Underpaying Workers To Pay $754,578 FLSA Backpay Settlement; $1 Million + FLSA Overtime Settlement Shows Employers Should Tighten On-Call, Other Wage & Hour Practices; New IRS Voluntary IRS Settlement Program Offers New Option For Resolving Payroll Tax Risks Of Misclassification But Employers Also Must Manage Other Legal Risks; Medical Resident Stipend Ruling Shows Health Care, Other Employers Should Review Payroll Practices; Employment Tax Takes Center Stage as IRS Begins National Research Project , Executive Compensation Audits;

While these and other agencies continue to keep the heat up on employers that misclassify workers, Congress also continues to hear testimony and consider legislation that would further clarify and tighten worker classification rules. See e.g., Review & Strengthen Defensibility of Existing Worker Classification Practices In Light of Rising Congressional & Regulatory Scrutiny; New IRS Worker Classification Settlement Program and Its Risks. Agency officials arefueling and responding to Congressional worker classification concerns by highlighting issues in Congressional testimony and other communications. In her November 3, 2011 testimony to the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections Committee on Education and the Workforce, for instance, U.S. Labor Department Wage & Hour Division (WHD) Deputy Administrator (WHD) Nancy Leppink testified that “employee misclassification is a serious and, according to all available evidence, growing problem” that the Obama Administration is “committed to working to end.” See Testimony of Nancy J. Leppink, Deputy Wage and Hour Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor before the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives (November 3, 2011).

“These agreements mean that all levels of government are working together to solve this critical problem,” she said.

Employers Urged To Audit & Strengthen Worker Classification Practices

As Federal and state regulators take aim at misclassification abuses, U.S. employers need to review each arrangement where their business receives services that the business treats as not employed by their business, as well as any employees of their business that the business treats as exempt employees keeping in mind that they generally will bear the burden of proving the appropriateness of that characterization for most purposes of law. The coordination and interrelationship of issues that Ms. Leppink testified about in her November 3 Subscommittee testimony shows that employers need to take a holistic approach in evaluating and addressing their worker classification exposures.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Stamer Dallas Bar Journal Article Cautions Employers Must Take Holistic Approach To Address Worker Misclassification Risks | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Independent Contractor, Overtime, payroll tax, Wage & Hour, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Employers Urged To Strengthen Worker Classification Defenses As Obama Administration Targets Employers Misclassifying Workers

December 26, 2011

U.S employers that misclassify workers as independent contractors, as exempt for wage and hour law purposes or otherwise increasingly risk investigation and enforcement from federal and state agencies targeting perceived misclassification abuses.

U.S. employers should review and correct as needed worker misclassifications that could result in violations of federal wage and hour or other employment, tax or other laws in light of the growing enforcement emphasis and interagency coordination targeting employers that violate federal or state tax, labor and other laws by misclassifying workers. Testimony of a top Labor Department official confirms that the Obama Administration has employers that misclassify workers in its sights and is ready to take swift action to punish their noncompliance.

Aggressive Employer Worker Classification Practices Under Seige

The Obama Administration is targeting employers that misclassify workers for enforcement.

In her November 3, 2011 testimony to the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. Labor Department Wage & Hour Division (WHD) Deputy Administrator (WHD) Nancy Leppink confirmed that the Labor Department is joining a growing list of federal and state agencies that are making ending employee misclassification an audit and enforcement priority. testified that “employee misclassification is a serious and, according to all available evidence, growing problem” that the Obama Administration is “committed to working to end.” See Testimony of Nancy J. Leppink, Deputy Wage and Hour Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor before the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives (November 3, 2011).

“These agreements mean that all levels of government are working together to solve this critical problem,” she said.

Employers Urged To Audit & Strengthen Worker Classification Practices

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

1 Comment | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Independent Contractor, Overtime, payroll tax, Wage & Hour, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

2/27 Deadline For Employers To Comment On DOL Proposed Rule Changes Extending Minimum Wage & Overtime Rules To More Home Caregiver Workers

December 25, 2011

February 27, 2012 will be the deadline for interested employers to comment on changes that the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) proposes to make to its rules on when its minimum wage and overtime protections apply to workers who provide in-home care services for the elderly and infirm. The proposal will revise the companionship and live-in worker regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act to more clearly define the tasks that may be performed by an exempt companion, and to limit the companionship exemption to companions employed only by the family or household using the services. In addition, the Department proposes that third party employers, such as in-home care staffing agencies, could not claim the companionship exemption or the overtime exemption for live-in domestic workers, even if the employee is jointly employed by the third party and the family or household.

If adopted as proposed, the proposed rules will significantly expand the number of home health care and other home care workers covered by minimum wage and overtime requirements. As proposed, the proposed regulation will revise the companionship and live-in worker regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):

To more clearly define the tasks that may be performed by an exempt companion;
To limit the companionship exemption to companions employed only by the family or household using the services; and
To provide that third party employers, such as in-home care staffing agencies, could not claim the companionship exemption or the overtime exemption for live-in domestic workers, even if the employee is jointly employed by the third party and the family or household.

Coupled with these and other enforcement efforts against health industry employers, WHD’s announcement of plans to tighten rules for home care givers. In connection with its announcement of the planned regulatory changes, for instance, WHD highlighted the following guidance about the wage and hour rules that employers of home care workers can anticipate being required to meet when employing these workers:

Violation of wage and hour laws exposes an employer to significant back pay awards, substantial civil penalties and, if the violation is found to be willful, even potential criminal liability.

In light of the proposed regulatory changes and demonstrated willingness of WHD and private plaintiffs to bring actions against employers violating these rules, health care and others employing home care workers should take well-documented steps to manage their risks. These employers should both confirm the adequacy of their practices under existing rules, as well as evaluate and begin preparing to respond to the proposed modifications to these rules. In both cases, employers of home care or other health care workers are encouraged to critically evaluate their classification or workers, both with respect to their status as employees versus contractor or leased employees, as well as their characterization as exempt versus non-exempt for wage and hour law purposes. In addition, given the nature of the scheduled frequently worked by home care givers, their employers also generally should pay particular attention to the adequacy of practices for recordkeeping.

This notice of proposed rulemaking will be available for comment beginning December 27, 2011 at www.regulations.gov. The comment period will close on February 27, 2012.

For Help With Compliance & Risk Management and Defense

If you need help in auditing or assessing, updating or defending your organization’s compliance, risk manage or other internal controls practices or actions under these or other laws, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping private and governmental organizations and their management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; schools and other governmental agencies and others design, administer and defend innovative compliance, risk management, workforce, compensation, employee benefit, privacy, procurement and other management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers implement, audit, manage and defend union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, procurement, conflict of interest, discrimination management, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on management, reengineering, investigations, human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and risk management, federal sentencing guideline and other enforcement resolution actions, and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

[1] WHD’s announcement of the planned rule notes that this draft shared December 15 remains subject to change before formally published in the Federal Register.

Comments Off on 2/27 Deadline For Employers To Comment On DOL Proposed Rule Changes Extending Minimum Wage & Overtime Rules To More Home Caregiver Workers | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Overtime, Wage & Hour | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

NLRB Changes Certification Election Case Procedures

December 25, 2011

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has adopted a final rule amending its election case procedures. The final rule published in the Federal Register on December 22, 2011primarily focuses on procedures followed by the NLRB in the minority of cases in which parties can’t agree on issues such as whether the employees covered by the election petition are an appropriate voting group. In such cases, the matter goes to a hearing in a regional office and the NLRB Regional Director decides the question and sets the election.

Scheduled to take effect April 30, 2012, the new final rule Final Rule on Election Procedures seeks to reduce litigation. Among other things, the Final Rule:

Amends § 102.64 to expressly construe Section 9(c) of the Act and to state that the statutory purpose of a pre-election hearing is to determine if a question of representation exists;
Amends § 102.66(a) and eliminate § 101.20(c) (along with all of Part 101, Subpart C) to ensure that hearing officers presiding over pre-election hearings have the authority to limit the presentation of evidence to that which supports a party’s contentions and is relevant to the existence of a question concerning representation;
Amends § 102.66(d) to afford hearing officers presiding over pre-election hearings discretion over the filing of post-hearing briefs, including over the subjects to be addressed and the time for filing;
Amends §§ 102.67 and 102.69 to eliminate the parties’ right to file a pre-election request for review of a regional director’s decision and direction of election, and instead to defer all requests for Board review until after the election, when any such request can be consolidated with a request for review of any post-election rulings;
Eliminates the recommendation in § 101.21(d) (as stated, along with all of Part 101, Subpart C) that the regional director should ordinarily not schedule an election sooner than 25 days after the decision and direction of election in order to give the Board an opportunity to rule on a pre-election request for review;
Amends § 102.65 to make explicit and narrow the circumstances under which a request for special permission to appeal to the Board will be granted;
Amends §§ 102.62(b) and 102.69 to create a uniform procedure for resolving election objections and potentially outcome-determinative challenges in stipulated and directed election cases and to provide that Board review of regional directors’ resolution of such disputes is discretionary; and
Eliminates part 101, subpart C of Board regulations and makes other conforming amendments.

According to the NLRB, the changes in the Final Rule will ensure that going forward, the regional hearings will be expressly limited to issues relevant to the question of whether an election should be conducted. The hearing officer will have the authority to limit testimony to relevant issues, and to decide whether or not to accept post-hearing briefs.

Also, all appeals of regional director decisions to the Board will be consolidated into a single post-election request for review. Parties can currently appeal regional director decisions to the Board at multiple stages in the process.

In addition, the rule makes all Board review of Regional Directors’ decisions discretionary, leaving more final decisions in the hands of career civil servants with long experience supervising elections.

Click here to read the Final Rule.

The Final Rule annoucnement was followed by the NLRB’s announcement that it is delaying the deadline for employers to comply with its employee rights notice-posting rule until April 30, 2012. However the extension does little to relieve employers from the wave of added regulatory and enforcement guidance including new social networking guidance issued coincident with the extension announcement.

While the poster requirement is delayed, the NLRB continues to pursue an active regulatory and enforcement agenda. See, e.g., Employers Face New Labor-Management Exposures Under Activist National Labor Relations Board. Employers should continue to strengthen their labor-management policies and practices to mitigate the growing labor exposures that result from this activist agenda. In fact, the NLRB accompanied its extension anouncement by sharing new guidance about its position on labor law restrictions on employer regulation of social networking and other communications.

For Help or More Information

If you need help with labor managmeent relations or other human resources or internal controls matters, please contact the author of this article, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Board Certified in Labor & employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, ,management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping private and governmental organizations and their management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; schools and other governmental agencies and others design, administer and defend innovative compliance, risk management, workforce, compensation, employee benefit, privacy, procurement and other management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers implement, audit, manage and defend union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, procurement, conflict of interest, discrimination management, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on management, reengineering, investigations, human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and risk management, federal sentencing guideline and other enforcement resolution actions, and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

[1] WHD’s announcement of the planned rule notes that this draft shared December 15 remains subject to change before formally published in the Federal Register.

Comments Off on NLRB Changes Certification Election Case Procedures | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: aor law, department of labor, Employment, Health Care, lovertime, NLRA, NLRB, Union, Wage & Hour | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

NLRB Delays Deadline For Employee Labor Rights Poster Requirement To April 30

December 25, 2011

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is delaying the deadline for employers to comply with its employee rights notice-posting rule until April 30, 2012. However the extension does little to relieve employers from the wave of added regulatory and enforcement guidance including new social networking guidance issued coincident with the extension announcement.

The NLRB rule will require that most private sector employers will be required to post the 11-by-17-inch notice on the new implementation date of April 30. The notice is available at no cost from the NLRB through its website, which has additional information on posting requirements and NLRB jurisdiction.

Facing litigation challenging the rule, the NLRB announced on December 23, 2011 that it would delay the deadline to comply with the rule to comply with he request of the federal court in Washington, DC hearing the llegal challenge. Following the announcement, the new implementation date is April 30, 2012.

For Help or More Information

If you need help with labor managmeent relations or other human resources or internal controls matters, please contact the author of this article, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

[1] WHD’s announcement of the planned rule notes that this draft shared December 15 remains subject to change before formally published in the Federal Register.

Comments Off on NLRB Delays Deadline For Employee Labor Rights Poster Requirement To April 30 | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Overtime, Wage & Hour | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

New Labor Department Retaliation Guidance Reminder Of Retailiation Risks

December 23, 2011

U.S. employers should exercise care to guard against potential retaliation claims brought by current or former employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA) and other federal employment laws.

Retaliation claims have emerged as a leading source of liability for U.S. employers. Most U.S. labor and employment laws, as well as many other statutes prohibit companies from retaliating against employees for exercising protected rights under the law’s provisions. Challenges and risks in managing this growing source of liability has been further fueled by the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Crawford v. Metropolitan Gov’t of Nashville and Davidson County, No. 06-1595, that the anti-retaliation provisions of Title VII extend to employees who take part in investigations even if that employee does not file a complaint of retaliation. See Supreme Court Decision May Open Doors To More Retaliation Claims

In light of these risks, U.S. employers should tighten employee discipline and other practices and documentation to guard against retaliation claims.

In undertaking these risk management efforts, employers should take advantage of the insights given from three new fact sheets addressing retaliation published by the U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division (WHD) on December 23, 2011:

Fact Sheet #77A, Prohibiting Retaliation Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), provides general information concerning the FLSA’s prohibition of retaliating against any employee who has filed a complaint or cooperated in an investigation and is available on the WHD website at here;
Fact Sheet #77B, Protection for Individuals under the FMLA, provides general information concerning the Family and Medical Leave Act’s (FMLA) prohibition of retaliating against an individual for exercising his or her rights or participating in matters protected under the FMLA and is available on the WHD website at here; and
Fact Sheet #77C, Prohibiting Retaliation Under the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA), provides general information concerning MSPA’s prohibition of discrimination against a migrant or seasonal agricultural worker who has filed a complaint or participated in any proceeding under or related to MSPA and is available on the WHD website at here.

The guidance comes as the WHD is proposing to adopt new rules that would provide minimum wage and overtime protections for nearly two million workers who provide in-home care services for the elderly and infirm. WHD’s focus on home health workers is an extension of its expanded regulation and enforcement efforts targeting a broad range of health care industry employers. See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to revise the companionship and live-in worker regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

The proposed tightening of regulations for home health workers follows a general toughening by WHD of its regulation and enforcement of wage and hour laws in the health care and many other industries. See, e.g. Home health care company in Dallas agrees to pay 80 nurses more than $92,000 in back wages following US Labor Department investigation; US Department of Labor secures nearly $62,000 in back overtime wages for 21 health care employees in Pine Bluff, Ark.; US Department of Labor initiative targeted toward increasing FLSA compliance in New York’s health care industry; US Department of Labor initiative targeted toward residential health care industry in Connecticut and Rhode Island to increase FLSA compliance; Partners HealthCare Systems agrees to pay 700 employees more than $2.7 million in overtime back wages to resolve U.S. Labor Department lawsuit; US Labor Department sues Kentucky home health care provider to obtain more than $512,000 in back wages and damages for 22 employees; and Buffalo, Minn.-based home health care provider agrees to pay more than $150,000 in back wages following US Labor Department investigation.

Employers should take steps to manage compliance and other exposures under these and other federal laws, including those for engaging in prohibited retaliation. Employers should both confirm the adequacy of their practices under existing rules, as well as take steps to decrease exposures to retaliation claims.

For Help With Compliance & Risk Management and Defense

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

*WHD’s announcement of the planned rule notes that this draft shared December 15 remains subject to change before formally published in the Federal Register.

Comments Off on New Labor Department Retaliation Guidance Reminder Of Retailiation Risks | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Overtime, Wage & Hour | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

HR Key Player In Managing Countrywide & Other US Discrimination Exposures

December 23, 2011

This week’s announcement by the U.S. Justice Department of the largest residential fair lending settlement in history on December 21, 2011 highlights the widening scope of exposures that U.S. businesses face under a broad range of federal Civil Rights and other discrimination laws. The settlement shows that discrimination risks are rising and that employment discrimination is only part of the problem. In addition to managing employment discrimination exposures in their employment practices, many businesses and business leaders also need to take steps to adequately recognize and provide policies, management controls and training to maintain compliance with federal disability and other discrimination laws prohibiting discrimination against disabled or other customers or others with whom they do business.

Human resources and other management leaders should move quickly to help their organizations manage these risks and responsibilities.

Countrywide Settlement

This week’s Justice Department settlement with Countrywide Financial Corporation and its subsidiaries (Countrywide) provides for payment of $335 million in compensation to the more than 200,000 qualified African-American and Hispanic borrowers that Federal officials allege were victims of the widespread pattern or practice of illegal discrimination against qualified African-American and Hispanic borrowers by Countrywide while Countrywide served as one of the nation’s largest single-family mortgage lenders and originated more than 4 million residential mortgage loans. Bank of America now owns Countrywide.

Federal officials charged Countrywide engaged in discriminatory mortgage lending practices against more than 200,000 qualified African-American and Hispanic borrowers from 2004 through 2008. The Justice Department claimed it uncovered a pattern or practice of discrimination involving victims in more than 180 geographic markets across 41 states and the District of Columbia. These discriminatory acts allegedly included widespread violations of the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and resulted in African-American and Hispanic borrowers being charged higher rates for mortgage loans – solely because of their race or national origin.

According to Attorney General Eric Holder, today’s settlement will compensate the more than 200,000 African-American and Hispanic borrowers who were victims of discriminatory conduct, including more than 10,000 African-American or Hispanic borrowers who – despite the fact that they qualified for prime loans – were steered into subprime loans. Subprime borrowers pay higher penalties and higher interest rates, have a greater likelihood of default and foreclosure than with prime loans, and other damages.

When announcing the settlement, Attorney General Holder reaffirmed the Obama Administration’s commitment to finding and prosecuting businesses that engage in illegal discriminatory practices. To read Attorney General Eric Holder’s remarks, click here.

Discrimination Obama Administration Priority

Enforcing disability discrimination laws is a high priority of the Obama Administration Business leaders increasingly recognize the need to tighten procedures to manage disability discrimination risks.

Human resources and other business leaders often recognize human resource related discrimination risks as requiring management. The heightened emphasis of the Obama Administration on disability regulation and enforcement clearly is raising business responsibilities and exposures under these employment laws. In order to manage these exposures effectively, however, it is important that businesses and their human resources leaders do not take for granted the adequacy of their current compliance and risk management efforts in light of the Obama Administration’s aggressive regulatory and enforcement agenda in this area. See e.g., Affordable Care Act To Require Health Plans Cover Contraception & Other Women’s Health Procedures In 2012; EEOC Finalizes Updates To Disability Regulations In Response to ADA Amendments Act; Update Employment Practices To Manage Genetic Info Discrimination Risks Under New EEOC Final GINA Regulations; EEOC Attacks Medical Leave Denials As Prohibited Disability Discrimination; Labor Secretary Comments Highlight Federal Protections & Resources To Support Veteran’s Employment Rights.

Employment discrimination risks are not the only discrimination exposures that U.S. organizations need to be concerned about, however. The Countrywide settlement joins a lengthy list of settlements and other actions by the Obama Administration against businesses and government entities for alleged violations of U.S. civil rights and other nondiscrimination laws. See, e.g. Businesses Face Rising Disability Discrimination Enforcement Risks; New Obama Administration Affirmative Action Guidance Highlights Organization’s Need To Tighten Nondiscrimination Practices; OFCCP Proposed Increased Disability Hiring Targets, Other Tougher Government Contractor Rules another Sign Of Rising Employment Discrimination Risks; Incentives To Get Employee Into Wellness Education Requires Legal Risk Management; New School Racial Accommodation Guidance Gives Important Insights For Schools & Other Organizations On Obama Administration Affirmative Action Enforcement; Justice Department Landlord Suit Shows Businesses Face Rising Disability Discrimination Enforcement Risks; Big Penalty for Lender Shows Risks of Violating Military Service or Vets Rights; OCR Requires Rhode Island DHS To Provide Translation, Other Services For Limited English, Other Language Impaired Accommodations.

These regulatory, audit, enforcement and other actions show that private businesses and state and local government agencies alike should exercise special care to prepare to defend their employment and other business practices against potential disability or other Civil Rights discrimination challenges on a broad range of fronts.

HR Key Player

Human resources professionals are key players to efforts to effectively manage their organization’s overall discrimination risks and responsibilities by managing compliance throughout the organization.

All organizations, whether public or private need to make sure both that their organizations, their policies, and people in form and in action understand and comply with current disability and other nondiscrimination laws. When reviewing these responsibilities, many state and local governments and private businesses may need to update their understanding of current requirements.

Federal nondiscrimination and other laws have been expanded or modified in recent years by statutory, regulatory or enforcement changes, risk management efforts should begin with an assessment of the adequacy of existing policies and practices in light of the latest rules and enforcement actions. Based on this assessment, business and governmental organizations should update policies and procedures as required, tighten documentation, and conduct ongoing, well-documented audits and training to mitigate exposures.

Human resources and other management leaders should position their organizations to guard against rising enforcement of these laws by updating policies, oversight and training to ensure that their workers and business partners recognize and know how to conduct themselves properly to fulfill responsibilities to persons with disabilities or others with whom the business deals who may be protected under Federal or state disability discrimination laws. In addition to adopting and training workers on policies requiring compliance with these laws, businesses should include contractual provisions requiring compliance with these laws in leases and other relevant business contracts. Most businesses also may want to provide and post information about processes that customers or others who may have a concern about the needs of persons with these special needs to position the business to address concerns that otherwise might go unnoticed until they arise to the level of an agency or other legal complaint.

If you need assistance in conducting a risk assessment of or responding to a challenge to your organization’s existing policies or practices for dealing with the issues addressed in these publications or other compliance, labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, internal controls or other management practices, contact attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

For Help With Compliance, Risk Management & Defense

If you need help in auditing or assessing, updating or defending your organization’s compliance, risk manage or other internal controls practices or actions, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872. If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available at www.cynthiastamer.com.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping employers and other management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers carry out, audit, manage and defend union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on management, re-engineering, investigations, human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and risk management, federal sentencing guideline and other enforcement resolution actions, and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For more information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to get access to other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Comments Off on HR Key Player In Managing Countrywide & Other US Discrimination Exposures | ADA, Affirmative Action, Child Labor, Civil Rights, Corporate Compliance, Disability, EEOC, Employers, GINA, Government Contractors, OFCCP, Rehabilitation Act, Retaliation, USERRA, VEVRRA | Tagged: ADA, civil rights, Discrimination, employment discrimination, Risk Management | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Senator Tells IRS To Fix Proposed Health Care Exchange Premium Tax Credit Regulations

December 16, 2011

U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, says the premium subsidy provisions of the Patient Protection & Affordable Care act (Affordable Care Act) does not authorize the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to allow individuals purchasing coverage through a federal health insurance exchange to receive the tax credits and subsidies authorized under new Internal Revenue Code § 36B to offset the cost of being mandated to buy health insurance created under Affordable Care Act Section 1311.

As created under the Affordable Care Act, Internal Revenue Code (Code) § 36B grates a refundable tax credit for certain individuals purchasing qualifying health insurance coverage from a qualified health plan. According to Senator Hatch, IRS proposed regulations here to implement Code § 36B would violate its provisions by allowing individuals that buy coverage through federal exchanges to claim premium tax credits because the express language of the statute only calls for amounts paid for coverage from “State” exchanges to count when calculating the amount of the credit. Read more details here.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Senator Tells IRS To Fix Proposed Health Care Exchange Premium Tax Credit Regulations | Claims Administration, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 36B, Affordable Care Act, exchanges, group health plan, health care exchanges, Health Insurance, Health Plans, HIPAA, Mental Health Benefits, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, premium subsidies, Substance Abuse Benefits | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Labor Department Proposes Changing Minimum Wage& Overtime Rules For Home Caregivers, Keeps Heat On Health Care Employers

December 15, 2011

The U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division (WHD) plans to propose new rules that would provide minimum wage and overtime protections for nearly two million workers who provide in-home care services for the elderly and infirm. WHD’s focus on home health workers is an extension of its expanded regulation and enforcement efforts targeting a broad range of health care industry employers.

On December 15, 2011 the WHD announced that it will publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [1] (NPRM) to revise the companionship and live-in worker regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):

To more clearly define the tasks that may be performed by an exempt companion;
To limit the companionship exemption to companions employed only by the family or household using the services; and
To provide that third party employers, such as in-home care staffing agencies, could not claim the companionship exemption or the overtime exemption for live-in domestic workers, even if the employee is jointly employed by the third party and the family or household.

Violation of wage and hour laws exposes an employer to significant back pay awards, substantial civil penalties and, if the violation is found to be willful, even potential criminal liability.

For Help With Compliance & Risk Management and Defense

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

[1] WHD’s announcement of the planned rule notes that this draft shared December 15 remains subject to change before formally published in the Federal Register.

Comments Off on Labor Department Proposes Changing Minimum Wage& Overtime Rules For Home Caregivers, Keeps Heat On Health Care Employers | Corporate Compliance, Employers, Fair Labor Standards Act, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Wage & Hour | Tagged: department of labor, Employment, Health Care, Overtime, Wage & Hour | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Urges Preparers to Renew PTINs for 2012

December 15, 2011

The Internal Revenue Service is reminding tax return preparers to renew their Preparer Tax Identification Numbers (PTINs) before year’s end. All 2011 PTINs will expire on Dececember 31 and must be renewed annually. Tax preparers can renew by loging in here. The fee to renew is $63.

According to the IRS, preparers who applied for PTINs using a paper Form W-12 last year are encouraged to renew online. An activation code and instructions were mailed to each paper applicant for this purpose. Individuals who prefer to renew their PTIN on paper must mail a Form W-12, IRS Paid Preparer Tax Identification Number Application and Renewal. The response time is 4 to 6 weeks.

Tips about dealing with password or other issues are available on the PTIN page here.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing, updating, administering or defending your fringe benefit or other employee benefit, compensation or human resources practices, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to watch legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials about regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS Urges Preparers to Renew PTINs for 2012 | Defined Benefit Plans, Defined Contribution Plans, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Retirement Plans, Tax, Tax Qualification | Tagged: 401(k), accountant, Circular 230, CPA, Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, Fringe Benefits, investment advice, IRA, meal expense, plan qualification, Preparer Tax Identification Number, prohibited transactions, ptin, retirement plan, Retirement Plans, tax preparer, travel expense | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

New Guidance On Fiduciary Duties In Handling ACA Group Health Plan Premium Rebates Highlight Advisability Of Tightening Funding Terms & Fund Handling Practices To Manage Fiduciary Risks

December 13, 2011

Group health plan sponsors and fiduciaries need to exercise care to properly handle any premium rebates, if any, received by from insurers to comply with the medical loss ratio rules enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act) to avoid violating the plan assets and other fiduciary responsibility rules of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), according to Technical Release No. 2011-04, Technical Release on Fiduciary Requirements for Handling Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) Rebates (“Technical Release”) published December 2, 2011.

As amended by the Affordable Care, Section 2718 of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA) requires that health insurance issuers:

Publicly report on major categories of spending of policyholder premium dollars, such as clinical services provided to enrollees and activities that will improve health care quality;
Establishes medical loss ratio (MLR) standards for issuers; and
Requires issuers to provide rebates to enrollees when their spending for the benefit of policyholders on reimbursement for clinical services and health care quality improving activities, in relation to the premiums charged (as adjusted for taxes), is less than the MLR standards.

Employers or other sponsors that are group policyholders on insurance contracts covered by the MLR rules are likely to receive any rebates due because Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) final regulations implementing these MLR requirements published December 7, 2011 require issuers to pay any MLR rebates “to the policyholder.”

In anticipation insurers’ payment of these rebates, the Employee Benefit Security Administration (EBSA) is cautioning employers and other ERISA-covered group health plan sponsors and plan fiduciaries that premium rebates received from an insurer pursuant to these HHS MLB regulations may be plan assets required to be handled in accordance with ERISA’s plan assets and other fiduciary responsibility rules.

In the December 2, 2011 Technical Release, EBSA reminds plan sponsors and fiduciaries that premium rebates distributed pursuant to the Affordable Care Act’s MLR standards with respect to a group health plan are likely to be plan assets protected by ERISA’s fiduciary responsibility rules. Accordingly, the Technical Release cautions that plan sponsors or other parties receiving or exercising discretion over the rebated amounts that are ERISA plan assets generally should see that rebated amounts are handled in accordance with the fiduciary responsibility and trust requirements generally applicable to ERISA plan assets.

Determination whether the premium rebate is a plan asset generally requires a careful evaluation of whether the plan has a beneficial interest in the rebate and certain other factors. According to the Technical Release, a distribution such as the rebate to a group health plan will be a plan asset if the plan has a beneficial interest in the distribution under ordinary notions of property rights. While the identity of the policyholder – the employer or other plan sponsor versus a trust or plan – is one important consideration, the Technical Release warns that this is not the only factor.

The Technical Release says the fact that the employer is the policyholder or the owner of the policy would not, by itself, indicate that the employer may retain the distributions. Rather, determining who is entitled to the distribution requires careful analysis of a broad range of factors including:

The terms of the governing plan documents;
The funding sources of the policy;
The parties’ understandings and representations; and
Other relevant facts and circumstances.

If the rebate is an ERISA plan asset, employers or others receiving a premium rebate payment and others with discretion over the use and handling of the rebate should take steps to ensure that they can demonstrate the rebate is handled and expended in accordance with ERISA’s fiduciary responsibility requirements. Among other things, this means that rebated amounts should be:

Held in trust unless the plan fiduciaries verify that an exception applies;
Used only for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to participants in the plan and their beneficiaries and defraying reasonable expenses of administering the plan;
Handled in accordance with the fiduciary responsibility provisions of ERISA section 404 and the prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA section 406;
Held in trust in accordance with ERISA section 403; and
Not allowed to inure to the benefit of any employer.

The Technical Release reminds plan sponsors and administrators that if the rebate is a plan asset, decisions about and actions taken to deposit in trust, allocate, apply, spend and other aspects of handling the plan’s portion of a rebate generally are subject to ERISA’s general standards of fiduciary conduct, prohibited transaction and trust requirements. The Technical Release also provides guidance about allocation of the rebate under certain circumstances and certain other questions that are likely to arise in connection with the receipt of a rebate. Insurers, brokers, consultants and others working with employers or other plan sponsors, administrators, or fiduciaries who may receive a rebate or otherwise involved in making funding decisions also may want to discuss the guidance and other fiduciary responsibility rules with their clients to help promote understanding and compliance.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing and updating, administering or defending your group health or other employee benefit, human resources, insurance, health care matters or related documents or practices or with other employee benefits, human resources, health care or insurance matters, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on leading health and managed care, employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials about regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on New Guidance On Fiduciary Duties In Handling ACA Group Health Plan Premium Rebates Highlight Advisability Of Tightening Funding Terms & Fund Handling Practices To Manage Fiduciary Risks | Claims Administration, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: ADA, Affordable Care Act, Fiduciary Responsibility, group health plan, Health Insurance, Health Plans, HIPAA, Mental Health Benefits, Mental Health Parity, Substance Abuse Benefits | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Mental Health Parity Guidance On Mental Health & Substance Abuse Copays, Utilization Management Limits Released

December 7, 2011

The U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Labor and the Treasury (the Departments) on November 17, 2011 published additional FAQs that share insights on how the MHPAEA requirements impact certain common copayments and utilization review arrangements historically used by plans and insurers. The new FAQ guidance here provides additional clarification about the meaning of the interim final rules implementing MHPAEA the Departments jointly issued on February 2, 2010, and previous FAQ guidance published on June 30, 2010 and December 22, 2010 as applied to these practices.

For group health insurers and group health plans subject to its provisions, MHPAEA generally requires that insurer or plan:

Cannot impose financial requirements and treatment limitations on mental health and substance use disorder benefits that are more restrictive than the predominant financial requirements and treatment limitations that apply to substantially all medical and surgical benefits; and
Cannot impose separate financial requirements or treatment limitations that are applicable only to mental health or substance use disorder benefits.

The new FAQs share the Departments joint response to questions about their interpretation of the interim final rules on nonquantitative treatment limitations in various respects. Among other things, the new FAQs reflect:

The new FAQs respond to various questions about the effect of the MHPAEA on various medical necessity and other utilization management practices that health plans and health insurers historically have applied mental health and substance abuse coverage’s.

The FAQs generally reaffirm that group health plans and health insurers generally cannot apply stricter medical necessity or other utilization review for mental health or substance abuse treatments than the prevailing requirements generally applicable to medical surgical benefits under the plan or policy.

The FAQ also provides insight into evidence that health insurers or health plan sponsors should consider and retain when designing fraud control or other medical management techniques to be defensible under the MHPAEA’s parity requirements.

Furthermore, the new FAQs also provide guidance about the viability and use of differences in clinical standards of care, length of stay, and other clinical standards to justify differences in the periods of coverage provided for mental and substance abuse coverage versus other types of treatments.

Finally, the FAQs also address when a group health plan or health insurer can require covered persons to pay a higher specialist copayment for mental health or substance abuse treatments than generally applies to care rendered to a non-specialist.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Mental Health Parity Guidance On Mental Health & Substance Abuse Copays, Utilization Management Limits Released | Claims Administration, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: ADA, Affordable Care Act, group health plan, Health Insurance, Health Plans, HIPAA, Mental Health Benefits, Mental Health Parity, Substance Abuse Benefits | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Group Health Plans & Insurer To Get More Time To Meet Affordable Care Act Summary of Benefits and Coverage Requirements

December 7, 2011

Delayed Deadline Allows Much Needed Time To Continue Preparations

Group health plans and insurers, their sponsors, fiduciaries, administrators and other services providers are getting more time to comply with the Affordable Care Act’s new Summary of Benefits and Coverage (“SBC”) mandate beyond the March 23, 2012 deadline originally set forth in the Proposed Regulations jointly published by the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Labor and the Treasury (the Departments). Plans, their insurers and administrators should make good use of this time to continue the time consuming planning and preparations expected to be required to comply with the final rules.

As amended by the Affordable Care Act, Public Health Service Act (“PHS Act”) § 2715 PHS requires group health plans and health insurance issuers to provide a “Summary of Benefits and Coverage” and “Uniform Glossary” meeting standards developed by the Departments.

In August, 2011, the Departments jointly published proposed regulations and accompanying templates detailing the content, format, supplements and other requirements that they proposed requiring health plans and health insurers to meet to satisfy the SBC requirements.

If implemented in final form as proposed, group health plans and insurers, their sponsors, administrators and fiduciaries can expect that significant work will be required to evaluate and prepare the SBC and associated adjustments to plan documents, summary plan descriptions and other materials and practices that are likely to be required in response to the new requirements. Since health plan documents and insurance contracts are unlikely to already use the same definitions as the SBC regulations require be used in the Glossary, group health insurers and self-insured group health plans, their sponsors, fiduciaries and other administrators generally will want to review and adjust definitions and other plan document and insurance cotnract provisions to eliminate inconsistencies and address other concerns. Likewise, adjustments to summary plan descriptions, certificates of benefits and other communication materials also likely will be needed. Furthermore, most health insurers and group health plan may want to reevaluate claims and other cost and reserve projections and consider other adjustments in response to potential implications of these adjustments.

As originally proposed by the Departments, health plans and issuers faced a March 23, 2012 deadline to begin complying with the SBC rules. Since August, 2011, we and various other attorneys from the American Bar Association RPTE and Tax leadership, as well as others have shared concerns with representatives of the Departments about the compliance deadlines and other aspects of the Proposed Rules. New guidance released by the Departments in November reflects that the Departments are taking this input to heart.

According to joint guidance issued by the Departments in November, the health plans and insurers will not be expected to comply by March 23. Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) guidance jointly issued by the Departments indicates that health plans and health insurers will not be required to comply with the SBC mandate until after the Departments issue finalize regulations.

According to the FAQ, the Departments’ final regulations, once issued, will include an applicability date that allows group health plans and health insurance issuers “sufficient time to comply.” The FAQ does not indicate when the Departments expect to publish final regulations or the length of the period following this publication that the Departments anticipate health plans and issuers will have to come into compliance.

This news provides welcome relief for group health plans and insurers, and the employers, administrators and others working to update and administer group health plans in response to the Affordable Care Act. Health plans, insurers, their sponsors, administrators and service providers are cautioned to make good use of this added time to begin preparing to respond quickly when regulations are finalized. While the Departments are expected to make various refinements when finalizing the regulations beyond adjusting the compliance deadline, plans and insurers are expected to be required to engage in significant planning and other preparations to meet the revised rules. In light of this, health insurers and group health plans, their sponsors, administrators and fiduciaries generally are advised to continue these preparations based upoln the guidance set forth in the proposed regulations so that they can be prepared to respond in a timely fashion to the final regulations.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

For important information concerning this communication click here. THE FOLLOWING DISCLAIMER IS INCLUDED TO COMPLY WITH AND IN RESPONSE TO U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR 230 REGULATIONS. ANY STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE NOT INTENDED OR WRITTEN BY THE WRITER TO BE USED, AND NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN CAN BE USED BY YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON, FOR THE PURPOSE OF (1) AVOIDING PENALTIES THAT MAY BE IMPOSED UNDER FEDERAL TAX LAW, OR (2) PROMOTING, MARKETING OR RECOMMENDING TO ANOTHER PARTY ANY TAX-RELATED TRANSACTION OR MATTER ADDRESSED HEREIN.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Group Health Plans & Insurer To Get More Time To Meet Affordable Care Act Summary of Benefits and Coverage Requirements | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health premiums, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

CMS Final Medicare Rule Imposes Many Conditions On Access To Medicare Claims Data To Evaluate Providers & Suppliers

December 6, 2011

Final Rules Make Direct Access To Data By All But Most Sophisticated Impossible

The Centers For Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) says disclosures of certain Medicare provider and supplier claims performance data scheduled to begin in January will empower employers, health plans and consumers to better evaluate the quality of these health care providers and suppliers.

CMS plans to begin sharing certain Medicare parts A, B and D provider claims data with “qualifying entities” that can demonstrate the necessary experience and qualifications for use in assisting employers, health plans and others to evaluate the performance of providers and suppliers. CMS also will generate public reports about this performance data for purposes of aiding employers, consumers and others in evaluating the quality for provider or suppliers.

The disclosures will be made in response to Section 10332 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively the “Affordable Care Act”). Section 10332 generally requires CMS make available this Medicare data to “qualifying entities” for use in conjunction with other claims data to evaluate provider performance effective January 1, 2012.

The new Final Rule on Availability of Medicare Data for Performance Measurement (“Final Rule”) available for review here establishes detailed requirements about who, when and under what conditions that Medicare will allow qualifying entities to obtain and use certain standardized extracts of Medicare Parts A, B, and D provider and supplier performance data in conjunction with other claims data to evaluate provider and supplier performance pursuant to Section 10332. The Final Rule also discusses privacy requirements that qualifying entities must meet when handling this data. scheduled for official publication in the December 7, 2011 Federal Register

The disclosure of provider performance data is intended to provide greater transparency to employers, health plans, consumers and other parties in evaluating health care provider and supplier quality. To access this information, however, entities will have to comply with detailed requirements. Complicated restrictions included in the Final Rules make it likely that only sophisticated health plans and service providers will be able to directly access and use the provider and supplier data intended to be made available under the Final Rule, however.

As implemented under the Final Rule, entities wishing to access the provider or supplier claims data will be required to meet detailed qualification and other requirements. For instance, among other things, the Final Rule generally only allows an entity to access and use the provider data if it is an entity or business contractor to an entity that:

CMS determines is an entity eligible to obtain the provider data under the eligibility criteria set forth in the Final Rule;
Apply to obtain the provider data under the Final Rule for an allowed purpose in accordance with a demonstrated plan as required by the Final Rules;
Meet a detailed list of requirements demonstrating that it has the experience, governance, policies, procedures and other required qualifications specified in the Final Rules to qualify to obtain and use the provider data;
Pays the required fee;
Comply with annual reporting and other reporting and monitoring requirements;
Comply with the specific requirements of the Final Rules concerning the protection of the privacy of accessed data;
Agree to meet the requirements described in the Final Rules; and
Otherwise comply with all other applicable requirements of the Final Rule.

Entities accessing the information also will be monitored and subject to sanction for failing to comply with the Final Rule in using or handling the provider performance data once it is received. Once an entity is allowed to access the provider claims data, the Final Rules specify that CMS will monitor and assess the performance of qualified entities and their contractors through audits, review of data source documentation and data as requested by CMS; site visits; review of data reported by the qualified entity as part of required annual reporting and other reporting requirements set forth in the Final Rule; analysis of complaints from beneficiaries and/or providers or suppliers. If CMS determines that a qualified entity has breached any of these requirements, it may warn; require a corrective action plan (“CAP”); place the qualified entity on a special monitoring plan; or terminate the qualified entity from participation in the program in accordance with the Final Rules.

Health plans, employers, and other entities desiring to access or use this information will need to exercise care when applying to obtain and handling the data to ensure that all requirements are met. To ensure that these requirements are met, parties interested in obtaining these rules should seek assistance from competent counsel and other qualified advisors concerning their proposed application and use of this data.

In light of these and other conditions for accessing and using this information, only a very limited of very sophisticated health plans, employers or other entities or their advisors are likely to apply to or qualify to access and use the provider and supplier claims data as contemplated by the rule. Individual consumers, and most employers generally will only benefit from the new access allowed to this data indirectly, by accessing the analysis of these entities.

For Help or More Information

If you need help responding to this new guidance or otherwise to deal with other health plan or insurance, employee benefit, human resources, compensation, health care matters or related matters, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with health and managed care, insurance and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend insured and self-insured medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. She also has worked extensively with Medicare and Medicaid Advantage, association, employer and other group insurance arrangements, MEWAs, fraternal benefit and mutual aid programs, government programs, and a broad range of other specialized health and other programs and insurers to design and administer arrangements in response to their unique regulatory and operational needs. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials concerning regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

You can learn more about Ms. Stamer and her experience, review some of her other training, speaking, publications and other resources, and register to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns from Ms. Stamer here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on CMS Final Medicare Rule Imposes Many Conditions On Access To Medicare Claims Data To Evaluate Providers & Suppliers | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

OSHA Updates Safety Resources To Prevent Construction, Other “Top 10” Exposures

December 5, 2011

Construction Exposures OSHA Exposure For Most Businesses Including Those In Construction

Construction industry as well as other employers need to watch key construction safety risks.

Construction industry employers get high scrutiny of their safety and injury experience and practices because of high injury incidents coming from these risks. However, you don’t have to be in the construction industry to be exposed to construction and building related risks that are common source of workplace injury and OSHA citations.

While continuing to keep the heat up on enforcement, the Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA) recently released new and updated educational brochures and a series of new QuickCards it intends to promote worker safety in these and other areas.

With construction and related activities continuing to be a lead source of injuries, the Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA) is taking steps to promote better safety compliance in relation to construction and other common accident sources as well as continuing to zealously enforce OSHA citations and other remedies against businesses breaching these and other safety responsibilities. As virtually all employers, including but not limited to those in construction or similar industries have workers performing construction related tasks, all employers should check the updated and existing safety requirements involving these actions and take other steps to manage these and other highlighted exposures.

Construction, Other Safety Education & Resources Updated

Focusing on worker safety in the construction, general and maritime industries, OSHA recently released new and updated educational brochures and a series of new QuickCards on worker safety. These materials available here include workers’ rights, employer rights and responsibilities following an OSHA inspection, construction industry digest, small entity compliance guide for respiratory protection standard and laboratory safety guidance. These new resources are part of a broad range of worker health and safety guides, standards and related materials published by OSHA covering a broad range of industries.

The emphasis on these industries is based in part on the high injury incidence in these businesses. OSHA statistics show that of 4,070 worker fatalities in private industry in calendar year 2010, one-fifth (751 or 18.5%) were in construction. The leading causes of worker deaths on construction sites were: falls, electrocution, struck by object, and caught–in/between. These “Fatal Four” were responsible for nearly three out of five (57%) construction worker deaths in 2010:

Falls – 260 out of 751 total deaths in construction in CY 2010 (35%)
Electrocutions – 76 (10%)
Struck by Object – 63 (8%)
Caught-in/between – 32 (4%)

Employers of workers involved in construction, general and maritime industries also frequently are found to have committed violations that fall within the Top 10 most frequently cited OSHA standards violated in FY2010:

Scaffolding, general requirements, construction (29 CFR 1926.451)
Fall protection, construction (29 CFR 1926.501)
Hazard communication standard, general industry (29 CFR 1910.1200)
Ladders, construction (29 CFR 1926.1053)
Respiratory protection, general industry (29 CFR 1910.134)
Control of hazardous energy (lockout/tagout), general industry (29 CFR 1910.147)
Electrical, wiring methods, components and equipment, general industry (29 CFR 1910.305)
Powered industrial trucks, general industry (29 CFR 1910.178)
Electrical systems design, general requirements, general industry (29 CFR 1910.303)
Machines, general requirements, general industry (29 CFR 1910.212)

Construction industry and other employers should review safety practices and compliance for compliance with these and all other standards and to address other potential safety risks to minimize OSHA and other occupational injury related liabilities. and ensure their documentation of these efforts meets OSHA requirements and also positions the employer to defend against potential sanctions in the event of an employee injury or OSHA audit.

Because of the heavy use of subcontractors in these industries, employers also should be aware of potential exposures that can result from other businesses and workers on site.

In addition, employers should take care to ensure that all required documentation of safety practices and notifications dictated by OSHA are maintained and properly preserved.

In the event of an accident or other safety hazard event, employers also should engage counsel and other needed experts to timely investigate, provide notification and redress and manage resulting exposures under OSHA, worker’s compensation and other laws.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

If you would like help reviewing or defending your organization’s occupational health and safety or other employment or risk management concerns or wish to discuss arranging for Ms. Stamer to conduct training or speak for your organization, please contact Ms Stamer here.

Immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee and past Vic e-Chair of its Worker’s Compensation Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on health and other employee benefit and related workforce, insurance and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with employment, health and safety, employee benefits, compensation and other internal controls and workforce matters. She has 24 plus years experience helping employer and other clients develop and operate legally defensible programs, practices and policies that promote the client’s human resources, employee benefits and other management goals. Ms. Stamer also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these and other human resources matters who is active in many other employee benefits, human resources and other management focused organizations.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on OSHA Updates Safety Resources To Prevent Construction, Other “Top 10” Exposures | Employee Benefits, Employers, OSHA, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: Employment, Occupational Injury, OSHA, Safety | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

OSHA Updates Safety Resources To Prevent Construction, Other “Top 10” Exposures

December 5, 2011

OSHA Updated Worker Safety Cards Available As Safety Enforcement Continues

Construction, Other Safety Education & Resources Updated

Focusing on worker safety in the construction, general and maritime industries, the recently released brochure topics available here include workers’ rights, employer rights and responsibilities following an OSHA inspection, construction industry digest, small entity compliance guide for respiratory protection standard and laboratory safety guidance. These new resources are part of a broad range of worker health and safety guides, standards and related materials published by OSHA covering a broad range of industries.

Falls – 260 out of 751 total deaths in construction in CY 2010 (35%)
Electrocutions – 76 (10%)
Struck by Object – 63 (8%)
Caught-in/between – 32 (4%)

Scaffolding, general requirements, construction (29 CFR 1926.451)
Fall protection, construction (29 CFR 1926.501)
Hazard communication standard, general industry (29 CFR 1910.1200)
Ladders, construction (29 CFR 1926.1053)
Respiratory protection, general industry (29 CFR 1910.134)
Control of hazardous energy (lockout/tagout), general industry (29 CFR 1910.147)
Electrical, wiring methods, components and equipment, general industry (29 CFR 1910.305)
Powered industrial trucks, general industry (29 CFR 1910.178)
Electrical systems design, general requirements, general industry (29 CFR 1910.303)
Machines, general requirements, general industry (29 CFR 1910.212)

Because of the heavy use of subcontractors in these industries, employers also should be cognizant of potential exposures that can result from other businesses and workers on site.

In addition, employers should take care to ensure that all required documentation of safety practices and notifications dictated by OSHA are maintained and properly preserved.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

About Solutions Law Press

EBSA Releases Collection of New M-1 and Other Guidance Impacting Multiple Employer Welfare Plans

December 5, 2011

Multiple and multi-employer health and other welfare plans are subject to special Form M-1 and other reporting and disclosure and other requirements under Federal law as amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Affordable Care Act”).

The Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration (“EBSA”) updated its website with the following new guidance under the Affordable Care Act today:

Proposed Rule on Ex Parte Cease and Desist and Summary Seizure Orders: Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements, available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/pdf/proposedm1revisionsreg1.pdf
Proposed Rule on Filings Required of Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements and Certain Other Entities, available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/pdf/proposedm1revisionsreg2.pdf
Notice of Proposed Revision of Annual Information Return/Report, available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/pdf/proposedm1revisionsreg3.pdf
Notice of Proposed Revision of the Form M-1, available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/pdf/proposedm1revisionsreg4.pdf
Proposed Form M-1 Revisions, available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/proposedm1revisions.html
Fact Sheet, available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/newsroom/fsproposedm1revisions.html
Related News Release, available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/newsroom/2011/11-1677-NAT.html

For More Information Or Assistance

Widely published on health benefit and other related matters, Ms. Stamer’s insights and articles have been published by the HealthLeaders, Modern Health Care, Managed Care Executive, the Bureau of National Affairs, Aspen Publishers, Business Insurance, Employee Benefit News, the Wall Street Journal, the American Bar Association, Aspen Publishers, World At Work, Spencer Publications, SHRM, the International Foundation, Solutions Law Press and many others.

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on EBSA Releases Collection of New M-1 and Other Guidance Impacting Multiple Employer Welfare Plans | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, Claims Administration, COBRA, Disability, Disability, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, M-1, MEWA, multi-employer, multiple employer, multiple employer welfare plan, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Incentives To Get Employee Into Wellness Education Requires Legal Risk Management

December 3, 2011

Employers and health plans hoping to leverage the cost containment and other benefits of effective wellness programs may find helpful insights from a new Healthy Cal report about The Network for a Healthy California. When designing and administering these programs, however, employers and health plans need to use care to manage nondiscrimination and privacy risks.

Healthy Cal reports that the experience of the The Network for a Healthy California, a partnering program by federal, state, and local agencies, shows that educational programs can help low-income families make better health choices.

According to the Healthy Cal report, the 2009 Pediatric Nutrition Surveillance data from the California Department of Public Health found that roughly 21 percent of the population in Orange County’s between the ages of 5 and 20 years, and 17 percent of children between the ages of 2 and 5 years were obese.

Healthy Cal says the Network created a number of initiatives that have helped many of Santa Ana’s low-income population access healthy foods and conducted a broad range of other educational programs for the population. Noting that the outreach sought improve food choices, cultural and awareness barriers and other understandings and patient and family behaviors and circumstances. Healthy Cal reports that these efforts are paying off. Learn more at Healthy Cal.

Effective education programs are one element of successful wellness and disease management programs. The Network’s efforts show that success from these efforts requires persistence. Of course, making wellness education work starts with getting the employees and their families to the lesson. That often is where the challenge lies.

Employers and health plans often face challenges getting employees and their family to participate in these and other wellness programs. Many employers and health plans try to overcome participation barriers by offering financial or other rewards or penalities. However, legal concerns require that these arrangements be designed and used with great care to ensure that the savings sought from the wellness program are not overshadowed by defense and liability costs.

Financial or other incentive and reward programs of course must be designed to comply with the nondiscrimination rules of the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act (HIPAA), the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) and, perhaps most significantly of late, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s interpretation of the Americans With Disabilities Act physical testing and other disability discrimination rules. Privacy requirements also can be a challenge under these laws unless information collected from screening and other wellness and disease management activities is carefully collected, routed and handled to comply with HIPAA, GINA and other privacy rules. See, e.g, EBSA Issues Guidance on Health PLan Wellness & Disease Management Programs Subject to HIPAA Nondiscrimination Rules; ADAAA Amendment Broader “Disability Definition Not Retroactive, Employer Action Needed To Manage Post 1/1/2009 Risks; Businesses Face Rising Disability Discrimination Enforcement Risks; EEOC Finalizes Updates To Disability Regulations In Response to ADA Amendments Act. A recent Florida District Court decision upholding one employer’s wellness program on the facts and circumstances may provide helpful insights for employers and health plans planning to use these arrangements on steps and evidence to retain to position to claim certain potential defenses to ADA disability discrimination claims. Until more favorable guidance evolves, however, all employers and health plans using these arrangements need to consider the potential exposures and take steps to position against a potential discrimination claim by private plaintiffs, regulators or both.

Meanwhile, all employers and health plans also should review the existing preventive care coverage provided in their health plans to ensure compliance with expanded federal mandates enacted as part of the sweeping new federal health care reform law. See e.g., Affordable Care To Require Health Plans Cover Contraception & Other Women’s Health Procedures.

Vendors enthusiastic about marketing their wellness and disease management programs frequently do not

If you need assistance addressing the legal requirements of your wellness program or other workforce, employee benefit, compensation or risk management concern, contact the author of this update. We also encourage you and others to help develop real meaningful improvements by joining Project COPE: Coalition for Patient Empowerment here by sharing ideas, tools and other solutions and other resources. TheCoalition For Responsible Health Care Policy provides a resource that concerned Americans can use to share, monitor and discuss the Health Care Reform law and other health care, insurance and related laws, regulations, policies and practices and options for promoting access to quality, affordable healthcare through the design, administration and enforcement of these regulations.You also can access information about how you can arrange for training on “Building Your Family’s Health Care Toolkit,” using the “PlayForLife” resources to organize low cost wellness programs in your workplace, school, church or other communities, and other process improvement, compliance and other training and other resources for health care providers, employers, health plans, community leaders and others here.

About Author Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

About Project COPE: The Coalition On Patient Empowerment & Its Coalition on Responsible Health Policy

Sharing and promoting the use of practical practices, tools, information and ideas that patients and their families, health care providers, employers, health plans, communities and policymakers can share and offer to help patients, their families and others in their care communities to understand and work together to better help the patients, their family and their professional and private care community plan for and manage these needs is the purpose of Project COPE.

The best opportunity to improve access to quality, affordable health care for all Americans is for every American, and every employer, insurer, and community organization to seize the opportunity to be good Samaritans. The government, health care providers, insurers and community organizations can help by providing education and resources to make understanding and dealing with the realities of illness, disability or aging easier for a patient and their family, the affected employers and others. At the end of the day, however, caring for people requires the human touch. Americans can best improve health care by not waiting for someone else to step up: Speak up, step up and help bridge the gap when you or your organization can do so by extending yourself a little bit. Speak up to help communicate and facilitate when you can. Building health care neighborhoods filled with good neighbors throughout the community is the key.

The outcome of this latest health care reform push is only a small part of a continuing process. Whether or not the Affordable Care Act makes financing care better or worse, the same challenges exist. The real meaning of the enacted reforms will be determined largely by the shaping and implementation of regulations and enforcement actions which generally are conducted outside the public eye. Americans individually and collectively clearly should monitor and continue to provide input through this critical time to help shape constructive rather than obstructive policy. Regardless of how the policy ultimately evolves, however, Americans, American businesses, and American communities still will need to roll up their sleeves and work to deal with the realities of dealing with ill, aging and disabled people and their families. While the reimbursement and coverage map will change and new government mandates will confine providers, payers and patients, the practical needs and challenges of patients and families will be the same and confusion about the new configuration will create new challenges as patients, providers and payers work through the changes.

For Added Information and Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

For Help Or More Information

If you need assistance in auditing or assessing, updating or defending your organization’s compliance, risk manage or other internal controls practices or actions, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 24 years of work helping employers and other management; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers implement, audit, manage and defend union-management relations, wage and hour, discrimination and other labor and employment laws, privacy and data security, internal investigation and discipline and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on management, reengineering, investigations, human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and risk management, federal sentencing guideline and other enforcement resolution actions, and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Incentives To Get Employee Into Wellness Education Requires Legal Risk Management | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

HHS Chides Insurer For “Excessive” Premium Increases After Affordable Care Act Rate Audit

November 21, 2011

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is seeking to publicly shame Everence Insurance of Pennsylvania for charging small businesses what HHS claims are “unreasonably high” premium increases.

According to HHS, its first federal rate review under the Affordable Care Act found that Everence’s 12 percent rate increase for small businesses in Pennsylvania. After reviewing the rate, HHS says independent experts determined the choice of assumptions the company based its rate increase on reflected national data rather than reliable and available state data. These assumptions resulted in what HHS characterizes as an “unreasonably high premium in relation to the benefits provided to small businesses by Everence Insurance of Pennsylvania.

While the Affordable Care Act gave HHS the ability to conduct and publish health insurer rate reviews but does not grant HHS the authority to actually force covered health insurers to change their rates. While some state laws may give state regulators this authority, HHS’ authority remains limited to drawing public attention to carrier rate increases that HHS perceives as excessive.

In an effort to use public opinion to chastise Everence Insurance of Pennsylvania, HHS is using its media might to publicize its findings. “We have called on this insurer to immediately rescind the rate, issue refunds to consumers or publicly explain their refusal to do so,” said Steve Larsen, director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

HHS’s announcement of its findings about Everence Insurance of Pennsylvania marks the first of many reviews that HHS will do in addition to insurance rate reviews already being done by states. HHS says it intends to review all health insurer proposals to raise rates by 10 percent or more this year.

Companies that HHS finds have made excessive rate increases can either reduce their rate hikes or post a justification on their website within 10 days of the rate review determination. As of publication, Everence Insurance of Pennsylvania had not published a public rebuttal to the HHS announcement on its website or indicated how it plans to respond to the announcement. See here.

For More Information Or Assistance

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on HHS Chides Insurer For “Excessive” Premium Increases After Affordable Care Act Rate Audit | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health premiums, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS U-Tube Video Discusses 2012 Flexible Benefit Plan Rule Change

November 14, 2011

Recent health care reforms and other statutory and regulatory changes have impacted the Internal Revenue Code’s rules for cafeteria plans.

The Internal Revenue Service is seeking to help employers and adminstrators involved in the sponsorship or administration of these arrangements by sharing a U-Tube Video discussing these changes.

This new YouTube video describes a change in the law that affects flexible spending arrangements for 2012.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing, updating, administering or defending your cafeteria plan or other fringe benefit or other employee benefit, compensation or human resources practices, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS U-Tube Video Discusses 2012 Flexible Benefit Plan Rule Change | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 401(k), cafeteria plan, Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, flexible benefit plan, Fringe Benefits, investment advice, IRA, meal expense, plan qualification, prohibited transactions, Retirement Plans, travel expense | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Big Penalty for Lender Shows Risks of Violating Military Service or Vets Rights

November 14, 2011

Businesses Urged To Review and Strengthen Their Policies, Practices & Training

Today’s (November 14, 2011) Justice Department announcement that a Bank of America subsidiary will pay 160 military service members at least $116,785 apiece for violating their federal credit rights is the latest reminder to businesses and their leaders of the significant liability that they run for failing to honor the legal rights of U.S. military service persons and their families. The payments are required as part of the terms of a May 26, 2011 settlement agreement reached to resolve charges that BAC Home Loans Servicing LP unlawfully foreclosed on servicemembers’ homes in violation of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA). The settlement represents the largest action taken under the SCRA by the Justice Department to date.

The announcement follows the Justice Department’s September 22, 2011 announcement that ServiceMaster 24-Hour and its owner would pay $15,000 for refusing to reemploy a member of the U.S. Army Reserve following his return from active duty in violation of USERRA. Together, the settlements together illustrate the growing risks businesses run if they fail to honor these and other rights of members and veterans of the U.S. military.

With government and private awareness and enforcement of these rights on the rise, U.S businesses should review and tighten their business and employment practices for dealing with individuals in the military and their families in light of growing risks of enforcement of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) and other federal and state protections.

You can learn more details about these settlements and other enforcement of these rules here.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

If you need assistance in conducting a risk assessment of or responding to a challenge to your organization’s existing policies or practices for dealing with servicemembers or with other compliance, labor and employment, employee benefit or compensation practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experience worker classification and other employment, employee benefits and workforce matters, Ms. Stamer has extensive experience advising and representing businesses about managing responsibilities and risks under USERRA, SCRA and other federal rules regarding the rights of military service members and veterans in employment, credit and other transactions as part of her broader human resources and internal controls practice.

Ms. Stamer has more than 24 years experience advising and representing employer, employee benefit and other clients before the Department of Labor, Justice Department, Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Labor, Department of Veterans Affairs, Immigrations & Customs, and other agencies, private plaintiffs and others on worker classification and related human resources, employee benefit, internal controls and risk management matters.

Ms. Stamer works extensively with employers, employee benefit plan sponsors, insurers, administrators, and fiduciaries, payroll and staffing companies, technology and other service providers and others to develop and operate legally defensible programs, practices and policies that promote the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. She works extensively with, speaks and publishes, and conducts management training on compliance and risk management of requirements concerning the handing of servicemember employment and other rights.

A featured presenter of numerous presentations on employment and other responsibilities of U.S. businesses to servicemembers, Ms. Stamer also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these and other employee benefit and human resources matters who is active in many other employee benefits, human resources and other management focused organizations. She frequently speaks and conducts training for the American Bar Association, DallasHR, Solutions Law Press and a wide range of other corporations and associations on the management of compliance and risks associated with employment and consumer rights of military service members, veterans and their families See, e.g., Update on Employment Rights of Emploeyes in The Military & Their Family.

You can learn more about Ms. Stamer and her experience, find out about upcoming training or other events, review some of her past training, speaking, publications and other resources, and register to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns from Ms. Stamer at www.CynthiaStamer.com.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

If you would like help reviewing or defending your organization’s practices or programs, need legal representation defending those programs and activities, or wish to discuss arranging for Ms. Stamer to conduct training or speak for your organization, please contact Ms Stamer here.

For important information concerning this communication click here.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Big Penalty for Lender Shows Risks of Violating Military Service or Vets Rights | Affirmative Action, Civil Rights, Consumer Protection, EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employers, Military Leave, OFCCP, Rehabilitation Act, Restructuring, Retirement Plans, Tax, USERRA, VEVRRA | Tagged: creditors, Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, Employers, lenders, military servicemembers, plan qualification, Retirement Plans, SCRA, Tax, USERRA, veterans | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

OCR 1st HIPAA Privacy, Security & Breach Notification Compliance Audits Begin

November 9, 2011

The kickoff of a new compliance audit pilot program provides another reason for health care providers, health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and their business associates to get serious about compliance with the privacy, security and data breach requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA).

OCR Pilot Audit Program Begins

On November 8, 2011, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) of the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) announced that it will begin auditing HIPAA compliance this month under a new pilot program.

As amended by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in Section 13411 of the HITECH Act, requires HHS to provide for periodic audits to make sure covered entities and business associates are complying with the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules and Breach Notification standards. To carry out this mandate, OCR is piloting a program to perform up to 150 audits of covered entities to assess privacy and security compliance between November 2011 and December 2012.

The commencement of OCR HIPAA compliance audits is yet another sign that covered entities and their business associates should get serious about HIPAA compliance. The audit program serves as a new part of OCR’s health information privacy and security compliance program. While OCR says that it presently views the pilot audits as primarily a compliance improvement tool, this does not mean violators should expect a free walk.

Even before the impending audits, HIPAA Privacy exposures of covered entities for failing to comply with HIPAA already had risen significantly. Earlier this year, OCR imposed a $4.3 Million Civil Money Penalty (CMP) against Cignet Health of Prince George’s County (Cignet) for violating HIPAA. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice has secured several criminal convictions or pleas under HIPAA’s criminal provisions. Under amendments made by the HITECH Act, state attorneys general also now are empowered to bring civil lawsuits against covered entities and business associates that commit HIPAA violations that injure citizens in their state under certain circumstances. Eventually, individuals injured by HIPAA violations also will get the right to share in a portion of certain HIPAA recoveries.

These and other audit and enforcement activities send a strong message that covered entities and their business associates need to get serious about HIPAA compliance. As stated by OCR Director Georgina Verdugo when announcing the Mass General Resolution Agreement, “To avoid enforcement penalties, covered entities must ensure they are always in compliance with the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules,” Verdugo added, “A robust compliance program includes employee training, vigilant implementation of policies and procedures, regular internal audits, and a prompt action plan to respond to incidents.” Learn more here.

For Help With Monitoring Developments, Compliance, Investigations Or Other Needs

Vice President of the North Texas Health Care Compliance Professionals Association, a member of the American College of Employee Benefit Counsel, Past Chair of the ABA RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements Group, Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Section and the former Board Compliance Chair of the National Kidney Foundation of North Texas, Ms. Stamer has extensive experience advising and assisting health care providers, health plans, their business associates and other health industry clients to establish and administer medical privacy and other compliance and risk management policies. Ms. Stamer also regularly helps clients deal with OCR and other agencies, publishes and speaks extensively on medical and other privacy and data security, health and managed care industry regulatory, staffing and human resources, compensation and benefits, technology, public policy, reimbursement and other operations and risk management concerns. Her publications and insights appear in the Health Care Compliance Association, Atlantic Information Service, Bureau of National Affairs, World At Work, The Wall Street Journal, Business Insurance, the Dallas Morning News, Modern Health Care, Managed Healthcare, Health Leaders, and a many other national and local publications. Her insights on the required “culture of compliance” with HIPAA are frequently included in medical privacy related publications of the Atlantic Information Service, Modern Health Care, HealthLeaders and many others. Among others, she has conducted privacy training for the Association of State & Territorial Health Plans (ASTHO), the Los Angeles Health Department, the American Bar Association, the Health Care Compliance Association, a multitude of health industry, health plan, employee benefit and other clients, trade and professional associations and others. You can get more information about her HIPAA and other experience here or may contact her at (469) 767-8872 or via e-mail here.

You can review other selected publications and resources and additional information about the employment, employee benefits and other experience of Ms. Stamer here.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on OCR 1st HIPAA Privacy, Security & Breach Notification Compliance Audits Begin | Data Security, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Patient Empowerment, Privacy, Tax | Tagged: Data Breach, Health Care Provider, Health Plans, HHS, HIPAA, OCR, Privacy, Privacy Rules | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Employers Face New Labor-Management Exposures Under Activist National Labor Relations Board

November 8, 2011

The just-released National Labor Relations Board (Board) 2011 Fiscal Year-end report highlights the advisability for employers to tighten their labor-management relations compliance and defenses in response to the growing regulatory and enforcement activism of the Board on behalf of labor under the Obama Administration.

President Obama made no secret of his strong support and intention to pursue an aggressive pro-union legislative and enforcement agenda and to take other actions to support unions. While Administration efforts to enact the Employee Free Choice Act or other pro-union legislation have met with limited success in Congress, federal enforcement law data shows the Obama Administration is achieving significant success in promoting its pro-union agenda through regulation and enforcement.

The 2011 Fiscal Year-end numbers show the number of cases handled by the Board rose 17% in 2011. During the 2011 Fiscal Year that began October 1, 2010, the Board:

Handled 272 unfair labor practice cases and 96 representation cases;
Issued 368 decisions in contested cases; and
Pursued two pro-labor rule making initiatives.

In cases like its highly publicized challenge to the planned move by Boeing of jobs to another state, the Board regularly has lent its support to labor efforts to oppose or challenge management authority. In the course of handling these cases, the Board also reached out to strengthen the power and protections of labor by addressing issues such as the access rights of pro-union employees to employer property, the rights of undocumented immigrant workers to back pay remedies, the protection of new collective bargaining relationships from challenge and other issues favorable to union organization and rights.

Along side its high disposition of cases, the Board also has released and sought public comment on two new rules favorable to labor:

A new final rule that will require that employers post a notice of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act (“Posting Rule”) scheduled to take effect on January 31, 2012; and
Proposed rules that would change pre- and post-election representation case procedures, which the Board has not finalized at this time.

The progress of the Board in using its regulatory and enforcement powers to promote a pro-labor agenda is helping union organizing and bargaining efforts. In light of this new activism, employers should review their existing policies to ensure that they comply with evolving federal rules regarding the rights of labor and to otherwise act to defend against potential labor related risks keeping in mind emerging decisions that extend certain historical labor rights to unionized employees, employees engaged in protected organizing activities and, under recent decisions, in some instances even employees in non-union environments requesting representation in disciplinary or other circumstances not historically understood by employers to fall within the provision of the National Labor Relations Act.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing, updating, administering or defending your labor and employment, fringe benefit or other employee benefit, compensation or other workforce and human resources practices, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on labor and employment, employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

Recently selected for induction as a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council and for extensive work and accomplishments in the employee benefits and human resources area, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, she also helps employers and others negotiate employee benefit and other compensation related commitments with unions and others. She also helps these and other clients to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary drafter of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to monitor legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials concerning regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Employers Face New Labor-Management Exposures Under Activist National Labor Relations Board | Employers, Labor Management Relations | Tagged: Collective Bargaining, Employer, Labor-Management, NLRA, NLRB, Union | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Labor Secretary Comments Highlight Federal Protections & Resources To Support Veteran’s Employment Rights

November 7, 2011

The U.S. Department of Labor is getting behind veterans. During the annual “Salute to Veterans” ceremony, Secretary of Labor Solis announced new initiatives designed to help military personnel receive training, find jobs and transition back into civilian life, including a curriculum redesign of the Transition Assistance Program. She also highlighted the findings of “The Veteran Labor Force in the Recovery,” a new report that outlines the challenges returning military personnel face in finding employment. Following the ceremony, retired Air Force Col. Lisa Firmin, Army Brig. Gen. Barrye Price and Medal of Honor recipient Paul Bucha participated in a panel discussion with Secretary Solis on issues facing today’s veterans.

The announcements are part of a broader stepped up effort by the Labor Department and other federal agencies to enforce federal protections for veterans and their families and other efforts promoting employment rights for veterans. In light of these and other federal and state effots, employers are urged to review their current policies and practices to ensure full compliance in form and operation with applicable federal and state laws safeguarding veterans and their familes.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

If you would like help reviewing or defending your organization’s health or other employee benefit or insurance programs, need legal representation on health plan or other employee benefits, employment or insurance concerns, or wish to discuss arranging for Ms. Stamer to conduct training or speak for your organization, please contact Ms Stamer here.

Immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on health and other employee benefit and related workforce, insurance and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with health benefit and insurance matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources programs and practices. She works extensively with plan sponsors, insurers, administrators, technology and other service providers and others to develop and operate legally defensible programs, practices and policies that promote the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. Ms. Stamer also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these and other employee benefit and human resources matters who is active in many other employee benefits, human resources and other management focused organizations.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Labor Secretary Comments Highlight Federal Protections & Resources To Support Veteran’s Employment Rights | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: Determination Letters, Employment, plan qualification, Retirement Plans, Tax, USERRA, veterants | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Exempts Enrolled Retirement Plan Agents From PTIN Requirement

November 4, 2011

The Internal Revenue Service has announced that enrolled retirement plan agents will not be required to obtain a preparer tax identification number (PTIN)

Notice 2011-91 will provide that enrolled retirement plan agents are not required to get a preparer tax identification number. Notice 2011-91 is scheduled for publication in Internal Revenue Bulletin 2011-47 on November 21, 2011.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS Exempts Enrolled Retirement Plan Agents From PTIN Requirement | Defined Benefit Plans, Defined Contribution Plans, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Retirement Plans, Tax, Tax Qualification | Tagged: 401(k), accountant, Circular 230, CPA, Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, Fringe Benefits, investment advice, IRA, meal expense, plan qualification, Preparer Tax Identification Number, prohibited transactions, ptin, retirement plan, Retirement Plans, tax preparer, travel expense | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

2012 Employee Benefits Cost of Living Adjustments Announced

October 30, 2011

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released the Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) for dollar limitations on benefits and contributions under the Internal Revenue Code (Code) for 2012. The 2012 COLAs are set forth in News Release IR-2011-103, which was published on October 20, 2011. The applicable limitations are as follows:

COLA Increases for Dollar Limitations on Benefits and Contributions

2012 Retirement Plans COLAs

Code Section	2012	2011	2010
IRAs
IRA Contribution Limit – 219(b)(5)(A)	5,000	5,000	5,000
IRA Catch-Up Contributions – 219(b)(5)(B)	1,000	1,000	1,000
IRA AGI Deduction Phase-out Starting at
Joint Return	92,000	90,000	89,000
Single or Head of Household	58,000	56,000	56,000
SEP
SEP Minimum Compensation – 408(k)(2)(C)	550	550	550
SEP Maximum Compensation – 408(k)(3)(C)	250,000	245,000	245,000
SIMPLE Plans
SIMPLE Maximum Contributions – 408(p)(2)(E)	11,500	11,500	11,500
Catch-up Contributions – 414(v)(2)(B)(ii)	2,500	2,500	2,500
401(k), 403(b), Profit-Sharing Plans, etc.
Annual Compensation – 401(a)(17)/404(l)	250,000	245,000	245,000
Elective Deferrals – 402(g)(1)	17,000	16,500	16,500
Catch-up Contributions – 414(v)(2)(B)(i)	5,500	5,500	5,500
Defined Contribution Limits – 415(c)(1)(A)	50,000	49,000	49,000
ESOP Limits – 409(o)(1)(C)	1,015,000200,000	985,000195,000	985,000195,000
Other
HCE Threshold – 414(q)(1)(B)	115,000	110,000	110,000
Defined Benefit Limits – 415(b)(1)(A)	200,000	195,000	195,000
Key Employee – 416(i)(1)(A)(i)	165,000	160,000	160,000
457 Elective Deferrals – 457(e)(15)	17,000	16,500	16,500
Control Employee – 1.61-21(f)(5)(i)	100,000	95,000	95,000
Control Employee – 1.61-21(f)(5)(iii)	205,000	195,000	195,000
Taxable Wage Base	110,100	106,800	106,800

For Help or More Information

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with these and other employment, employee benefit and compensation matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources, management and other programs and practices tailored to the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. A primary author of the Bolivian Social Security pension privatization law, Ms. Stamer also works extensively with management, service provider and other clients to watch legislative and regulatory developments and to deal with Congressional and state legislators, regulators, and enforcement officials about regulatory, investigatory or enforcement concerns.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on 2012 Employee Benefits Cost of Living Adjustments Announced | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 401(k), COLA, Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, Fringe Benefits, investment advice, IRA, meal expense, plan qualification, prohibited transactions, Retirement Plans, travel expense | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Updates Meal, Travel Reimbursement & Deduction Rules

October 30, 2011

The Internal Revenue Service recently loosened its rules on when employers must report the value of employer-provided cellphones and cellphone service as taxable income to employees.

Notice 2011-72 provides guidance on the tax treatment of cellular telephones or other similar telecommunications equipment (hereinafter collectively “cell phones”) that employers provide to their employees primarily for noncompensatory business purposes.

Notice 2011-72 generally allows for the exclusion of the reasonable cost of an employer-provided cellphone and cellphone services as long as the employer can show a valid business purpose of the employer for the employer to provide that service, even if the employee also uses the cellphone or cellphone service for personal reasons.

While the guidance will help lift the burden of employers to track and allocate business versus non-business usage of cellphones by employees receiving cellphones or cellphone service, businesses still need to document the business justification for provision of the cellphone or cellphone service if they plan to exclude the cellphone or cellphone service from the employee’s income.

Notice 2011-72 was published in Internal Revenue Bulletin 2011-38 on September 19, 2011.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS Updates Meal, Travel Reimbursement & Deduction Rules | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 401(k), cellphones, Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, Fringe Benefits, investment advice, IRA, meal expense, plan qualification, prohibited transactions, Retirement Plans, travel expense | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

EBSA Plans To Include Health Care Reform Compliance In Health Plan Audits Beginning In FY 2012; Disputes OIG Criticism Of ACA Enforcement Efforts

October 30, 2011

Insurance companies administering certain self-insurance arrangements for employers or certain other entities may qualify as exempt from the information reporting obligations imposed under Internal Revenue Code section 6050W.

Notice 2011-78 provides relief to insurance companies administering certain self-insurance arrangements on behalf of an employer or other entity from any information reporting obligations under section 6050W of the Internal Revenue Code. Insurance companies may rely on the notice until the regulations under section 6050W are amended. The IRS published Notice 2011-78 in the Internal Revenue Bulletin 2011-41 on October 11, 2011.

For More Information Or Assistance

If you need help reviewing, updating, administering or defending your health benefit or other benefit or insurance program for compliance with ACA or other federal or state employee benefit, insurance, health care or other laws or regulations, or with any other employment, employee benefit, compensation or internal controls matter, please contact the author of this article, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on EBSA Plans To Include Health Care Reform Compliance In Health Plan Audits Beginning In FY 2012; Disputes OIG Criticism Of ACA Enforcement Efforts | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Tax, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Publishes More Guidance For Tax Preparers On Preparer Tax Identification Number

October 30, 2011

Tax attorneys, accountants and certain other tax advisors or representatives are required by new Internal Revenue Service rules to obtain a preparer tax identification number (PTIN).

Notice 2011-80 provides guidance to individuals who have or will obtain a PTINincluding a provisional PTIN, or who become registered tax return preparers.

Notice 2011-80 was published in IRB 2011-43 on October 24, 2011.

For Help or More Information

If you need help reviewing and updating your employee benefit plan investment advice arrangements or with other employee benefits, human resources or related matters, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Recently selected for induction as a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Council and for extensive work and accomplishments in the employee benefits area, immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on employee benefit, human resources and related workforce, insurance and financial services, and health care matters.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS Publishes More Guidance For Tax Preparers On Preparer Tax Identification Number | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 401(k), Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, ERISA, investment advice, IRA, plan qualification, prohibited transactions, Retirement Plans, Tax, Tax preparers | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Updates Meal, Travel Reimbursement & Deduction Rules

October 30, 2011

The Internal Revenue Service recently released updated regulations governing the reimbursement of employees for, and deduction by business owners of lodging, meals, and incidental expenses during business related travel. Employers and business owners should review and update their policies and practices for reimbursing employees, volunteers, partners, and in the case of business owners, themselves in response to these recently updated rules.

Revenue Procedure 2011-47 provides rules for employees, volunteers, and partners who are reimbursed for lodging, meals, and incidental expenses, or meals and incidental expenses only, while traveling away from home, to substantiate the expenses by per diem allowance rather than actual expenses.

Notice 2011-81 provides the 2011-2012 special per diem rates for taxpayers to use in substantiating the amount of ordinary and necessary business expenses incurred while traveling away from home.

Revenue Procedure 2011-47 and Notice 2011-81 were published in IRB 2011-42 on October 17, 2011.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS Updates Meal, Travel Reimbursement & Deduction Rules | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 401(k), Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, Fringe Benefits, investment advice, IRA, meal expense, plan qualification, prohibited transactions, Retirement Plans, travel expense | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Plans & Investment Advisors Get Flexibility To Give Investment Advice To 401(k) & Other Individual Account Plan Participants & Beneficiaries

October 30, 2011

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recently updated the applicable interest rates used for purposes of making calculations under Internal Revenue Code § 412(b)(5)(B)(ii)(II) and Code § 430(h)(2).

Notice 2011-84 provides guidance as to the corporate bond weighted average interest rate and the permissible range of interest rates specified under § 412(b)(5)(B)(ii)(II) of the Code as in effect for plan years beginning before 2008. It also provides guidance on the corporate bond monthly yield curve (and the corresponding spot segment rates), and the 24-month average segment rates under § 430(h)(2). In addition, this notice provides guidance as to the interest rate on 30-year Treasury securities under § 417(e)(3)(A)(ii)(II) as in effect for plan years beginning before 2008, the 30-year Treasury weighted average rate under § 431(c)(6)(E)(ii)(I), and the minimum present value segment rates under § 417(e)(3)(D) as in effect for plan years beginning after 2007.

Notice 2011-84 was published in the IRB 2011-43, dated October 24, 2011.

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Plans & Investment Advisors Get Flexibility To Give Investment Advice To 401(k) & Other Individual Account Plan Participants & Beneficiaries | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 401(k), Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, ERISA, investment advice, IRA, plan qualification, prohibited transactions, Retirement Plans, Tax | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS To Waive User Fee On Certain Plan Qualification Determination Applications

October 30, 2011

The Internal Revenue Service has announced plans to waive the user fee requirement that normally applies when plan sponsors seek determination letters on the qualified status for certain qualified employee benefit plans.

Notice 2011-86. The Code provides for exemption from the requirement to pay a user fee for certain applications to the Service for determination letters on the qualified status of pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus, annuity, and employee stock ownership (ESOP) plans. This notice amplifies Notice 2002–1, 2002–1 C.B. 283, by explaining how to determine, for purposes of eligibility for exemption from the user fee requirement, if such an application has been filed within a remedial amendment period with respect to the plan beginning within the plan’s first five plan years. The guidance in this notice generally pertains to such applications that are filed with the Service after January 31, 2011.

Notice 2011-86 will appear in IRB 2011-45 dated Nov. 7, 2011.

For Help or More Information

Other Resources

If you found this update of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing some of the other updates and publications authored by Ms. Stamer available including:

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS To Waive User Fee On Certain Plan Qualification Determination Applications | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: 401(k), Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, ERISA, investment advice, IRA, plan qualification, prohibited transactions, Retirement Plans, Tax | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

ABC President Klein To Speak At Nov. 10 Dallas WEB Meeting

October 26, 2011

You are invited to the DFW ISCEBS Monthly Luncheon
(International Society of Certified Employee Benefit Specialists)

Topic: The Political & Legislative Outlook Going Into 2012!
Speaker: Jim Klein, President, American Benefits Council

Rarely is any organization able to get a “true” Washington insider to speak in the DFW area. Your Dallas Chapter is bringing one of the most knowledgeable insiders to let us know what is going on in Washington—just two weeks before the Congressional “Supercommittee” will release their recommendations. Jim Klein, President of the American Benefits Council will provide us tremendous insight into the Benefits challenges going into 2012.

The Supercommittee was established as part of the legislation to avoid a government default – will announce its proposals to cut the federal debt by $1.5 trillion over the next ten years. With employer-sponsored health and retirement benefits registering as the two largest expenditures in the Tax Code, benefits policy is sure to be “in the mix” in the Supercommittee’s deliberations and in the action Congress is scheduled to vote on before year end. Jim Klein, President of the American Benefits Council, will examine what the deficit reduction/tax reform efforts may mean for employer-sponsored plans and Social Security and Medicare; and what the implications might be if Congress fails to agree on budget savings. At the same time this debate is underway, Congress and the regulatory agencies are dealing with other items on the benefits agenda. Jim will discuss these, as well as preview how the Democrats and Republicans may approach employee benefits issues as the Presidential and Congressional elections approach.

Date: Thursday, November 10, 2011
Time: 11:30 a.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Location: Haggar Clothing Co. Headquarters – 11511 Luna Road, Dallas, Texas
Cost: $20 for current Chapter Members; $35 for All Others

Registration & prepayment via PayPal: http://www.dfwiscebs.org

Registration only: davidw@gpatpa.com or 972-744-2328

PLEASE NOTE: Only cash or check accepted at the door.
Pre-registration Deadline: Friday, November 4th

YOU DON’T HAVE TO BE A MEMBER TO ATTEND. EVERYONE IS WELCOME For important information about this communication click here.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on ABC President Klein To Speak At Nov. 10 Dallas WEB Meeting | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, plan qualification, Retirement Plans, Tax | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

2010 Webcast Series on Federal Employer Employment of Persons With Disabilities Planned

October 19, 2011

The Obama Administration is making hiring of qualified individuals wtih disabilities within the federal government, as well as enforcement of the Americans With Disabilities Act and other disabilities laws a key priority. In light of expanding opportunities, employers should strengthen their disability discrimination risk management practices.

As part of these efforts, employers may want to learn more about what the federal government is doing about hiring persons with disabilities. The Job Accommodation Network (JAN) plans to hold a free series of three webcasts, presented on 1.5 hour segments on January 4, February 1 and March 7, 2012 at 2 p.m. Eastern Time.

The three-part series will cover the hiring and employment of people with disabilities in the Federal Government. Last year’s participants included federal disability program managers, hiring managers, supervisors, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission representatives and selective placement coordinators.

The author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer frequently conducts training and publishes on these and other matters. She regularly speaks and conducts briefings on employee benefit, human resources, internal controls and risk management matters. You can find out about upcoming training or other events, learn more about Ms. Stamer and get updates at www.CynthiaStamer.com.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

If you would like help auditing, strengthening or defending your organization’s diversity or other human resources, employee benefits or risk management programs, need legal representation on these concerns, or wish to discuss arranging for Ms. Stamer to conduct training or speak for your organization, please contact Ms Stamer here.

Immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on health and other employee benefit and related workforce, insurance and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experienced with health benefit and insurance matters, Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources programs and practices. She works extensively with plan sponsors, insurers, administrators, technology and other service providers and others to develop and run legally defensible programs, practices and policies that promote the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. Ms. Stamer also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these and other employee benefit and human resources matters who is active in many other employee benefits, human resources and other management focused organizations.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on 2010 Webcast Series on Federal Employer Employment of Persons With Disabilities Planned | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: ADA, Discrimination | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

EBSA Plans To Include Health Care Reform Compliance In Health Plan Audits Beginning In FY 2012; Disputes OIG Criticism Of ACA Enforcement Efforts

October 7, 2011

Look for the Department of Labor Employee Benefit Security Administration (EBSA) to begin looking at compliance with the group health plan reform mandates of the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (HCERA)(collectively “ACA”) requirements as part of health plan audits in its Fiscal Year 2012.

Assistant Secretary of Labor Phyllis Borzi announced EBSA’s plan to begin examining ACA compliance as part of broader health plan compliance audits that the EBSA intends to conduct in Fiscal Year 2012 in her response to a critique of EBSA’s ACA inplementation and enforcement efforts contained in a September 30, 2011 audit report issued by the Departmentof Labor’s Office of Inspector General. According to that response, EBSA has developed a comprehensive checklist for auditing ACA compliance by health plans that it plans to use as part of health plan audits and has conducted significant staff training as part of its ACA implementation activities. In light of EBSA plans to add ACA compliance to its health plan audits in 2012, employer and union health plans, their sponsors, insurers and administrators should take appropriate steps to ensure that their programs terms and practices are up to date with these requirements.

Ms. Borzi shared the plans for audit as part of a broader rebuttle on behalf of EBSA to criticisms contained in a September 30, 2011 report by the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Inspector (OIG) critical of the effectiveness and speed of EBSA’s efforts to implement certain health care reform provisions of ACA.

Enacted on March 23, 2010, ACA makes EBSA, along with the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Health & Human Services, a key player in the implementation and enforcement of the health benefit targeted reforms enacted as part of its sweeping health care reforms. The September 30, 2011 OIG report identified various areas of improvement that OIG indicated EBSA should make to its implementation efforts based on OIG’s review of efforts by the EBSA to carry out its responsibilities to interpret, implement and enforce these reforms.

OIG Concerns

While its September 30, 2011 report titled “Further Action By EBSA Could Help Ensure PPACA Implementation And Compliance,” (OIG Report) acknowledged the significant actions taken by EBSA toward implementing ACA, the OIG Report still found that EBSA should take additional action to help ensure the timely and effective implementation and enforcement of ACA’s reforms.

The most significant criticism expressed in the OIG report related to the adequacy of work and data reported by EBSA to HHS for HHS to use to define the benefits to be considered “essential benefits” under ACA. Under ACA, EBSA was required to provide HHS with the results of a survey of benefits typically covered by employers that is sufficiently broad to enable HHS to determine benefits provided under a typical employer plan. The OIG Report expresses several concerns about the breadth and validity of the information that EBSA provided to HHS. According to the OIG, EBSA was unable to state that the report it provided HHS was broad enough to encompass all benefits EBSA considered to be typically covered by employers. Moreover, EBSA did not address all benefits HHS requested. As a result, OIG expressed concern that HHS may not be able to ensure that State Insurance Exchanges offer the appropriate essential health benefits required by ACA.

In addition to its critique of EBSA’s essential benefits survey, the OIG also concluded:

EBSA could work with Treasury and HHS to establish a public timeline for addressing the public comments received on interim-final PPACA regulations and issuing final regulations;
EBSA should have included the ACA requirements in its health plan investigations to better leverage its enforcement resources to assist plans in complying with the new regulations; and
EBSA should develop a regulation concerning MEWAs under PPACA Section 6604, regarding the applicability of State law as a means to combat fraud and abuse.

In light of these findings, the OIG recommended that EBSA take the following actions to strengthen its ACA implementation and enforcement actions:

Work with the Departments of HHS, Treasury, and the Office of Management and Budget to establish specific timetables to respond to public comments and issue final regulations;
Incorporate the ACA requirements immediately into the enforcement program to assist plans in complying with ACA;
Provide HHS with the results of a survey of benefits typically covered by employers that is sufficiently broad to enable HHS to determine benefits provided under a typical employer plan; and
Proceed with rulemaking relative to MEWAs under ACA section 6604.

EBSA Says Will Start Checking ACA Compliance in FY 2012 But Response Disputes Certain OIG Findings

While agreeing with the first and last recommendations, Ms. Borzi defended EBSA’s decision to delay auditing of health plan compliance with ACA and the adequacy of the survey data it reported to HHS for use in establishing essential benefits under ACA.

Concerning the auditing, Ms. Borzi said that EBSA has developed a comprehensive checklist to promote consistent investigations of ACA compliance, which EBSA plans to begin using when it conducts compliance assessments as part of its Fiscal Year 2012 Health Benefits Security Project as part of a broad range of implementation activities that EBSA has performed. Ms. Borzi’s response to the OIG recommendations indicated that EBSA disagrees with OIG’s assessment that EBSA should be auditing compliance with ACA as part of its current year audits. Rather, Ms. Borzi indicated that EBSA’s assessment and experience leads it to believe it more suitable for EBSA to use a phased implementation approach under which EBSA which delayed ACA compliance audits pending the development of regulations and after plans and insurers have had the opportunity to proccss the implementing regulations and related guidance and benefit from EBSA’s extensive outreach.

Ms. Borzi also took exception to the OIG’s criticism of EBSA’s survey. In her response, she states that the report EBSA made to HHS “fully satisfies” the requirements of ACA. She pointed out that ACA “clearly requires the Secretary of HHS, rather than the Secretary of Labor, to determine the scope of benefits offered by a typical employer plan. Thc stated purpose of the Secretary of Labor’s survey is to inform this determination.” According to Ms. Borzi, the survey is based on the National Compensation Survey conducted regularly by the Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics uses a large, nationally representative sample of employers to collect detailed information on whether particular benefits are included in employer health plans. Ms. Borzi concluded that this survey “will al1ow the Secretary of HHS to determine which are offered by a typical employer plan.

Likewise, Ms. Borzi disagreed with the OIG’s criticism that the report provided to HHS does not expressly tate which benefits are “typical” as unfounded. According to Ms. Borzi, the statute docs not require the DOL to determine a specified threshold of incidence above which (and only above which) the benefit should be considered “typical.” As a result, Ms. Borzi concluded that the EBSA report, by providing detailed data on the incidence of different benefits, fulfills the statutory purpose and requirements without taking on the function of the Secretary of HHS.

Ms. Borzi’s response also reported the EBSA’s disagreement with the OIG’s assertion that EBSA’s approach to the report could impair the public comment process. She stated that the report and associated supporting materials are easily available to the public and that commcntcrs are free to provide their views on the survey and on what benefits arc offered by a typical employer plan. Furthermore,Ms. Borzi pointed to planned opportunities for public input announced by the Secretary of HHS as offering additional opportunities for public input.

For More Information Or Assistance

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on EBSA Plans To Include Health Care Reform Compliance In Health Plan Audits Beginning In FY 2012; Disputes OIG Criticism Of ACA Enforcement Efforts | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

ONC Hires APP Design, Inc. To Run Patient E-Consent Trial Project

October 3, 2011

ONC’s Office of the Chief Privacy Officer recently awarded a contract to APP Design, Inc. to find an efficient, effective, and creative way to help patients better understand their choices about whether and when their health care provider can share their health information electronically, including sharing it with a health information exchange organization. The project team will design, develop, and pilot innovative ways to electronically carry out existing patient choice policies, while improving business processes for health care providers. To learn more about the E-Consent Trial project, please see the Statement of Work. ONC’s formal launch of the E-Consent Trial Project will be in October.

For Assistance or Additional Information

Nationally and internationally known for her knowledge and work on health and other employee benefit matters and engaging and informative presentations, attorney, author and policy advocate Cynthia Marcotte Stamer will help you prepare your plan and organization to cope with these and other challenges of understanding and coping with health care reform.

Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPPT Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements, an ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Council Representative, incoming ABA TIPS Employee Benefit Plan Committee Vice Chair, former ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group Chair, past Southwest Benefits Association Board Member, Employee Benefit News Editorial Advisory Board Member, Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law and a widely published speaker and author, Ms. Stamer has more than 24 years experience advising businesses, plans, fiduciaries, insurers and governments on health care, retirement, employment, insurance, :and tax program design, administration, defense and policy and related employment, insurance and health care matters. Her experience includes extensive experience advising insured and self-insured ERISA group medical and other plans, Medicare and Medicaid Advantage plans, mini-med, high-deductible and other consumer driven medical, long-term care, occupational injury, ex-pat, association, fraternal benefit and other managed care and medical benefit plans and insurers, their service providers, insurers, sponsors, fiduciaries, technology providers and others. A primary drafter of the Bolivian pension law, Ms. Stamer also has more than 30 years experience working on legislative and regulatory health care, pension, workforce, education and immigration reform matters including extensive work on the Pension Protection & Affordable Care Act, HIPAA, COBRA, state managed care and other insurance and other laws. In addition to her experience advising governments and others internationally about these matters, she regularly advises and represents employers, employee benefit plans, insurers, health care and managed care providers and others about evolving laws and regulations and assists them in dealing with Congress, the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Labor, Immigration and Customs, OCR, OIG, CMS and other HHS agenices, the FTC, the Justice Department, state insruance and health departments, and others.

A widely published author and popular speaker, Ms. also regularly publishes and speaks for a broad range of organizations including American Bar Association, Aspen Publishers, World At Work, Benefits Magazine, Employee Benefit News, Spencer Publications, SHRM, the International Foundation, Solutions Law Press and many others. She currently or previously has served on the editorial advisory board of Employee Benefits News, BNA Employee Benefits CDRolm and a wide range of other highly regarded publications. Her insights on these and other matters have appeared in Managed Care Executive, Health Leaders, Private Payers News, the Wall Street Journal, various publications of the Bureau of National Affairs, Aspen, Atlantic Information Serices, the Wall Street Journal, and many other industry and news publications. In recognition of this extensive record of employee benefit experience and involvement, Ms. Stamer recently was selected to be inducted as a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on ONC Hires APP Design, Inc. To Run Patient E-Consent Trial Project | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Electronic Consents, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, ONC, Patient Empowerment, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

New Labor Department Video Tries To Educate Young Workers About Benefits & Benefit Rights

October 1, 2011

The Employee Benefits Security Administration has produced two new videos aimed at younger workers with information critical to their physical and long-term financial health. EBSA’s videos provide quick and relevant detail, and offer links to other invaluable online tools to help workers take full advantage of their employer-sponsored benefits. Watch the Videos in English and SpanishThe author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer frequently conducts training and publishes on these and other matters. She regularly speaks and conducts briefings on employee benefit, human resources, internal controls and risk management matters. You can find out about upcoming training or other events, learn more about Ms. Stamer and get updates at www.CynthiaStamer.com.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

Immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on health and other employee benefit and related workforce, insurance and health care matters.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on New Labor Department Video Tries To Educate Young Workers About Benefits & Benefit Rights | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, plan qualification, Retirement Plans, Tax | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Employer Assistance and Resource Network Offers Free Webinars For Employers During October In Honor of Disability Employment Awareness Month on Thursdays in October from 2:00 – 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time. Topics will include Employer Preparedness to Include Veterans with Disabilities

September 29, 2011

The Employer Assistance and Resource Network (EARN) will be hosting four weekly webinars in celebration of National Disability Employment Awareness Month on Thursdays in October from 2:00 – 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time. Topics will include Employer Preparedness to Include Veterans with Disabilities in the Workplace; the Employment of Persons with Disabilities; the Work Opportunity Tax Credit; and the Workforce Recruitment Program. To learn more, see Free Webinar Series for Employers Beginning October 6.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

If you would like help reviewing or defending your organization’s labor and employment, health or other employee benefit or insurance programs, need legal representation on health plan or other employment, employee benefits, or other management controls or risk management matters or wish to discuss arranging for Ms. Stamer to conduct training or speak for your organization, please contact Ms Stamer here.

Immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on labor and employment, employee benefit and related workforce, insurance and health care matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive practical knowledge and experienced with human resources and other workforce staffing and management matters, Ms. Stamer has extensive experience helping employer and other management organizations manage and resolve risks arising under employment discrimination and other employment laws. She also works with employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators, service providers, insurers and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources programs and practices. She works extensively with employers, plan sponsors, insurers, administrators, technology and other service providers and others to develop and operate legally defensible programs, practices and policies that promote the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. Ms. Stamer also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these and other human resources, employee benefit, and internal controls matters who is active in many human resources, employee benefits, and other management focused organizations.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Employer Assistance and Resource Network Offers Free Webinars For Employers During October In Honor of Disability Employment Awareness Month on Thursdays in October from 2:00 – 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time. Topics will include Employer Preparedness to Include Veterans with Disabilities | ADA, Disability, Disability, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, GINA, Military Leave, Retirement Plans, Tax, VEVRRA | Tagged: ADA, disability law, employment law, reasonable accommodation | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

New IRS Voluntary IRS Settlement Program Offers New Option For Resolving Payroll Tax Risks Of Misclassification But Employers Also Must Manage Other Legal Risks

September 26, 2011

Program Another Sign of Growing Audit & Enforcement Risks. Businesses Urged To Strengthen Their Worker Classification Defenses

The September 22, 2011 launch by the Internal Revenue Service of a new Voluntary Worker Classification Settlement Program (“Settlement Program”) is the latest warning to businesses using independent contractors, leased employees or other non-employee workers of the need to review critically within the scope of attorney-client privilege the defensibility of their existing classification and treatment of those workers as non-employees in light of the in light of stepped up scrutiny and enforcement emphasis by the IRS and other federal and state regulators as well as workers and others in private litigation.

Coupled with growing scrutiny and challenges to businesses efforts to avoid employment-related liability and obligations through the use or workers that the business characterizes as non-employees by other federal and state agencies and plaintiff attorneys, the Settlement Agreement announcement is another sign that businesses using workers who are not employees need to be prepared to defend their worker classification and the legality of their dealings with these workers under applicable federal and state laws.

Settlement Program Establishment Should Prompt Review Defensibility of Worker Classifications

The new Settlement Program established under Announcement 2011-64 reflects the widespread emphasis by the IRS and other federal and state regulators on uncovering and redressing misclassification of workers as non-employees by businesses for purposes of tax and other laws. IRS scrutiny of worker classification practices by businesses has risen significantly over the past decade.

The IRS’ launch of the Settlement Program follows its announcement in September, 2010 of plans to conduct approximately 6,000 payroll tax audits over a three year period focusing on the appropriateness of employer worker classification and other payroll tax practices. The announcement of the new Settlement Program signals that the IRS perceives that worker misclassification by business in violation of Federal tax laws is sufficiently widespread and pervasive to merit both efforts to incentive voluntary correction through participation in the Settlement Program, as well as stiff enforcement against businesses that fail to self-correct worker classification compliance concerns.

Designed to increase tax compliance and provide what the IRS says will be “greater certainty for employers, workers and the government,” the IRS says the Settlement Program offers eligible employers concerned about potential worker misclassification exposures that might arise from a payroll tax audit the opportunity to come into compliance by making the required filing, adjusting their practices and paying the required settlement fee effectively equaling just over one percent of the wages paid to the reclassified workers for the past year. If this settlement fee is paid and the other requirements of the Settlement Program are met, the Settlement Program specifies that employers accepted into the program will not be assessed interest or penalties and not be audited on payroll taxes related to these workers for prior years.

For businesses that can meet applicable requirements for participation, participation in the Settlement Program may offer an attractive option for resolving payroll related tax risks. However, not all employers will qualify for the Settlement Program. Employers must meet the eligibility requirements for participation.

Also, employers electing to use the Settlement Program need to understand the implications of that participation on the Statute of Limitations on their payroll tax liabilities. For the first three years of participation in the program, the Settlement Program specifies that participating employers will be subject to a special six-year statute of limitations, rather than the usual three years that generally applies to payroll taxes. Businesses will need to weigh the benefits of using the Settlement Program, if available, against the risk of reclassification and the availability of other resolution options that may be available under applicable Internal Revenue Code and IRS rules and procedures. Furthermore, many businesses evaluating worker classifications also may find it difficult to determine with certainty the risk of reclassification for certain categories of workers. Whether a worker is properly classified as an employee for most purposes under the Internal Revenue Code’s income tax withholding and reporting, payroll tax and most other employment tax turns on a highly fact specific analysis of under a common law employment test. When an analysis of the evidence reflects a high degree of certainty that the classification of a worker as a non-employee was not defensible under existing tax authorities, use of the Settlement Program or other tools to resolve liability definitely merits consideration. Because of the factual nature of the analysis, however, the decision whether to use the Settlement Program where the circumstances under which the worker renders services are less clear may be more difficult. When making these assessments, businesses should avoid the temptation of being overly optimistic in their assessment of the facts and circumstances given that the Internal Revenue Code generally assigns responsibility to the business to prove the appropriateness of its classification of a worker as a non-employee. While this allocation of the burden of proof means businesses should exercise caution when engaging workers in non-employee capacities, where the facts support this characterization, classification of a worker as a non-employee can be appropriate. When deciding to continue the non-employee characterization for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code, however, businesses are urged to document the evidentiary basis and evidence supporting that determination in anticipation of a potential future audit or other challenge.

Learn more about the Settlement Program and worker classification risk management here.

Businesses Should Address Other Worker Reclassification Risks When Conducting Settlement Program Risk Analysis

As welcome as the opportunity to resolve potential payroll tax exposures through participation in the Settlement Program, businesses considering using the Settlement Program also will need to understand and prepared to address various non-tax legal concerns. Because worker misclassification tends to impact on a broad range of legal obligations and risks, businesses evaluating or planning to use the Settlement Program are act quickly, but carefully, to evaluate and determine whether and how to use the Settlement Program and to identify and take appropriate steps to address both the tax-related liabilities targeted for resolution under the Settlement Program, as well as misclassification exposures likely to arise with respect to workers to be reclassified in connection with the use of the Settlement Program.

When conducting this evaluation and deciding whether to use the Settlement Program, businesses also need to keep the wider implications of the analysis and their decisions regarding how to handle a potential aggressive or misclassification as a worker as a non-employee. A determination of potential aggressive or misclassification for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code’s payroll tax rules generally will necessitate the need to evaluate potential exposures that may arise from the worker misclassification under other federal and state laws.

Typically, in addition to treating a worker as a non-employee for tax purposes, a business also will treat the worker as a non-employee for immigration law eligibility to work, wage and hour, employment discrimination, employee benefits, fringe benefits, worker’s compensation, workplace safety, tort liability and insurance and other purposes. Consequently, a determination that reclassification is advisable for tax purposes generally will prompt the need to consider how to address the worker reclassification and attendant risk for purposes of other legal risks and requirements, as well as those covered by the Settlement Program. Businesses will need to consider how the voluntary reclassification of workers and settlement under the Settlement Program may impact their exposures and obligations under other laws. As the Settlement Program does not provide relief from the exposures arising from misclassification under other laws, businesses should be prepared to evaluate the advisability of reclassification of the worker for purposes of these other laws, the potential exposures attendant to misclassification of workers under those laws, and risks, challenges and opportunities for mitigating these exposures.

Businesses Cautioned To Conduct Evaluations & Discussions In Attorney-Client Privilege Due To Complexity & Significance of Potential Exposures

Conducting and discussing the Settlement Program and other related concerns within the scope of attorney-client privilege is particularly important because of the potentially significant civil and even criminal liability exposures that may arise from misclassification of workers for purposes of the various relevant laws. Because of the broad reaching and potentially significant non-tax exposure inherent in these discussions, business leaders are cautioned that the evidentiary privileges that often provides protection against disclosure of certain discussions with accountants and certain other non-attorney tax advisors for purposes of certain tax laws may be inadequate in scope to protect discussions against discovery for purposes of these other laws. Accordingly, while businesses definitely should incorporate appropriate tax advisors into the evaluation process, most businesses before commencing meaningful discussions with or engaging assessments by their accounting firm or other non-attorney tax advisor will want to engage counsel and coordinate the involvement of their accounting and other non-attorney tax advisors through qualified legal counsel to protect and maximize the ability to conduct the analysis of their risks and options within the protection of attorney-client privilege.

For Help With These Or Other Matters

If you need assistance in conducting a risk assessment of or responding to an IRS, Labor Department or other legal challenges to your organization’s existing workforce classification or other labor and employment, employee benefit or compensation practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Ms. Stamer has more than 24 years experience advising and representing employer, employee benefit and other clients before the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Labor, Immigrations & Customs, and other agencies, private plaintiffs and others on worker classification and related human resources, employee benefit, internal controls and risk management matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney widely known for her extensive and creative knowledge and experience worker classification and other employment, employee benefits and workforce matters, Ms. Stamer works extensively with employers, employee benefit plan sponsors, insurers, administrators, and fiduciaries, payroll and staffing companies, technology and other service providers and others to develop and operate legally defensible programs, practices and policies that promote the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals.

A featured presenter in the recent “Worker Classification & Alternative Workforce: Employee Plans & Employment Tax Challenges” teleconference sponsored by the American Bar Association Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Ms. Stamer also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these and other employee benefit and human resources matters who is active in many other employee benefits, human resources and other management focused organizations.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefits Council, the immediate past Chair and current Welfare Benefit Committee Co-Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, the Vice Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, the Gulf States Area TEGE Council Exempt Organizations Coordinator, past-Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, and the editor and publisher of Solutions Law Press HR & Benefits Update and other Solutions Law Press Publications, She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications.

About Solutions Law Press

For important information concerning this communication click here. THE FOLLOWING DISCLAIMER IS INCLUDED TO COMPLY WITH AND IN RESPONSE TO U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR 230 REGULATIONS. ANY STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE NOT INTENDED OR WRITTEN BY THE WRITER TO BE USED, AND NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN CAN BE USED BY YOU OR ANY OTHER PERSON, FOR THE PURPOSE OF (1) AVOIDING PENALTIES THAT MAY BE IMPOSED UNDER FEDERAL TAX LAW, OR (2) PROMOTING, MARKETING OR RECOMMENDING TO ANOTHER PARTY ANY TAX-RELATED TRANSACTION OR MATTER ADDRESSED HEREIN.

Comments Off on New IRS Voluntary IRS Settlement Program Offers New Option For Resolving Payroll Tax Risks Of Misclassification But Employers Also Must Manage Other Legal Risks | 105(h), Cafeteria Plans, COBRA, Corporate Compliance, Disability, Disability, Disability Plans, Discrimination, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Fair Labor Standards Act, family leave, FMLA, Government Contractors, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, I-9, Immigration, Income Tax, Insurance, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Labor Management Relations, Leave, medical leave, Military Leave, Nonresident aliens, OSHA, Payroll Tax, Restructuring, Retirement Plans, Tax, Tax Qualification, Unemployment Benefits, Unemployment Insurance, Union, VEVRRA, Wage & Hour | Tagged: contract labor, Determination Letters, Employee, Employee Benefits, Independent Contractor, leased employee, misclassificaton, payroll tax, plan qualification, Retirement Plans, staffing, Tax, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

HHS Projects Medicare Advantage Enrollment Will Rise As Premiums Decline In 2012; Plans Face Increased Regulation & Enforcement

September 25, 2011

Medicare Advantage enrollment will rise and premiums will decline in 2012. While plans can expect increased enrollment, they also face increasing challenges in managing the demands of increased government regulation under Health Care Reform and other new regulations, as well as rising governmental scrutiny of premiums and compliance. Consequently, while more individuals than ever are expected to sign up for Medicare Advantage Plan coverage, the plans still face significant compliance and operational challenges.

According to the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) , Medicare Advantage premiums on average will be 4% lower in 2012 than in 2011. Meanwhile HHS reports that Medicare Advantage plans project enrollment to increase by 10%. This follows an earlier HHS announcement that average prescription drug plan premiums will remain virtually unchanged in 2012.

Of people with Medicare, HHS reports 99.7% continue to enjoy access to a Medicare Advantage plan, and benefits will remain consistent with those offered in 2011. To offset declining premiums and other costs, however, many industry experts expect that plans will make greater use of technology in place of human staffing, cut back on broker compensation and utilization and implement other operational changes to help control operations costs.

While many Medicare Adtange and Medicaid Advantage Plans will benefit from increased enrollment, producing promised benefits and avoiding regulatory sanctions amid tightening budgets remains a challenge for many of these plans. Medicare and Medicaid Advantage plans are tightly regulated by federal and state law. Over the past few years, the compliance, premiums, profits and other activities of these and other health plans have been heavily scruitinzed by Congress and federal and state regulators. As part of the stepped up health care fraud and other cost containment efforts, federal regulators have stepped up audit and enforcement against these programs. Several plans have suffered administrative sanctions or other discipline under these laws. Most commentatorys anticipate this scrutiny to expand in 2012.

Learn more here.

For Assistance or Additional Information

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on HHS Projects Medicare Advantage Enrollment Will Rise As Premiums Decline In 2012; Plans Face Increased Regulation & Enforcement | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Adds Participant Notification To Required Procedures For Church Plan Determination Letter Requests

September 23, 2011

Participant Notification Added To Required Procedures For Church Plan Determination Letter Requests

Revenue Procedure 2011-44 modifies the procedures previously announced by the IRS in January to include a requirement that parties requesting a determination letter for a church plan notify plan participants and other interested parties of the letter request by providing a written notice containing the information set forth in a Model Notice published by the IRS as an attachment to the Revenue Procedure.

Procedures for requesting determination letters and other employee benefit plan related rulings generally are governed by Revenue Procedure 2011-04.

Revenue Procedure 2011-44 is scheduled for official publication in Internal Revenue Bulletin 2011-39 on September. 26, 2011

For Help With These Or Other Matters

Immediate past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and current Co-Chair of its Welfare Benefit Committee, Vice-Chair of the ABA TIPS Employee Benefits Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 24 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on health and other employee benefit and related workforce, insurance and health care matters.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS Adds Participant Notification To Required Procedures For Church Plan Determination Letter Requests | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans, Tax | Tagged: Determination Letters, Employee Benefits, plan qualification, Retirement Plans, Tax | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

4th Circuit Rejects Two Challenges To Affordable Care Act Constitutionality

September 8, 2011

The Fourth Circuit this morning (September 8, 2011) published decisions ruled rejecting two lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on jurisdictional grounds in Liberty University v. Geithner and Commonwealth of Virgina v. Sebelius.

Cynthia Marcotte Stamer will discuss this new development and other health care reform issues when she speaks to the Houston Chapter of WEB at 11:30 a.m on September 14, 2011 on “Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do.” The program will cover newly proposed rules that will require health plans and health plan issuers to provide a new summary of benefits and coverage beginning in 2012 and other emerging rules imposed under recently engaged health care reform laws. The program is approved for 1 hour of general continuing education credit by the Texas Department of Insurance. Get details and register online at www.webnetwork.org/houston.

As the debate over the validity and future of the sweeping health care reforms enacted under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) rages in Congress and the federal courts, employer and other health plan sponsors, insurers, fiduciaries and administrators face the daunting challenge of keeping their health plans compliant, affordable and relevant in the face of the steady rollout of the deluge of new mandates imposed by the Affordable Care Act and other evolving health plan mandates and planning for changes yet to come.

A former national WEB member nationally and internationally known for her knowledge and work on health and other employee benefit matters and engaging and informative presentations, attorney, author and policy advocate Cynthia Marcotte Stamer will help you prepare your plan and organization to cope with these and other challenges of understanding and coping with health care reform.

Ms. Stamer’s presentation will focus on key health care reform information that can help employers and other plan sponsors, insurers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators and advisors understand and cope with the effects and responsibilities of health care reform including:

Recently proposed and finalized regulations;
Updating you on the status of litigation challenging the ACA health care reforms in the courts;
Updating you on the key developments affecting health care regulatory reforms likely to impact your health plan;
Sharing an updated roadmap of the currently scheduled implementation of key future health benefit reforms enacted under ACA;
Sharing selected tips and strategies for managing compliance and other risks and deal with uncertainties arising as health care reform continues to evolve; and
Audience questions and discussion of questions and ideas.

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on 4th Circuit Rejects Two Challenges To Affordable Care Act Constitutionality | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Stamer Speaks 9/14 On Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do

September 3, 2011

Cynthia Marcotte Stamer will speak to the Houston Chapter of WEB at 11:30 a.m on September 14, 2011 on “Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do.” The program will cover newly proposed rules that will require health plans and health plan issuers to provide a new summary of benefits and coverage beginning in 2012 and other emerging rules imposed under recently engaged health care reform laws. The program is approved for 1 hour of general continuing education credit by the Texas Department of Insurance. Get details and register online at www.webnetwork.org/houston.

Recently proposed and finalized regulations;
Updating you on the status of litigation challenging the ACA health care reforms in the courts;
Updating you on the key developments affecting health care regulatory reforms likely to impact your health plan;
Sharing an updated roadmap of the currently scheduled implementation of key future health benefit reforms enacted under ACA;
Sharing selected tips and strategies for managing compliance and other risks and deal with uncertainties arising as health care reform continues to evolve; and
Audience questions and discussion of questions and ideas.

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on Stamer Speaks 9/14 On Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, health issuer, Health Plans, health policy, instruction, Insurance, Insurer, speech, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

ABA TIPS Section Appoints Cynthia Marcotte Stamer Vice Chair of Employee Benefits General Committee

August 16, 2011

The American Bar Association Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section recently appointed Solutions Law Press Managing Editor Cynthia Marcotte Stamer to serve as Vice-Chair Appointment of the Employee Benefits General Committee for the 2011-2012 fiscal year.

The TIPS Employee Benefits Committee concentrates on helping attorneys and others keep on top of and respond to developments in the constantly evolving practice area of employee benefits, with particular emphasis on litigation and regulatory compliance issues through programs, meetings, publications and other projects and activities. Additional information about involvement in the Employee Benefits Committee and its programs, publications and activities is available here.

A noted Texas-based employee benefits and employment lawyer with extensive involvement in the leadership of the ABA and other professional organizations involved in employee benefits, health care and workforce matters, is nationally and internationally known for her pioneering leadership and work as an attorney, consultant, policy advocate, speaker and author helping businesses, governments, and communities on health and other insurance and employee benefits, patient education and empowerment, wellness and disease management, and other programs, policies, and processes. For more than 24 years, Ms. Stamer’s legal practice has focused on advising and representing employers, insurers, health care providers, community leaders and governments about health care and employee benefits policy and process improvement, quality, performance management, education, compliance, communications, risk management, reimbursement and finance, and other related matters. In addition to her legal practice, Stamer also extensively consults and provides leadership to a broad range of clients, professional and civic organizations, and others on strategies for improving the health care system and the ability of health care providers, payers, employers, community organizations, government agencies to help patients and their families to access cost-effective, quality, affordable health care and other resource needs. She also has worked extensively with a broad range of business and government clients on health care, pension, social security, workforce, insurance and many other related policy matters.

In addition to her service with TIPS, Ms. Stamer also is active in the leadership of a broad range of other professional and civil organizations. For instance, Ms. Stamer presently serves as Executive Director of Project COPE, the Coalition on Patient Empowerment and the Coalition for Responsible Healthcare Policy; Vice President of the North Texas Healthcare Compliance Professionals Association; Immediate Past Chair of the American Bar Association RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee and its representative to the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits and Vice Chair of its Welfare Benefits Committee; Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group and a current member of its Healthcare Coordinating Council; and as the Gulf Coast TEGE Council TE Committee Coordinator. She previously served as a founding Board Member and President of the Alliance for Healthcare Excellence, as a Board Member and Board Compliance Committee Chair for the National Kidney Foundation of North Texas; the Board President of the early retirement intervention agency, The Richardson Development Center for Children; Chair of the Dallas Bar Association Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Committee; a member of the Board of Directors of the Southwest Benefits Association; on many seminar faculties and in many other professional and civic leadership and volunteer roles.

Author of the hundreds of publications and workshops these and other employment, employee benefits, health care, insurance, workforce and other management matters, Ms. Stamer’s insights on employee benefits, insurance, health care and workforce matters in Atlantic Information Services, The Bureau of National Affairs, HealthLeaders, Modern Healthcare, Business Insurance, Employee Benefits News, World At Work, Benefits Magazine, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Morning News, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other publications. She also regularly conducts training and speaks on these and other management, compliance and public policy concerns. Some recent publications and programs that may be of interest include:

Stamer Speaks 9/14 On Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do
Labor Department 2011 Stats Show Employer Health Coverage & Other Benefit Statistics
Borzi Tells House Committee Current Fiduciary Regs Flawed; Must Fix Loopholes In Investment Advisor Definition To Protect Plans
Labor Department 2011 Stats Show Employer Health Coverage & Other Benefit Statistics
Conviction Highlights Risks Of Misleading Investors
DOL Considers Easing Rules For Electronic Benefit Communications
Improving The Effectiveness Of Compliance & Risk Management By Getting Hr On The Compliance Team
IRS Establishes Safe Harbor Election For Allocating Success-Based Fees Paid On Certain Business Transactions
IRS Changing Substantiation Rules For Business Travel Expenses
9/22/11 Cutoff To Apply For Affordable Care Act Annual Limit Temporary Waiver
Spectrum Healthcare NLRB Charge Settlement Highlights Need To Defend Against Possible Unfair Labor Practices & Other Union Exposures
IRS Releases Health Savings Account, High Deductible Health Plan 2012 Indexed Amounts
IRS Guidance On Affordable Care Act Requirement That Employers Report Cost Of Health Coverage On W-2 Released
Plan Sponsors. Their Owners & Management & Others Risk Personal Liability If Others Defraud Plans Or Mismanage Employee Benefit Plan Responsibilities
Health Plans, Insurers Get Limited & Imperfect Relief From Grace Period Extension For Some New Affordable Care Act Health Claims & Appeals Rules
EEOC Finalizes Updates To Disability Regulations In Response To ADA Amendments Act: Employers Should Manage Risks
Employer Charged With Misclassifying & Underpaying Workers To Pay $754,578 FLSA Back Pay Settlement
Avoiding Liability For Another’s Health Plan Fraud
Health Plans & Employers Beware! $4.3 Million Civil Penalty Shows OCR Serious About HIPAA Enforcement
IRS Expands When HFSAS & HRAs May Allow Over-The-Counter Drug Purchases With Drug Cards
DOL Announces Changes To H-2b Prevailing Wage Calculation Rules
$1 Million + FLSA Overtime Settlement Shows Employers Should Tighten On-Call, Other Wage & Hour Practices
Affordable Care Act Grandfathered Plan Rules Loosened To Allow Insured Plans Making Some Insurance Changes To Qualify
Update Employment Practices To Manage Genetic Info Discrimination Risks Under New EEOC Final Gina Regulations
EEOC Attacks Medical Leave Denials As Prohibited Disability Discrimination
DOL Proposes To Expand Investment Related Services Giving Rise To ERISA Fiduciary Status As Investment Fiduciary

For additional information about Ms. Stamer, upcoming training, publications or other materials or events, see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly via email here or (469) 767-8872.

IIf you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here. If you do not wish to receive these updates in the future, send an e-mail with the word “Remove” in the Subject to here.

Comments Off on ABA TIPS Section Appoints Cynthia Marcotte Stamer Vice Chair of Employee Benefits General Committee | Cafeteria Plans, COBRA, Corporate Compliance, Defined Benefit Plans, Defined Contribution Plans, Disability Plans, Employee Benefits, Employers, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Insurance, Internal Controls, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Retirement Plans, Wellness, Wellness Programs | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

New Affordable Care Act Guidance Helps Some Health Plans Stay Grandfathered

August 2, 2011

Affordable Care Act To Require Health Plans Cover Contraception & Other Women’s Health Procedures Beginning In 2012

Contraception Mandate Might Not Apply To Certain Religious Employer Plans

Starting with plan years beginning after July 31, 2011, most employer and union sponsored group health plans and group and individual health insurers generally must cover contraceptive and certain other preventive services for women (“Women’s Preventive Services”) at no cost to comply with federal rules that these programs cover preventive care for members with no cost sharing enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”).

On Monday, August 1, 2011, the Department of Health & Human Services (“HHS”) on Monday, August 1, 2011 announced guidelines (Women’s Preventive Services Guidelines”) that add contraception and a list of women’s health procedures to the preventive care procedures that ACA requires covered health plans and health insurance policies covered by the Affordable Care Act to cover without cost to members. ACA’s general preventive coverage rules generally have required covered health plans and policies to cover without cost a broad list of other preventive care procedures since the first plan year beginning after September 22, 2009.

Interim Final Regulations implementing ACA’s new preventive care mandate published July 14, 2010 interpreted this ACA preventive care mandate broadly to dictate that ACA covered health plans and health insurers cover as preventive services at no member cost hundreds of procedures.

Concerning the Women’s Preventive Services, however, the Interim Final Regulations delayed implementation of requirements to cover Women’s Preventive Services until August 1, 2011 to give time to HRSA time to issue its recommendations about what procedures should qualify as Women’s Preventive Services. When HRSA failed to finalize its input by August 1, 2011, HHS finalized its list of required Women’s Preventive Services now rather than to continue waiting for HRSA’s final input.

Finalization of the list of required Women’s Preventive Services now means covered health plans and policies must add coverage for these listed procedures with no co-pay beginning with all post-July 31, 2012 plan years.

While the published list of required Women’s Preventive Services generally mandates that ACA-covered health plans and policies cover contraceptive services for women at no cost beginning in 2012, some plans sponsored by religious employers and group health policies covering these groups may be exempt from the duty to coverage contraception under a new regulation that HHS, along with the Department of Labor Employee Benefit Services Administration (“EBSA) and the Department of Treasury Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”)(collectively, the “Agencies”) will jointly publish in the Federal Register on August 3, 2011. See here for more detailed information.

Plans & Insurers Should Review & Update Preventive Care & Other Wellness Benefits

Non-grandfathered health plans and policies, their sponsors, insurers, fiduciaries and administrators should carefully review and update their health plans for compliance with the existing preventive care mandates and other evolving rules about disease management and wellness benefits and coverages, as well as to consider the impending requirement to comply with additional Women’s Preventive Services coverage requirements in 2012 as part of their plan design and cost projections.

Existing health plans and health insurance should be reviewed to ensure that the programs appropriately cover all preventive services currently required by the applicable ACA mandates or other laws and re-reviewed for compliance with any updated rules before each plan year to identify any additional costs, changes to plan documents, communications, administrative procedures and vendor contracts required to administer the health plan in accordance with existing rules. For 2012, this should specifically consider the need to comply with the new Women’s Preventive Services coverage requirements that take effect next plan year also should be considered.

In addition to specifically planning for compliance with ACA’s preventive services coverage mandates, all health plans and policies, their sponsors, insurers, fiduciaries and administrators should review the other wellness and disease management components of their plans. In addition to ACA compliance, these arrangements may need redesign to minimize emerging exposures to challenge by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) or private plaintiffs under the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”). Since the Obama Administration took office, the EEOC has taken the position that many common wellness and disease management programs violate the ADA. In addition to these exposures, amendments to the nondiscrimination requirements of the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), new nondiscrimination rules added by the Genetic Information & Nondiscrimination Act (“GINA”), federal mental health parity rules, evolving Affordable Care Act claims, coverage and other rules and guidance about essential benefits and other statutory, regulatory and enforcement changes often require updates to common disease management and wellness programs as well as other health plan provisions. Appropriate steps should be taken to review and update these and other plan terms, procedures, communications and practices to maintain compliance and support the ability to enforce plan terms and rely on plan cost projections.

The author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer frequently conducts training and publishes on these and other matters. She is scheduled to speak about these and other changing health plan requirements in light of health care reform at the September 14, 2011 Houston WEB Chapter lunch and will be conducting briefings on preventive care, wellness and disease management and other rules for several other organizations over the next few months. You can find out about upcoming training or other events and get updates at www.CynthiaStamer.com.

For Help With These Or Other Health Plan Or Employee Benefit Matter

If you would like help reviewing or defending your organizations health plan or other insurance or employee benefit and employment practices in light of these or other laws, please contact attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is recognized, internationally, nationally and locally for her more than 23 years of work, advocacy, education and publications on employee benefit and related matters.

A board certified labor and employment attorney Ms. Stamer continuously advises and assists employee benefit plans, their sponsoring employers, fiduciaries, insurers, administrators and others to monitor and respond to evolving legal and operational requirements and to design, administer, document and defend medical and other welfare benefit, qualified and non-qualified deferred compensation and retirement, severance and other employee benefit, compensation, and human resources programs and practices. She works extensively with plan sponsors, insurers, administrators, technology and other service providers and others to develop and operate legally defensible programs, practices and policies that promote the client’s human resources, employee benefits or other management goals. Ms. Stamer also is a widely published author and highly regarded speaker on these and other employee benefit and human resources matters who is active in many other employee benefits, human resources and other management focused organizations.

You can review other recent human resources, employee benefits and internal controls publications and resources and additional information about the employment, employee benefits and other experience of Ms. Stamer here. Some recent publications and programs that may be of interest include:

Ms. Stamer is scheduled to conduct training on these and other health benefit requirements for a number of organizations over the upcoming month. For information about these and other training opportunities or for other resources and information, see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

For Help or More Information

If you have questions or need help understanding or responding to the Regulations, with other health benefit design, administration or operations concerns, or with other employee benefits, compensation, labor or employment or other workforce management concerns, please contact the author of this update, Board Certified Labor and Employment attorney and management consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Past Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Chair of the ABA RPTE Employee Benefit and Other Compensation Committee, and a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Ms. Stamer is nationally recognized for her more than 23 years pragmatic and innovative health program work.

Board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization with extensive leading edge health plan experience, Ms. Stamer has worked continuously throughout her career helping health plan sponsors, fiduciaries, administrators, insurers and others design, administer and defend health and other employee benefit and insurance programs domestically and internationally. She is widely recognized for her experience helping design and implement legally compliant self-insured and insured health reimbursement, mini-med, high-deductible health plans, limited benefit plans, 24-hour and occupational medicine, ex-pat and medical tourism, deductible reimbursement and other creative health benefit programs to solve a wide range of financial and other challenges while coping with changing regulatory and market realities. Her work includes both working with clients to design, document, implement and administer these and other arrangements, as well as the development of wellness and disease management, claims administration and appeals, eligibility, and other administrative services, processes and technologies. She also works with plan fiduciaries, plan sponsors, insurers, administrators, brokers and advisors, bankruptcy trustees, creditors, debtors, service providers and their officers and directors about the prevention, investigation, mitigation and resolutions of civil and criminal liability arising from suspected or known benefit administration claims, breaches of fiduciary duty, privacy and data security breach, vendor disputes and other disputes arising in relation to employee benefit and insurance arrangements. As a continuing part of this representation, Ms. Stamer regularly represents and defends plan sponsors, fiduciaries, third party administrators and other service providers and management officials in dealings with the Department of Labor, Department of Justice, Department of Health & Human Services, Department of Defense, Securities and Exchange Commission, state insurance regulators, state attorneys general and other federal and state regulators and prosecutors and private plaintiffs in connection with investigations, prosecutions, audits and other actions arising from employee benefit, insurance and related arrangements and products.

Recognized in the International Who’s Who of Professionals and bearing the Martindale Hubble Premier AV-Rating, Ms. Stamer also is a highly regarded author and speaker, who regularly conducts management and other training on a wide range of labor and employment, employee benefit, human resources, internal controls and other related risk management matters. Her writings frequently are published by the American Bar Association (ABA), Aspen Publishers, Bureau of National Affairs, the American Health Lawyers Association, SHRM, World At Work, Government Institutes, Inc., Atlantic Information Services, Employee Benefit News, and many others. For a listing of some of these publications and programs, see here. Her insights on human resources risk management matters also have been quoted in The Wall Street Journal, various publications of The Bureau of National Affairs and Aspen Publishing, the Dallas Morning News, Spencer Publications, Health Leaders, Business Insurance, the Dallas and Houston Business Journals and a host of other publications. In addition to her many ABA leadership involvements, she also serves in leadership positions in numerous human resources, corporate compliance, and other professional and civic organizations. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, World At Work, the ICEBS, SHRM and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Stamer Speaks 9/14 On Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do
Labor Department 2011 Stats Show Employer Health Coverage & Other Benefit Statistics
Borzi Tells House Committee Current Fiduciary Regs Flawed; Must Fix Loopholes In Investment Advisor Definition To Protect Plans
Labor Department 2011 Stats Show Employer Health Coverage & Other Benefit Statistics
Conviction Highlights Risks Of Misleading Investors
DOL Considers Easing Rules For Electronic Benefit Communications
Improving The Effectiveness Of Compliance & Risk Management By Getting Hr On The Compliance Team
IRS Establishes Safe Harbor Election For Allocating Success-Based Fees Paid On Certain Business Transactions
IRS Changing Substantiation Rules For Business Travel Expenses
9/22/11 Cutoff To Apply For Affordable Care Act Annual Limit Temporary Waiver
Spectrum Healthcare NLRB Charge Settlement Highlights Need To Defend Against Possible Unfair Labor Practices & Other Union Exposures
IRS Releases Health Savings Account, High Deductible Health Plan 2012 Indexed Amounts
IRS Guidance On Affordable Care Act Requirement That Employers Report Cost Of Health Coverage On W-2 Released
Plan Sponsors. Their Owners & Management & Others Risk Personal Liability If Others Defraud Plans Or Mismanage Employee Benefit Plan Responsibilities
Health Plans, Insurers Get Limited & Imperfect Relief From Grace Period Extension For Some New Affordable Care Act Health Claims & Appeals Rules
EEOC Finalizes Updates To Disability Regulations In Response To Ada Amendments Act: Employers Should Manage Risks
Employer Charged With Misclassifying & Underpaying Workers To Pay $754,578 FLSA Back Pay Settlement
Avoiding Liability For Another’s Health Plan Fraud
Health Plans & Employers Beware! $4.3 Million Civil Penalty Shows OCR Serious About HIPAA Enforcement
IRS Expands When HFSAS & HRAs May Allow Over-The-Counter Drug Purchases With Drug Cards
DOL Announces Changes To H-2b Prevailing Wage Calculation Rules
$1 Million + FLSA Overtime Settlement Shows Employers Should Tighten On-Call, Other Wage & Hour Practices
Affordable Care Act Grandfathered Plan Rules Loosened To Allow Insured Plans Making Some Insurance Changes To Qualify
Update Employment Practices To Manage Genetic Info Discrimination Risks Under New EEOC Final Gina Regulations
EEOC Attacks Medical Leave Denials As Prohibited Disability Discrimination
DOL Proposes To Expand Investment Related Services Giving Rise To Erisa Fiduciary Status As Investment Fiduciary

Comments Off on New Affordable Care Act Guidance Helps Some Health Plans Stay Grandfathered | 105(h), ADA, Affordable Care Act, Claims Administration, Corporate Compliance, Discrimination, Disease Management, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, GINA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Public Policy | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, Employee Benefits, grandfathered health plan, grandfathered plan, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, Health Plans, Insurance, medical insurance | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Stamer Speaks 9/14 On Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do

July 29, 2011

Cynthia Marcotte Stamer will speak to the Houston Chapter of WEB at 11:30 a.m on September 14, 2011 on “Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do.” Get details and register online at www.webnetwork.org/houston.

Updating you on the status of litigation challenging the ACA health care reforms in the courts;
Updating you on the key developments affecting health care regulatory reforms likely to impact your health plan;
Sharing an updated roadmap of the currently scheduled implementation of key future health benefit reforms enacted under ACA;
Sharing selected tips and strategies for managing compliance and other risks and deal with uncertainties arising as health care reform continues to evolve; and
Audience questions and discussion of questions and ideas.

For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience, see www.CynthiaStamer.com.

Comments Off on Stamer Speaks 9/14 On Coping With Health Care Reform: What’s New, What Lies Ahead & What To Do | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, CHIP, COBRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Income Tax, Insurance, Malpractice, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Protected Health Information, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax Credit, Wellness Programs | Tagged: benefits, Employee Benefits, employee benefits policy, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, Health Plans, health policy, Insurance, Speeches, Training, WEB | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Labor Department 2011 Stats Show Employer Health Coverage & Other Benefit Statistics

July 29, 2011

A new 2011 U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Study of employee benefits offered shares key insights into how many employers offer employer-provided health and other benefits The study shows that health and other benefits offered by employers, how much employers contribute and when employees enroll in offered benefits varies widely varied by whether the employer is a government or private sector employer, the industry, size and other characteristics of the employer and the income, profession, education and other characteristics of the employee. It is no surprise that government employers that can pass along costs to taxpayers provide coverage more broadly and subsidize more of the cost.

With regard to health benefits, the report reveals that practices vary significantly among employers, on average, medical care benefits were available to 69 percent of private industry workers and half of workers participated in a medical plan. For single coverage, private sector employers paid 80 percent of the medical care premiums for full-time workers and 69 percent of medical care premiums for full-time workers in private industry. Data shows employees often elect not to take offered coverage.

In addition to data on medical benefits, the study also reports that paid leave remains the most commonly provided benefit nationally and includes data on other benefits.

The DOL highlights 1st time reporting of domestic partner status for 1st time in its announcement. Data also provided on paid vacation and other leave.

Read report summary and access report at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ebs2.nr0.htm.

For Help or More Information

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Labor Department 2011 Stats Show Employer Health Coverage & Other Benefit Statistics | 105(h), Absenteeism, Affordable Care Act, COBRA, Disability, Disability, Disability Plans, Employers, ERISA, FMLA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Public Policy | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, Employee Benefits, grandfathered health plan, grandfathered plan, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, Health Plans, Insurance, medical insurance | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Borzi Tells House Committee Current Fiduciary Regs Flawed; Must Fix Loopholes In Investment Advisor Definition To Protect Plans

July 28, 2011

Assistant Secretary of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) Phyllis C. Borzi testified Tuesday, July 26, 2011 to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce Subcommitte on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions that EBSA a proposed fiduciary regulation that would update EBSA regulations defining when a person is considered a “fiduciary” by reason of giving investment advice for a fee with respect to assets of an employee benefit plan or IRA will help protect employee benefit plan participants by correcting “loopholes” in a “flawed 35-year-old rule” that allow many parties providing advice about the investment of retirement plan assets to escape coverage by ERISA’s fiduciary responsibility rules. The proposed regulations and other stepped up regulations and enforcement of ERISA’s fiduciary protections by the EBSA means that plan sponsors, fiduciaries, investment advisors and other plan service providers and others involved in the sponsorship, design, and administration of an employee benefit plan need to act to manage expanding fiduciary responsibilities and exposures.

Borzi Says Loopholes & Other Flaws In Existing Regulations Hurt Plans & Their Participants

Borzi told the Committee that EBSA believes its rules about the types of advisory relationships that give rise to fiduciary status under the ERISA on the part of those providing investment advice services need to change because “technicalities” and “loopholes” in the current EBSA fiduciary regulations definition of “investment advisor” in effect since 1975 harms participants and beneficiaries by allowing many advisers to easily dodge fiduciary status.

Borzi testified that the five-part regulatory test used under the current regulations to determine when ERISA’s fiduciary requirements apply to “investment advice” and when the advisor is a “fiduciary” significantly narrowed the plain language of the ERISA statute so that much of what plainly is advice about plan investments is not treated as investment advice as fiduciary conduct under ERISA and the person paid to render that advice is not treated as an ERISA fiduciary.

Under current fiduciary regulation, an investment adviser is not treated as a fiduciary accountable for complying with ERISA’s prudence, exclusive benefit, prohibited transaction and other fiduciary responsibility safeguards if and when providing advice that meets each element of a five part test.

Under the current regulation, a person is a fiduciary under ERISA and/or the tax code with respect to their advice only if and when he or she:

Make recommendations on investing in, purchasing or selling securities or other property, or give advice as to their value;
On a regular basis;
Pursuant to a mutual understanding that the advice;
Will serve as a primary basis for investment decisions; and
Will be individualized to the particular needs of the plan.

Borzi told members of Congress this narrow definition of investment advisor exempts a wide range of parties receiving compensation for providing advice about the investment of employee benefit funds from coverage by ERISA’s fiduciary responsibility requirements. Borzi testified that the narrowness of the existing regulation opened the door to serious problems, and changes in the market since the regulation was issued in 1975 have allowed these problems to proliferate and intensify. Borzi says the narrowness of the regulation has harmed some plans, participants, and IRA holders. Research has linked adviser conflicts with underperformance. SEC reviews of certain financial sales practices may also reflect these influences. Finally, EBSA’s own enforcement experience has demonstrated specific negative effects of conflicted investment advice.

Borzi Says Proposed Regulation Would Strengthen Protections For Plans & Their Participants

Borzi said the proposed regulation published in the Federal Register on October 22, 2010 would change the rules defining a person is considered to be a “fiduciary” by reason of giving investment advice for a fee with respect to assets of an employee benefit plan or IRA by modifying the current regulation in effect since 1975 would replace the five-part test of “investment advisor” with a broader definition more in keeping with the statutory language while providing clear exceptions for conduct that should not result in fiduciary status.

According to Borzi, types of advice and recommendations that generally would trigger fiduciary status under the proposed regulations include: (1) appraisals or fairness opinions concerning the value of securities or other property; (2) recommendations as to the advisability of investing in, purchasing, holding or selling securities or other property; or (3) recommendations as to the management of securities or other property.

To be a fiduciary for performing these or other activities treated as fiduciary investment advice, Borzi explained that a person engaging in one of these activities must receive a fee and also meet at least one of the following four conditions:

Represent to a plan, participant or beneficiary that the individual is acting as an ERISA fiduciary;
Already be an ERISA fiduciary to the plan by virtue of having any control over the management or disposition of plan assets, or by having discretionary authority over the administration of the plan;
Be an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940; or
Provide the advice pursuant to an agreement or understanding that the advice may be considered in connection with investment or management decisions with respect to plan assets and will be individualized to the needs of the plan.

At the same time, Borzi testified that the proposed regulation recognizes that activities by certain persons should not result in fiduciary status. Specifically, these are:

Persons who do not represent themselves to be ERISA fiduciaries, and who make it clear to the plan that they are acting for a purchaser/seller on the opposite side of the transaction from the plan rather than providing impartial advice;
Persons who provide general financial/investment information, such as recommendations on asset allocation to 401(k) participants under existing Departmental guidance on investment education;
Persons who market investment option platforms to 401(k) plan fiduciaries on a non-individualized basis and disclose in writing that they are not providing impartial advice; and
Appraisers who provide investment values to plans to use only for reporting their assets to the DOL and IRS.
EBSA Still Working To Address Expressed Concerns

The proposed regulation has prompted a large volume of comments and a vigorous debate. Borzi testified that the EBSA is working hard to hear and consider every stakeholder concern and shared some examples of how EBSA is considering addressing certain of these concerns. Borzi said EBSA is taking multiple steps in its effort to respond to these and other concerns in its efforts to finalize the regulation including:

Borzi told the Committee EBSA is working to better understand how specific compensation arrangements would be affected by the proposed rule and whether clarifications of existing prohibited transactions exemptions would be appropriate. Borzi said EBSA has already begun to issue subregulatory guidance describing some of these clarifications and will continue to do so as necessary as it completes its analysis.

Borzi also said that as EBSA further develops its thinking in this rulemaking, EBSA is paying special attention to the two primary exceptions to fiduciary status under the proposed rule: (1) clarifying the difference between investment education that does not give rise to fiduciary status and fiduciary investment advice; and (2) clarifying the scope of the so-called “sellers’ exception” under which sales activity is not fiduciary advice. In both cases, Borzi said EBSA intends to analyze and address the comments and concerns that were raised during our extensive public comment period.

Finally, Borzi said EBSA is exploring a range of appropriate regulatory options for moving forward, taking into consideration public comments submitted for the record, EBSA’s economic analysis, and relevant academic research. In so doing, Borzi told the Committee EBSA is aiming to address conflicted investment advice while not unnecessarily disrupting existing compensation practices or business models.

Plan Sponsors, Fiduciaries, Service Providers Should Prepare For Tighter Rules While Continuing To Provide Input To EBSA

The proposed changes to the definition of investment advisor is one of many steps that EBSA is taking to tighten the regulations implementing ERISA’s fiduciary requirements and to enforce the protections of ERISA. The proposal to expand the conditions that providing investment advice regarding retirement plan assets will trigger the fiduciary protections of ERISA is designed to expand the reach of those regulations. Service providers involved in providing these or other related services generally will want to review and update their processes, documentation and training to manage new exposures likely to arise from these proposed regulations, while continuing to share feedback to EBSA and other rulemakers.

Service providers are not the only parties that need to update practices and provide input about these rules. Plan sponsors, fiduciaries, service providers, participants and beneficiaries also are impacted. Employers and other plan sponsors, fiduciaries and others need to anticipate and respond effectively to the inevitable efforts by providers of investment advice and other services to avoid or shift liability. Parties securing or relying on advice or services about investments or other responsibilities should:

Carefully, prudently conduct a documented investigation and critical analysis of existing and proposed advisors and other service providers credentials, analysis, performance, contract, recommendations and other conduct;
Carefully review contracts and other materials and secure appropriate constractual and other safeguards;
Require indemnification, insurance and other protections;
Ensure that appropriate action is taken to appoint parties intended to perform fiduciary advisory or other services to manage risks
Secure and maintain appropriate fiduciary and other liability insurance coverage;
Carefully conduct an appropriate, well-documented prudent review of performance, credentials and other relevant factors on a regular basis to preserve ongoing evidence of prudence; and
Other appropriate safeguards to manage risks and liabilities.

To help guard and position themselves to defend against fiduciary exposures plan sponsors, fiduciaries, service providers and others involved in the administration of health or other employee benefit plans should seek the advice of legal counsel with appropriate experience with employee benefit and other related matters to develop an understanding of ERISA and other laws and the duties and liabilities that these rules may create for their organizations and themselves personally. For additional tips and information about managing these risks, see here.

For Help With These Or Other Risk Management Matters

If you need assistance in auditing or assessing, updating or defending your wage and hour or with other labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation or internal controls practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers implement, audit, manage and defend wage and hour and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on wage and hour, worker classification and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile at here or e-mailing this information here. To unsubscribe, e-mail here.

Comments Off on Borzi Tells House Committee Current Fiduciary Regs Flawed; Must Fix Loopholes In Investment Advisor Definition To Protect Plans | Bankruptcy, Corporate Compliance, Defined Benefit Plans, Defined Contribution Plans, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Professional Liability, Reporting & Disclosure, Restructuring, Retirement Plans, Risk Management, Union | Tagged: 404, Director Liability, embezzlement, ERISA, Fiduciary, Fiduciary Responsibility, Officer Liability, Officers & Directors Liability, Owner Liability, Plan Sponsor Liability, Service Provider Liability, tpa | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Changing Substantiation Rules For Business Travel Expenses

July 19, 2011

Employers and business travelers get ready. The Internal Revenue Service is changing its rules for substantiation of expenses for lodging, meal and incidental expenses incurred while traveling away from home on business.

Announcement 2011-42, scheduled for Federal Register publication on August 8, will announce the IRS’ stop allowing taxpayers to use the high-low per diem method for substantiating lodging, meal, and incidental expenses incurred in traveling away from home.

Along with its elimination of this substantiation method option, the IRS has announced it plans to publish a revenue procedure providing the general rules and procedures for substantiating these expenses (omitting the high-low substantiation method) and a notice providing the special transportation rate. The IRS has announced that it plans to stop publishing the per diem revenue procedure annually but will publish changes as required.

For Help With Monitoring Developments, Compliance, Investigations Or Other Needs

If you need help with fraud prevention and detection or other internal controls or compliance matters, the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, can help. Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law, Chair of the ABA RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements Group, and an ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Council Representative, Ms. Stamer has more than 23 years experience advising a broad range of public and private businesses on human resources, employee benefits, compensation, performance management and other related operations, risk management, compliance and product matters. Ms. Stamer also regularly represents and advises business clients, employee benefit plans and their fiduciaries, insurers, financial services providers, and others about dealings with investigations and disputes, vendor relations and credentialing, government regulations, investigations and audits, disputes and enforcement actions and a wide range of other concerns. She also publishes and speaks extensively on regulatory and compliance, performance management, and other operations and risk management concerns. Her publications and insights appear in the SHRM, Atlantic Information Service, Bureau of National Affairs, World At Work, The Wall Street Journal, Business Insurance, the Dallas Morning News, and a many other national and local publications. You can get more information about Ms. Stamer and her other experience here.

If you need help investigating or responding to a known or suspected compliance, litigation or enforcement or other risk management concern, help with reviewing, updating, administering or defending a current or proposed employment, employee benefit, compensation or other management practice, wish to inquire about federal or state regulatory compliance audits, risk management or training, or need legal representation on other matters please contact Ms Stamer here or at (469) 767-8872.

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here. If you do not wish to receive these updates in the future, send an e-mail with the word “Remove” in the Subject to here.

Comments Off on IRS Changing Substantiation Rules For Business Travel Expenses | Employers, Employment Tax, Human Resources, Income Tax, Payroll Tax, Tax | Tagged: 132, Compensation, employee expenses, Employer, Fringe Benefits, Payroll, Tax, travel, Travel expenses, Withholding | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

9/22/11 Cutoff To Apply For Affordable Care Act Annual Limit Temporary Waiver

June 20, 2011

6/17 Guidance Says Temporary Relief Offered Through 2014 Unavailable For Plans Not Applying By 9/22/11

Health plans and insurers wishing to qualify for a temporary waiver of annual limit restrictions enacted under the Affordable Care Act after September 22, 2011 must act quickly and should expect to face tougher qualification requirements. Plans and insurers not applying by a newly set September 22, 2011 deadline will be permanently disqualified from eligibility to request the relief for post-September 22, 2011 plan years according to guidance issued Friday, July 17, 2011.

Plans Must Apply Before 9/22/11 & Meet Tightened Requirements To Preserve Possibility Of Temporary Relief Qualification For Post 9/22/11 Plan Years

On Friday, June 17, 2011, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced that CMS will not accept or consider any new applications or requests for extensions of temporary waivers of the Affordable Care Act annual limitation requirements.

Additionally, CMS also updated the requirements that plans and insurers applying for a new or extension of an existing annual limit waiver before September 22, 2011 through 2013. Under the new guidance, any plans receiving these waivers also will have to meet tighter requirements to qualify for the requested annual limit waiver for post-September 22, 2011 plan years.

The Affordable Care Act will ban annual limits for non-grandfathered health plans beginning in 2014. Until then, the Affordable Care Act provides for the phased out of annual limits. The phase out of the annual limits is intended to preserve access to needed benefits and the affordability of coverage until the reforms scheduled to take effect in 2014 are in place.

Currently, most plans cannot impose an annual limit that is lower than $750,000. Beginning in September, 2011, the allowable annual limit under the Affordable Care Act will increase to $1.25 million and to $2 million for plan years beginning in September 2012.

Temporary Waiver Program Provides Relief For Some Qualifying Plans

In response to concerns that compliance with the phased in annual limit restrictions would result in significant cost increases or coverage terminations for many plans, CMS last year issued guidance that granted temporary waivers from the phased in annual limits for qualifying limited benefit,, “mini-med” or certain other qualifying plans that submitted timely applications demonstrating that compliance with the phaseout limits would result in a significant decrease in access to benefits or a significant increase in premiums and met other qualification requirements. (For a list of applications previously approved or denied by city and state, see cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/approved_applications_for_waiver.html.)

CMS Most Likely To Approve Waiver Requests For Plans With Lower Annual Limits But Other Plans Also Can Apply

Like the waiver program guidance for 2010, the June 17, 2011 guidance technically gives all plans and issuers with restricted annual limits below $2 million the opportunity to apply for a temporary waiver before September 22, 2011. However, not all plans will necessarily qualify for the requested relief.

Under the temporary waiver program, CMS authority to decide whether to approve or deny an annual limit waiver request made by a plan that otherwise meets all requirements. CMS has indicated that it is most likely to approve waivers for plans with low annual limits (e.g., $10,000), as CMS sees these plans as most likely to need waivers to prevent a significant increase in premiums or decrease in access to coverage to comply with the current limit of $750,000. In contrast, CMS views plans with higher annual limits as less needful of a temporarywaiver because complying with the new rules is unlikely to lead to a significant increase in premiums or decrease in access to care. CMS says that its actuarial analysis indicates that most plans that currently have annual limits above $750,000 and below $2 million can meet the increased 2011 annual limit of $1.25 million with minimal premium increases (less than one percent). Similarly, CMS predicts that increasing annual limits from $1.25 million to $2 million in 2012 will have a “small impact” on premiums. Consequently, CMS is less likely to approve waiver requests for plans that already have higher limits in effect.

CMS Also Tightening Other Requirements For Waiver Relief Qualification

In addition to applying for a waiver before September 22, 2011 and showing the requisite impact on plan costs or coverage, the July 17 guidance also will require that plans seeking a temporary waiver of the annual limit after September 22, 2011 meet other more stringent conditions. Among other things, plans with waivers will be required:

To tell consumers that their health care coverage is subject to an annual dollar limit lower than what is allowed under the law;
Include the dollar amount of the annual limit along with a description of the plan benefits to which the limit applies;
Show how the annual limit would affect a consumer who was hospitalized to help people understand how far their coverage will reach if they become seriously ill; and
Must attest annually to their compliance with the consumer disclosure requirement.

Plans & Sponsors Should Act Quickly To Keep Option of Qualification For Temporary Relief Option

Plans and insurers that wish to preserve the possibility of qualifying for temporary relief from the otherwise applicable Affordable Care Act limitations on annual waivers for post-September 22, 2011 plan years should act quickly to prepare and submit their application for relief.

For Help or More Information

Ms. Stamer is scheduled to conduct training on these and other health benefit requirements for a number of organizations is upcoming months. For information about these and other training opportunities or for other resources and information, see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on 9/22/11 Cutoff To Apply For Affordable Care Act Annual Limit Temporary Waiver | Affordable Care Act, Employers, ERISA, Health Care Reform, Human Resources, Insurance | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, annual limits, grandfathered plan, Health Care Reform, Health Plans | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Spectrum Healthcare NLRB Charge Settlement Highlights Need To Defend Against Possible Unfair Labor Practices & Other Union Exposures

May 20, 2011

The National Labor Regulations Board (NLRB)’s announcement of a settlement against a Connecticut nursing home operator this week in conjunction with a series of other enforcement actions highlight the need for businesses to tighten defenses and exercise other caution to minimize their organization’s exposure to potential NLRB charges or investigation. As reflected by many of these enforcement acts, the exposures arise both from active efforts by businesses to suppress union organizing or contracting activities, as well as the failure to identify and manage hidden labor law exposures in the design and administration of more ordinary human resources, compliance, business operations and other policies and practices.

On May 17, 2011, the NLRB announced here that Connecticut nursing home operator Spectrum Healthcare has agreed to settle a NLRB case involving multiple allegations of unlawful suspensions, discharges and unilateral changes in violation of the National Labor Relations Act and other federal labor laws by offering reinstatement and back pay to all discharged and striking workers and signing a new three-year collective bargaining agreement with its employees’ union, New England Health Care Employees Union District 1199, SEIU.

Along with the contract and reinstatement of all employees, the company agreed to pay $545,000 in back pay and pension benefits to employees who were harmed by the unfair labor practices, and to expunge any disciplinary records related to the case. As a result, all NLRB charges against the company have been withdrawn. Spectrum admits to no wrongdoing in the settlement.

The settlement, reached midway through a hearing before an NLRB administrative law judge in Connecticut and approved by the judge yesterday, ends a long-running dispute which grew into a strike by almost 400 employees at four nursing homes in Connecticut operated by Spectrum Healthcare, LLC. Complaints issued by the NLRB Regional Office in Hartford alleged that, beginning in the fall of 2009, several months after the prior collective bargaining agreement expired, Spectrum discharged seven employees and suspended three others to retaliate against their union activities and to discourage other employees from supporting the union. In addition, one employee was discharged and seven others were suspended after the employer unilaterally changed its tardiness discipline policy without first bargaining with the union.

The complaints further alleged that in April 2010, employees at the four nursing homes — in Derby, Ansonia, Winsted, and Hartford — went on strike to protest the unfair labor practices. When the strikers offered unconditionally to return to work in late August, the employer refused to take them back. Under federal labor law, if a strike is called because of an unfair labor practice, employees are entitled to reinstatement after an unconditional offer to return to work.

The reinstated employees are due to return to the facilities this week.

The Spectrum Healthcare settlement is reflective of the growing number of NLRB enforcement orders against employers generally and health care providers specifically under the Obama Administration. The Obama Administration has close ties and has expressed its strong and open support for union and union organizing activities. The adoption of a series of union friendly labor law reforms was one of the key campaign promises of President Obama during his election campaign. While other legislative priorities and the change in the leadership of the House of Representatives appears to have slowed efforts to push through this agenda, it has not slowed the Administration’s efforts to support unions with strong enforcement activities. Empowered by a difficult economic and job situation and an awareness of the Obama Administration’s strong support for union organizing and other activities, unions are stepping up organizing efforts and more aggressively challenging employers actions.

Over the past few months, public awareness of the Obama Administration’s aggressive enforcement agenda on behalf of unions has drawn new attention as a result of the widespread media coverage of NLRB actions challenging Boeings planned relocation of certain manufacturing jobs intervention in a planned relocation of certain manufacturing operations. See, e.g., Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon releases statement on Boeing complaint; National Labor Relations Board issues complaint against Boeing Company for unlawfully transferring work to a non-union facility. However, the Boeing and Spectrum Healthcare actions represent only the tip of the iceberg of the rising number of NLRB enforcement activities, most of which take place with little media or public attention.

Along side the Spectrum Healthcare and Boeing actions, in recent weeks, the NLRB also has been busy with several other enforcement activities. For instance:

On May 9 2011, the NLRB issued a complaint against Hispanics United of Buffalo (HUB), a nonprofit that provides social services to low-income clients, that alleges that HUB unlawfully discharged five employees after they took to Facebook to criticize working conditions, including work load and staffing issues. The case involves an employee who, in advance of a meeting with management about working conditions, posted to her Facebook ; and
On May 17, the NLRB secured a temporary injunction from a U.S. District Court in San Jose California against San Jose area waste hauling company OS Transport LLC, charged with engaging in unfair labor practices including the termination of a lead organizer and another Union supporter, retaliation against Union efforts in the form of unfavorable assignments, threats to Union supporters, and promises of improved treatment of employees who disavow the Union for the alleged purpose of defeating a union. o offer reinstatement to two drivers and restore full assignments to other drivers who had expressed support for a union during an organizing campaign. More Details here.,

In addition, in recent weeks, the NLRB also has:

Sued the state of Arizona on amendment limiting method for choosing union representation on May 5, 2011;
Secured an order requiring a Milwaukee job training center to pay back pay and reinstate workers fired for complaining about bounced paychecks on May 3, 2011;
Ordered a concrete supplier to rehire employees in Indianapolis on May 2, 2011;
Found a New York egg processing plant of unlawful interference and ordered a third election ohm April 27, 2011; and
Secured a settlement from Build.com of unlawful dischrage charges for firing employee based on Facebook comments on April 20

Amid this difficult enforcement environment, business leaders should exercise special care to prepare to defend their actions against both potential organizing efforts, to understand the types of actions and activities that may help fuel charges, and take steps to manage these and other union organization and other labor risks.

For Help With Labor & Employment, Employee Benefits Or Other Risk Management and Defense

If you need assistance in auditing or assessing, updating or defending your labor and employment, employee benefits, compliance, risk manage or other internal controls practices or actions, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers implement, audit, manage and defend wage and hour and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on wage and hour, worker classification and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Spectrum Healthcare NLRB Charge Settlement Highlights Need To Defend Against Possible Unfair Labor Practices & Other Union Exposures | 105(h), Absenteeism, ADA, Affirmative Action, Affordable Care Act, ARRA, Bankruptcy, Cafeteria Plans, Child Labor, CHIP, Claims Administration, COBRA, COBRA Subsidy, Corporate Compliance, Data Security, Defined Benefit Plans, Defined Contribution Plans, Disability, Disability, Disability Plans, Discrimination, Disease Management, Drug & Alcohol, E-Verify, EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Agreement, Employment Tax, ERISA, Excise Tax, Fair Labor Standards Act, family leave, Fiduciary Responsibility, FMLA, GINA, Government Contractors, H.R. 4872, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, I-9, Immigration, Income Tax, Insurance, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Labor Management Relations, Leave, Malpractice, medical leave, Medicare Part D, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Military Leave, Non-Compete, Non-Competition Agreement, Nonresident aliens, OFCCP, OSHA, Pandemic, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Preemption, Prescription Drugs, Privacy, Professional Liability, Protected Health Information, Public Policy, Refunds, Rehabilitation Act, Reporting & Disclosure, Restructuring, Retaliation, Retirement Plans, Risk Management, Safety, Sexual Harassment, Stimulus Bill, Swine Flu, Tax, Tax Credit, Tax Qualification, Telecommuting, Uncategorized, Unemployment Benefits, Unemployment Insurance, Union, USERRA, VEVRRA, Wage & Hour, Wellness, Wellness Programs, Whistleblower | Tagged: ADAAA, Americans With Disabiltiies Act, Employer, employment discrimination, facebook, HR, Human Resources, NLRA, social medial, unfair labor practices, Union | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

OCR’s McAndrew Speaks At 5/16 JCEB HIPAA Teleconference; OCR/NIST To Share Other HIPAA Training On Line

May 10, 2011

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Office for Civil Rights (OCR) are making presentations from the 4th annual conference on “Safeguarding Health Information: Building Assurance through HIPAA Security” co-hosted in Washington, D.C. on May 10 & 11, 2011 available on line for review. The training is part of a series of continuing efforts by the agencies to outreach to various parties on the Privacy and Security Rules of the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act of 1996, as amended (HIPAA). Meanwhile, OCR’s Susan McAndrew is scheduled to share insights on OCR’s HIPAA regulatory and enforcement agenda at a teleconference to be hosted by the American Bar Association Joint Committee on Employee Benefits at Noon Central on May 16, 2011.

The Security Rule sets federal standards to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of electronic protected health information by requiring HIPAA covered entities and their business associates to implement and maintain administrative, physical and technical safeguards. Presentations cover a variety of current topics including updates on HHS health information privacy and security initiatives, OCR’s enforcement of health information privacy and security activities, integrating security safeguards into health IT and security automation, insider threat trends and safeguards, and more.

The conference is designed to explore the current health information technology security landscape and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Security Rule, the agencies share their practical strategies, tips and techniques for implementing the HIPAA Security Rule.

For details about reviewing the May 10-11 presentations, see the 2011 HIPAA Conference website here. For details about the May 16 teleconference, see here.

For Help With Monitoring Developments, Compliance, Investigations Or Other Needs

If you need assistance monitoring federal health reform, policy or enforcement developments, or to review or respond to these or other health care or health IT related risk management, compliance, enforcement or management concerns, the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, can help. Vice President of the North Texas Health Care Compliance Professionals Association, Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Section and the former Board Compliance Chair of the National Kidney Foundation of North Texas, Ms. Stamer has more than 23 years experience advising health industry clients about these and other matters. Ms. Stamer has extensive experience advising and assisting health care providers, health plans, their business associates and other health industry clients to establish and administer medical privacy and other compliance and risk management policies, to health care industry investigation, enforcement and other compliance, public policy, regulatory, staffing, and other operations and risk management concerns. She regularly designs and presents HIPAA and other risk management, compliance and other training for health plans, employers, health care providers, professional associations and others.

Ms. Stamer also regularly works with OCR and other agencies, publishes and speaks extensively on medical and other privacy and data security, health and managed care industry regulatory, staffing and human resources, compensation and benefits, technology, public policy, reimbursement and other operations and risk management concerns. Her publications and insights appear in the Health Care Compliance Association, Atlantic Information Service, Bureau of National Affairs, World At Work, The Wall Street Journal, Business Insurance, the Dallas Morning News, Modern Health Care, Managed Healthcare, Health Leaders, and a many other national and local publications. For instance, On May 3, 2011, Ms. Stamer served as the appointed scribe for the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Agency meeting with OCR and will moderate a teleconference featuring comments by OCR’s Susan McAndrew for the Joint Committee on Employee Benefits scheduled for May 16. Her insights on the required “culture of compliance” with HIPAA also recently were quoted in medical privacy related publications of the Atlantic Information Service. Among others, she has conducted privacy training for the Association of State & Territorial Health Plans (ASTHO), the Los Angeles Health Department, the American Bar Association, the Health Care Compliance Association, a multitude of health industry, health plan, employee benefit and other clients, trade and professional associations and others.

You can get more information about her HIPAA and other experience here.

About Solutions Law Press

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on OCR’s McAndrew Speaks At 5/16 JCEB HIPAA Teleconference; OCR/NIST To Share Other HIPAA Training On Line | Data Security, GINA, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Privacy, Uncategorized, Wellness Programs | Tagged: Health Care, Health Care Provider, Health Plans, HIPAA, OCR, Protected Health Information | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Health Plans & Sponsors Should Monitor, Begin Preparing To Meet New Health Care Reform Low-Income Member Voucher Requirements

April 14, 2011

The Affordable Care Act will require employer sponsored plans to honor vouchers to help pay the cost of coverage for certain lower income individuals and children.

Employers and their health plans will face new responsibilities to figure relevant family income, to provide information about their plans and costs of coverage, and to follow voucher handling requirements for employees and others whose coverage will be paid for in whole or in part with these low-income vouchers. While the rules are still evolving, employers and health plans nevertheless need to start preparing to meet these new responsibilities. Employers and heatlh plans need to keep an eye on the development of these rules at the Federal and state level and begin planning for how they will administer these responsibilities.

A Kaiser Family Foundation Issue Brief discusses some of the ways and implications of income determinations to be made for this purpose.

For Help With Investigations, Policy Updates Or Other Needs

If you have questions or need help responding to the RFI or have any questions or need help understanding or dealing with these or any other workforce management, employee benefits, compensation or other internal control concerns, please contact the author of this update, Board Certified Labor and Employment attorney and management consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Ms. Stamer has advised, represented, trained, and defend a broad range of employer, employee benefit plan, insurance and other clients in relation to electronic and other communications and other employee benefit concerns and frequently publishes and is interviewed about electronic and other employee benefit plan communications and other employee benefit plan matters. Chair of the ABA RPTE Employee Benefit and Other Compensation Committee, a council member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and the Legislative Chair of the Dallas Human Resources Management Association Government Affairs Committee, Ms. Stamer helps businesses, employee benefit plans and other organizations solve problems, develop and implement strategies to manage people, processes, and regulatory exposures to achieve their business and operational objectives and manage legal, operational and other risks. Board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, with more than 23 years management-focused human resource and employee benefits experience, Ms. Stamer helps businesses manage their people-related risks and the performance of their internal and external workforce though appropriate human resources, employee benefit, worker’s compensation, insurance, outsourcing and risk management strategies domestically and internationally. Throughout her career, Ms. Stamer has continuously has advised and represented a broad range of fiduciaries, plan sponsors, bankruptcy trustees, creditors, debtors, service providers and their officers and directors about the prevention, investigation, mitigation and resolutions of civil and criminal liability arising from suspected or know breaches of fiduciary duty, fraud or other misconduct involving health, pension or other employee benefit and insurance arrangements. As a continuing part of this representation, Ms. Stamer regularly represents and defends plan sponsors, fiduciaries, third party administrators and other service providers and management officials in dealings with the Department of Labor, Department of Justice, Department of Health & Human Services, Department of Defense, Securities and Exchange Commission, state insurance regulators, state attorneys general and other federal and state regulators and prosecutors and private plaintiffs in connection with investigations, prosecutions, audits and other actions arising from employee benefit, insurance and related arrangements and products.

Other Helpful Resources & Information

If you found this article of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other Breaking News, articles and other resources available here including:

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here. If you do not wish to receive these updates in the future, unsubscribe by updating your profile here.

Comments Off on Health Plans & Sponsors Should Monitor, Begin Preparing To Meet New Health Care Reform Low-Income Member Voucher Requirements | 105(h), Affordable Care Act, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Tax | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, employee contributions, enrollment, Health Care Reform, health plan eligibility, Health Plans, income, medical plan, reporting, voucher | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Recap of IRS Employee Plans 2011 1st Quarter Guidance

April 10, 2011

Keeping on top of the employee plan guidance published by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and other relevant agencies can be critical to efforts of plan sponsors, fiduciaries, administrators and other service provider’s ability to anticipate plan design or other actions needed to maintain compliance or manage other concerns. The following is a recap of the more significant the IRS Employee Plan guidance published by the IRS between January 1 and March 31, 2011.

Notice 2011-33, 2011-19 I.R.B.: Updates for the corporate bond weighted average interest rate for plan years beginning in April 2011; the 24-month average segment rates; the funding transitional segment rates applicable for April 2011; and the minimum present value transitional rates for March 2011.
Notice 2011-22, 2011-12 I.R.B. 557: Updates for the corporate bond weighted average interest rate for plan years beginning in March 2011; the 24-month average segment rates; the funding transitional segment rates applicable for March 2011; and the minimum present value transitional rates for February 2011.
Announcement 2011-21, 2011-12 I.R.B. 567: This announcement designates Form 8955-SSA, Annual Registration Statement Identifying Separated Participants With Deferred Vested Benefits, as the form to be used to satisfy the reporting requirements of §6057(a) of the Code for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2009, and sets forth the due dates for filing the form for the 2009 plan year and subsequent plan years. .
Notice 2011-19, 2011-11 I.R.B. 550: This notice provides guidance regarding when securities of the employer are readily tradable on an established securities market or readily tradable on an established market for purposes of certain provisions of the Internal Revenue Code relating to employer securities held by certain qualified retirement plans. .
Announcement 2011-16, 2011-7 IRB 500: This announcement corrects a typographical error in Rev. Rul. 2011-3.
Rev. Rul 2011-7, 2011-10 I.R.B.: This revenue ruling provides guidance clarifying how the section 403(b) plan termination provisions apply. .
Announcement 2011-8, 2011-5 IRB 446: This announcement corrects an error in Rev. Proc. 2011-8 in the user fee schedule that applies to a non-mass submitter of a master or prototype (M&P) plan.
Notice 2011-13, 2011-9 I.R.B. 529: Updates for the corporate bond weighted average interest rate for plan years beginning in February 2011; the 24-month average segment rates; the funding transitional segment rates applicable for February 2011; and the minimum present value transitional rates for January 2011.
Notice 2011-7, 2011-5 I.R.B. 437: Updates for the corporate bond weighted average interest rate for plan years beginning in January 2011; the 24-month average segment rates; the funding transitional segment rates applicable for January 2011; and the minimum present value transitional rates for December 2010.
Notice 2011-3, 2011-2 IRB 263: The notice provides guidance on the special rules relating to funding relief for single-employer defined benefit pension plans (including multiple employer defined benefit pension plans) under the Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare. Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act of 2010 (PRA 2010), Pub. L. No. 111-192.
Rev. Rul. 2011-3, 2011-4 I.R.B. 326: The covered compensation tables under Code §401 for the year 2011 are provided to determine contributions to defined benefit plans and permitted disparity.
Rev. Proc. 2011-4, 2011-1 I.R.B. 123: Annual EP/EO revenue procedure on letter rulings.
Rev. Proc. 2011-5, 2011-1 I.R.B. 167: Annual EP/EO revenue procedure on technical advice.
Rev. Proc. 2011-6, 2011-1 I.R.B. 195: Annual EP determination letter revenue procedure.
Rev. Proc. 2011-8, 2011-1 I.R.B. 237: Annual EP/EO revenue procedure on user fees.

For Help With These Or Other Risk Management Matters

If you need assistance in accessing, assessing or auditing, updating or defending your employee benefit or compensation arrangements and practices in response to this recent guidance or with other labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation or internal controls practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers implement, audit, manage and defend wage and hour and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on wage and hour, worker classification and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Recap of IRS Employee Plans 2011 1st Quarter Guidance | Defined Benefit Plans, Defined Contribution Plans, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Retirement Plans, Risk Management, Tax, Tax Qualification | Tagged: 401(k) Plan, 403(b) Plan, employee benefit plan, Employee Plan, IRS, plan qualification, Qualified Plan, retirement plan, Tax | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Guidance On Affordable Care Act Requirement That Employers Report Cost of Health Coverage On W-2 Released

April 9, 2011

The Internal Revenue Service has released an advance copy of interim guidance implementing requirements that employers report to employees of the cost of their employer-sponsored group health plan coverage required under Internal Revenue Code (Code) § 6051(a)(14) of the Code, as enacted as part of the Affordable Care Act.

The interim guidance contained in Notice 2011-28 generally applies beginning with 2012 Forms W-2 (that is, the forms required for the calendar year 2012 that employers generally are required to furnish to employees in January 2013 and then file with the Social Security Administration (SSA)).

The Affordable Care Act will require that employers report to employees information about the cost of employer provided health care coverage beginning in January 2013. According to Notice 2010-69, employers are permitted, but not required to report the cost of health coverage on any forms required to be furnished to employees prior to January 2013. However, any employers that choose to report earlier (on the 2011 Forms W-2 generally furnished to employees in January 2012) may look to this notice for guidance regarding that voluntary earlier reporting.

Reporting to employees pursuant to Code § 6051(a)(14) is for their information only. The report of the information is intended by Congress to inform employees of the cost of their health care coverage. It does not cause otherwise excludable employer-provided health care coverage to become taxable. This notice provides interim guidance that

Notice 2011-28 will be published in Internal Revenue Bulletin 2011-16 on April 18, 2011.

For Help With Affordable Care Act or Other Employee Benefits or HR Needs

The new W-2 reporting requirement is one of a multitude of changes impacting the responsibilities of employment based health care coverage enacted under the Affordable Care Act.

If you have any questions or need help responding to the Affordable Care Act or other any other health plan or insurance employee benefit, compensation, workforce or internal control concerns, please contact the author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on IRS Guidance On Affordable Care Act Requirement That Employers Report Cost of Health Coverage On W-2 Released | Affordable Care Act, Employee Benefits, Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Internal Controls, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Payroll Tax, Tax | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, Employer, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, premiums, Tax, w-2 | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Plan Sponsors. Their Owners & Management & Others Risk Personal Liability If Others Defraud Plans or Mismanage Employee Benefit Plan Responsibilities

April 4, 2011

Mitigate Risk With Appropriate Prevention, Monitoring & Response

Executives, board members, and other business leaders of companies providing health, 401(k) or other employee benefits under plans regulated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA) should heed a series of recent fiduciary liability settlement orders and lawsuits of the U.S. Department of Labor (Labor Department) as important reminders of the potential personal liability exposures executives can may face if their company’s benefit programs are not appropriately maintained and administered.

Recent Enforcement Actions, Changing Regulations Highlight Fiduciary Risks

On March 29, 2011, the Labor Department sued the owner of Eyeglass Factory, Inc. (EGF), Stephen Schaffer, for breach of fiduciary duties under ERISA by failing to ensure that EGF timely forwarded health plan contributions collected from employees to pay health plan contributions to the plan and failing to ensure that he and other plan fiduciaries and service providers were bonded in accordance with ERISA’s fidelity bond requirements.[i] The Labor Department suit charges that from July 1, 2000 to October 1, 2000, Schaffer and EGF withheld and failed to forward to the health plan contributions deducted from employee pay for health insurance coverage and contributions made to the flexible benefit plan sponsored by EGF from January 1, 2000 to December 4, 2000. The employees’ paycheck withholdings were commingled with the company’s general assets and used for its general operating expenses. The Labor Department is asking the court to order that Schaffer and other defendants make restitution to the plan for the misapplied contributions, including lost opportunity costs, to correct prohibited transactions and to appoint an independent fiduciary to oversee the plans once Schaffer is removed as the plan fiduciary.

The Schaffer suit follows the Labor Department’s successful prosecution of a breach of fiduciary duty action against Larry Lauterback, the president and former owner of a Minnesota Cement Company, for his role in allowing his construction company to commingle with company assets and divert to company use employee health and 401(k) contributions withheld from employee’s pay. In Solis v. Larry Lauterback, [ii] the District Court ordered Lauterback to restore $17,273.18 in unremitted employee contributions and lost opportunity costs to the company’s health and dental plan, and $747.20 in unremitted employee contributions to the company’s 401(k) plan and enjoins Lauterback from serving or acting as a fiduciary or service provider to any employee benefit plan for three years.. The order followed the entry of a consent judgment against Lauterback and the plan sponsor, Slate Cement, Inc., for failure to remit employee contributions, failure to forward employee contributions to medical and dental providers, co-mingling employee contributions of the general assets and using those assets for company operations.

The Schaffer and Lauterback actions taken in March, 2011 are only the most recent in a series of enforcement actions taken against business executives, board members, plan vendors and others for their role in committing or failing to take prudent steps to prevent or redress alleged misconduct relating to the maintenance, administration and funding of various employee benefit programs regulated by ERISA. In recent months and years, the Labor Department has filed several lawsuits against business executives and businesses for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. While misuse of employee contributions by plan sponsors is a common focus of many of these actions, plan sponsors, plan service providers and members of their management with discretionary authority or responsibility over plan assets or administration or the election of those appointed to administer those responsibilities often arise out of the failure or these individuals to take prudent steps to prevent, monitor or address misconduct by other plan fiduciaries or service providers.[iii]

Plan sponsors, fiduciaries, service providers and their management should anticipate these risks and their attendant responsibilities will continue to rise as the Labor Department moves forward to adopt and implement revisions and enhancements to its fiduciary regulations such as those provided for in the new “Interim Final Regulation Relating to Improved Fee Disclosure for Pension Plans” scheduled to take effect in July, 2011 and the Proposed Regulation on the “Definition of the Term Fiduciary” published by the Labor Department in July and October, 2010 respectively.

Meanwhile, the Labor Department enforcement activities highlight the longstanding and ongoing policy of aggressive investigation and enforcement of alleged misconduct by companies, company officials, and service providers in connection with the maintenance, administration and funding of ERISA-regulated employee benefit plans. In its Fiscal Year 2010, the Labor Department closed 3,112 civil investigations, of which 2,301 (73.94%) resulted in monetary recoveries or other corrective action. The Labor Department referred 264 cases for civil litigation and filed 128 civil lawsuits. Meanwhile on the criminal side, the Labor Department closed 281 criminal investigations and obtained indictments against 96 people.

In addition to prosecutions brought by the Labor Department, companies and individuals that exercise discretion and control of the administration or funding of employee benefit plans regulated by ERISA also may be sued personally by participants and beneficiaries for breach of fiduciary under ERISA. A review of the Labor Department’s enforcement record and existing precedent makes clear that where the Labor Department perceives that a plan sponsor or its management fails to take appropriate steps to protect plan participants, the Labor Department will aggressively pursue enforcement regardless of the size of the plan sponsor or its plan, or the business hardships that the plan sponsor may be facing.

Plan Sponsors, Fiduciaries, Service Providers & Their Management Should Act To Manage Exposures

Given these exposures, businesses providing employee benefits to employees or dependents, as well as members of management participating in, or having responsibility to oversee or influence decisions concerning the establishment, maintenance, funding, and administration of their organization’s employee benefit programs need a clear understanding of their responsibilities with respect to such programs, the steps that they should take to demonstrate their fulfillment of these responsibilities, and their other options for preventing or mitigating their otherwise applicable fiduciary risks.

To help guard and position themselves to defend against these and other exposures, plan sponsors, fiduciaries, service providers and others involved in the administration of health or other employee benefit plans should seek the advice of legal counsel with appropriate experience with employee benefit and other related matters to develop an understanding of ERISA and other laws and the duties and liabilities that these rules may create for their organizations and themselves personally. For additional tips and information about managing these risks, see here.

For Help With These Or Other Risk Management Matters

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers implement, audit, manage and defend wage and hour and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on wage and hour, worker classification and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

[i] Chao v. Stephen Schaffer, the Eyeglass Factory, Inc., No O2-CV-60197, as announced in EBSA Release No. 11-341-CHI (March 29, 2011).

[ii] Solis v. Larry Lauterback, as announced in EBSA Release No 11-322-CHI (March 14, 2011).

[iii] See, e.g. Chao v. Associated Plan Administrators, as announced in EBSA Release No. 07-1265-BOS/BOS 2007-298 (October 16, 2007); Chao v. Starkey, as announced in EBSA Release No. 05-747-ATL (May 2, 2005); Chao v. Perry., as announced in EBSA Release BOS 2002-054 (March 21, 2002); Chao v. Mabry, as announced in EBSA Release No. 160 (March 20, 2002). See also, e.g., Baker v. Kingsley, 2006 WL 2027606 (N.D.Ill.2007); In Re Enron Corp Securities Derivative & “ERISA” Litigation, 284 F.Supp. 511 (S.D.Tex. 2003); Varity Corp. v. Howe, 516 U.S. 489 (1996); Brink v. DeLesio, 496 F. Supp. 1350 (D.Md. 1980).

Comments Off on Plan Sponsors. Their Owners & Management & Others Risk Personal Liability If Others Defraud Plans or Mismanage Employee Benefit Plan Responsibilities | Bankruptcy, Corporate Compliance, Defined Benefit Plans, Defined Contribution Plans, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Professional Liability, Reporting & Disclosure, Restructuring, Retirement Plans, Risk Management, Union | Tagged: 404, Director Liability, embezzlement, ERISA, Fiduciary, Fiduciary Responsibility, Officer Liability, Officers & Directors Liability, Owner Liability, Plan Sponsor Liability, Service Provider Liability, tpa | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Health Plans, Insurers Get Limited & Imperfect Relief From Grace Period Extension For Some New Affordable Care Act Health Claims & Appeals Rules

March 24, 2011

The Departments of Labor, Health & Human Services and Internal Revenue Service are extending a previously announced enforcement grace period under which the agencies will not take enforcement against health plans or health insurers that attempt to operate in good faith compliance with, but fail to meet certain new requirements for handing medical claims and appeals enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act). While health plans and insurers working in good faith to comply with the new requirements may find the enforcement relief helpful for dealing with some areas of uncertainty about the interpretation of certain requirements, it is important to keep in mind that the enforcement grace period provides only limited and somewhat imperfect relief. As a result, health plans, health insurers and those responsible for their design and administration are encouraged to continue to move forward on efforts to comply with the new requirement in thoughtful and well-documented manners despite the announced grace period extension.

New Claims & Appeals Requirements & Enforcement Grace Period

As signed into law on March 23, 2010, the Affordable Care Act generally requires that health plans and health insurance policies that are not “grandfathered” to begin complying with a series of new requirements by the first day of the first plan year that begins after September 22, 2010. These new requirements include a number of new requirements about the way that nongrandfathered health plans and health insurance policies handle medical claims and appeals. For instance, the Affordable Care Act as construed by the agencies in interim final regulations published by the agencies on July 23, 201 will require that non-grandfathered group health plans and insurers issuing non-grandfathered health insurance plans and policies:

Implement specified internal and external review procedures that among other things mandate independent external review of medical judgment based decisions in accordance with the regulations for reviews of appeals of medical judgment based denials;
Provide a broad range of new information in notices regarding claims and do so in a culturally and linguistically appropriate manner;
Provide continued coverage pending the outcome of an internal appeal; and
Comply with a laundry list of additional criteria for ensuring that a claimant receives a full and fair review in addition to complying with the requirements of existing Labor Department claims and appeals procedures.

After the agencies jointly published interim final regulations defining and implementing these requirements on July 23, 2010, last September the agencies announced that they would not enforce certain elements (but not all) of the new requirements set forth in the interim final regulations against covered health plans or health insurers seeking to comply in good faith with the new requirements through July 1, 2011. In the March 18, 2011 announcement, the Department of Labor said that the agencies now have agreed to extend this reprieve from agency enforcement of the requirements listed in the guidance against plans seeking to comply in good faith with the new requirements until plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2012.

While offering welcome relief, covered health plans and insurers, their sponsors and issuers should not over-estimate the reach and protection provided by this new guidance. For instance:

First, in order to qualify for the enforcement grace period, efforts must be made to administer the health plan or health insurance policy in good faith compliance with the new requirements during the enforcement grace period.
Second, the enforcement grace period provides only limited relief. The extension to 2012 only four of a series of new requirements set forth in the interim final regulations. Nongrandfathered plans and their administrators and insurers remain accountable for prudently administering claims and appeals in accordance with all other requirements of the Affordable Care Act as well as pre-existing claims and appeals regulations set forth in 2000 claims regulations issued by the Department of Labor pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

Third, the enforcement grace period guidance only means that the agencies will not exercise their power to take action against a non-compliant plan. It does not prevent plan members, health care providers with benefit assignments or other plan beneficiaries from bringing lawsuits against health plans, health insurers or their administrators for failing to comply with the new requirements during post- September 22, 2010 plan years even if the enforcement grace period otherwise protects the plan or insurer from agency enforcement action. This means that health insurers and health plans may still run the risk that plan members or beneficiaries will ask courts to reverse claims or appeals denials or impose other penalties and sanctions against plans or their fiduciaries for failing to meet the new requirements for post-September 22, 2010 plan years.

Finally, and perhaps most significantly, the grace period guidance requires nongrandfathered plans and insurers to make “good faith” efforts to comply with the requirements covered by the relief during the grace period in order to be eligible to claim the relief offered by the enforcement grace period guidance.

Consequently, despite the relief announced March 18, nongrandfathered health plans still have significant work to do to comply with the new Affordable Care Act claims and appeals requirements even during the announced enforcement grace period.

For Help With Affordable Care Act or Other Employee Benefits or HR Needs

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Health Plans, Insurers Get Limited & Imperfect Relief From Grace Period Extension For Some New Affordable Care Act Health Claims & Appeals Rules | Affordable Care Act, Claims Administration, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Public Policy | Tagged: affordale care act, Appeals, appeals procedure, claims procedure, Claims Regulations, ERISA, external appeals, Health Insurance, Health Plans, Insurer, internal claims, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, tpa | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

EEOC Finalizes Updates To Disability Regulations In Response to ADA Amendments Act

March 24, 2011

Employers Urged To Tighten Disability Related Discrimination Risk Management

Employers should review and update their existing employment and employee benefit practices in response to updated regulations (Final Regulations) governing the disability discrimination rules of the Americans With Disabilities Act as amended by the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) will publish in the Friday, March 25, 2011 Federal Register.

On Thursday, March 24, 2011, the EEOC released an advance copy of the Final Regulations along with two Question-and-Answer documents about the Final Regulations to aid the public and employers – including small business – in understanding the law and new regulations. The Final Regulations, accompanying Question and Answer documents and a fact sheet are available on the EEOC website here .

The changes contained in the updated Final Regulations update the EEOC’s disability regulations in response to amendments made to the ADA by Congress as part of the ADAAA. Like the ADAAA they implement, the Final regulations are designed to simplify the determination of who has a “disability” and make it easier for people to establish that they are protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The Final Regulations and the ADAAA amendments they implement make it likely that businesses generally will face more disability claims from a broader range of employees and will possess fewer legal shields to defend themselves against these claims. Since these changes make it easier for certain employees to qualify as disabled under the ADA, businesses should act strategically to mitigate their ADA exposures in response to the Final Regulations. Learn more about the Final Regulations and get suggestions for risk management of expanding disabilities discrimination exposures here.

For Help With Disability Discrimination Risk Management or Other Needs

If you need assistance in auditing or assessing, updating or defending your disability management or with other labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation or internal controls practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. Her experience includes extensive work helping employers implement, audit, manage and defend wage and hour and other workforce and internal controls policies, procedures and actions. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on wage and hour, worker classification and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on EEOC Finalizes Updates To Disability Regulations In Response to ADA Amendments Act | Absenteeism, ADA, Affirmative Action, Corporate Compliance, Disability, Disability, Disability Plans, Discrimination, Drug & Alcohol, EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employers, GINA, Government Contractors, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Leave, Military Leave, Non-Compete, Rehabilitation Act, Retaliation, Union | Tagged: ADA, ADAAA, Americans With Disabiltiies Act, Disability Discrimination, Employer, employment discrimination, HR, Human Resources | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Speak Up On The 1st Anniversary of Health Care Reform

March 23, 2011

On the 1st anniversary of the passage of Health Care Reform, let’s celebrate by accepting the invitation from Joe Biden to “discuss how health care reform is already working.”

Below is the text of an e-mail I (and millions of other Americans, I suspect, received an e-mail from Joe Biden, in which he touts health care reform as already saving patients like a young man from Minnesota. In the e-mail, Biden says: “On the one-year anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, I think we have a duty to discuss how reform is already working.” OK, tell me what you think?

Unquestionably, health care reform produces some winners and loosers. Although few of the reforms enacted are actually in effect yet, Biden says heath care reform is working and credits the law for saving the life of the young man and millions of others. On the other hands, many patients and doctors treating patients with cancer and other life threatening illnesses complain and report fears that in the future increasing Medicare, Medicaid or other government regulations and market distruptions. Some folks think it’s all good. Other’s think it’s all bad. Many American’s think it’s a little bit of both and many just don’t know.

Where does the truth lie? On the 1st anniversary of the passage of health are reform, one thing is certain. The American health care system and it’s impact on our employees, families, friends, communities and goverment and personal budget’s is too great to be complacent. So, as Health Care Reform turns one, let’s accept the invitation of Vice President Biden and share our experiences and thoughts with our elected representatives, regulators, with others on with others on the Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy linkedin a the following link and keep the discussion going until we get it right:

Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy

Here’s the e-mail from “Joe Biden [info@barackobama.com]”

Cynthia –I want to tell you about a family in Minnesota.

Justin and Kari live in Brooklyn Park, right outside of Minneapolis. They’re parents to three children. Their three-year-old, William, was born with a genetic disorder called tuberous sclerosis complex.

For the rest of his life, William will wrestle with tumors in his brain, his heart, his kidneys, his skin, and possibly other major organs. He must take medication to control seizures and faces the threat of kidney disease.

What Justin and Kari want for William is a future. And because of health reform, that’s what he’ll have.

Today, insurance companies are no longer able to discriminate against William because of the condition he’s dealt with since birth. Now, Justin and Kari know they’ll be able to get the kind of care that William needs — today and into the future.

Their story isn’t unique, but it’s one of many that need to be told. We all know people whose lives have been changed because of the Affordable Care Act, even if we don’t realize it. So we’ve found a way to show exactly how reform is working for all of us — for our parents, our siblings, our kids, ourselves.

Will you take a minute to take our Health Reform Checkup and let the people you love know how reform is working for them?

Before the Affordable Care Act, Justin and Kari weren’t sure about the future. They worried that they’d never be able to find coverage for William again if Justin lost his job. They worried about the life that William would lead — whether he’d ever be able to work or support a family.

Not anymore. William’s condition isn’t going away, but he’ll always be able to get care. The Affordable Care Act is one year old today, and it has already changed William’s life — and this country — for good.

Today, there are families who feel better about the future than they did a year ago. They’ve found some security, some relief. And these are people we know. They’re our neighbors, our colleagues, our friends, our families — the people next to us every day.

On the one-year anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, I think we have a duty to discuss how reform is already working.

Watch Justin and Kari tell their story, and take a moment to learn how health reform is changing the lives of those you know:

http://my.barackobama.com/Checkup

A year ago, I stood next to the President as he signed health reform into law — and we have you to thank for making that possible.

Yours,

Joe

Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee — 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Comments Off on Speak Up On The 1st Anniversary of Health Care Reform | 105(h), Affirmative Action, Affordable Care Act, Child Labor, Disability, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, Human Resources, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Policy | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, Health Care, Health Care Reform, Health Plans | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

CMS Publishes Proposed Consumer Disclosure Notices Detailing Required Health Insurer Rate Increase Justification Disclosures

March 7, 2011

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) on March 7, 2011 published proposed consumer disclosure notices that it proposes to require insurers proposing rate increases over 10 percent to electronically file in furtherance of CMS’ implementation of the Affordable Care Act premium rate review regulation published by HHS in December of 2010. The proposed consumer disclosure notices can be found here listed under “CMS-10379.”

Like the premium rate review regulation, the proposed notification requirements would apply to non-grandfathered group or individual insurance plans in the individual and small group markets.

Under the premium rate review regulation, rate increases by insurers for non-grandfathered group or individual health insurance plans that exceed a specified threshold amount are subject to review by either State insurance officials or HHS if the State does not have an effective process for reviewing rates. The proposed threshold for the first year is 10%. After 2011, a state-specific threshold will be set for disclosure of rate increases, using data and trends that better reflect cost trends particular to that state. According to CMS’, the review of rates under the rate review regulation could begin as early as July 2011.

CMS contemplates that the proposed consumer disclosure notices published March 7, 2011 will ‘help consumers know what their insurance companies are proposing while the rate increase requests are being reviewed. The notices would provide some basic information about health insurance rate increases and their review, as well as detailed information about the specific increase that an insurer has proposed. Consumers would also be able to see what the insurance company believes is driving the increase in premiums and how much of the increase would go to profits and administrative expenses. CMS intends to make the information provided by insurers in the notices available to consumers on CMS’ website. According to CMS, once rates begin being reviewed, HHS will work to post information on proposed rates as quickly as possible.

For Help Responding To Affordable Care Act or Other Health Plan Rules

The proposed premium rate review and associated consumer disclosure notice requirements are part of the rapidly evolving federal and state rules, court decisions, enforcement actions and other developments that require quick action by health plans, health insurers and their sponsors and administrators. If you need assistance in auditing or assessing, updating or defending your health plan or policies, documents, practices or conduct, or other labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, privacy and data security, or other related practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on Affordable Care Act and other health and other employee benefit, insurance, human resources and health care matters.

Nationally and internationally known for her leading edge work on health benefit and insurance matters, Ms. Stamer has counseled, represented and trained employers and other employee benefit plan sponsors, plan administrators and fiduciaries, insurers and financial services providers, third party administrators, human resources and employee benefit information technology vendors and others privacy and data security, fiduciary responsibility, plan design and administration and other compliance, risk management and operations matters for more than 23 years. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on health benefit reform and other related health and pension, human resources, insurance, privacy and health care concerns. She also regularly conducts training on these and other related matters for a broad range of organizations including the Association of State and Territorial Healthcare Organizations (ASTHO), the Los Angeles County Health Department, a multitude of health plans and their sponsors, health care providers, the American Bar Association, SHRM, the Society for Professional Benefits Administrators and many others Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on CMS Publishes Proposed Consumer Disclosure Notices Detailing Required Health Insurer Rate Increase Justification Disclosures | Affordable Care Act, Employers, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Policy, Reporting & Disclosure | Tagged: Affordable Care Act, Consumer Disclosure Notices, Health Insurer, Health Plans, non-grandfathered plans, Premium Rate Review | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Avoiding Liability For Another’s Health Plan Fraud

February 25, 2011

TPA’s Embezzlement Guilty Plea Reminds Plan Sponsors, Fiduciaries & Service Providers To Ensure Fiduciaries, Administrators & Staff Prudently Selected, Monitored & Bonded

The guilty plea of an Ohio-based third-party administrator to embezzlement of $1 million in plan assets reminds employers and other employee benefit plan sponsors and members of their management participating in plan related activities, plan administrators and other plan fiduciaries and plan service providers (“plan decision-makers”) of the importance of ensuring appropriate, well-documented credentialing and selection, oversight, auditing and bonding the individuals and companies acting as fiduciaries and others participating in administration of plans or their assets (“plan workforce members”) to minimize their potential exposure to potential personal liability as a result of the fraud under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

Cox Prosecution Reflective DOL Readiness To Prosecute Parties For Misuse of Plan Monies & Other Plan Fraud

According to a February 23, 2011 U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announcement, Rhonda Sue Irvin Cox, owner of Irvin Administrative Solutions LLC (IAS), pleaded guilty to the embezzlement of $1 million of retirement plan assets from client plans administered by IAS. The DOL reports that between January 2003 and April 2007, Cox plead guilty to using used her position with ISC to embezzle the funds from 12 of 59 plans for which IAS served as a third party administrator. Cox also pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements in documents required under ERISA to be kept and certified by the plans’ administrator. Scheduled to be sentenced on June 1, 2011, Cox faces a maximum of five years in prison on each criminal count, a $250,000 fine and a special assessment. Cox is scheduled to be sentenced on June 1, 2011.

The DOL and Justice Department have a long-standing record of aggressive investigation and prosecution of embezzlement or other fraud impacting health and other employee benefit plans. Their criminal and civil enforcement and prosecution record makes clear this commitment remains strong.

Plan Sponsors, Fiduciaries & Service Providers May Face Civil Liability From When Others Defraud Their Plans

While plan decision-makers generally are aware that individuals defrauding health or other employee benefit plans risk criminal and civil prosecution, many fail to recognize their own potential civil liability exposures that may arise out of the fraudulent acts or other misconduct of another plan workforce member.

Embezzlement of plan assets is one of many acts of misconduct that can create potential fiduciary liability exposure for plan decision-makers under ERISA. Until confronted with potential fraud, misconduct or other misfeasance by a plan fiduciary, service provider or other plan workforce member, many plan decision-makers lack an adequate appreciation of the personal liability they may incur if they cannot demonstrate appropriate steps were taken to protect their health plan from this misconduct.

Under ERISA’s fiduciary responsibility rules, embezzlement or other misuse of employee contributions or other plan assets as well as certain other misconduct or misfeasance by a plan fiduciary, service provider or other plan workforce member can create personal liability exposures for plan decision-makers with responsibility or discretionary authority over the selection, retention, or management of plan workforce members if the plan decision-maker cannot demonstrate appropriate steps were taken to select, monitor and bond the plan workforce and other prudent action was taken to prevent and redress the fraud. Accordingly, health plans, their sponsors, fiduciaries, service providers, their management, and others serving as, or selecting, managing or retaining companies or individuals that participate in the handling of health plan assets or administration should act to strengthen their health plans and themselves against these exposures.

Risk Management Strategies & Tips

When embezzlement or other concern affecting their health plan arises, plan decision-makers concerned about protecting their health plans and themselves must act promptly in a carefully documented, prudent manner to investigate and respond to the concern. They should be prepared to present well-documented evidence of the scope and limits of their responsibility, authority, awareness, and potential for the selection, monitoring and oversight of the plan workforce member or others responsible for the performance of those actions, the adequacy of the bonding arrangements for the plan, and other efforts to prudently protect the plan before, during and after the discovery of the concern. While these and other steps can help strengthen the ability of a plan decision-maker to liability exposures that can result from the other plan workforce member’s embezzlement of plan assets or other misconduct, plan sponsors and plan decision-makers also should acquire suitable fiduciary and other liability insurance coverage and make other arrangements to help provide for the potential financial costs and other demands that are likely to arise in the event that it becomes necessary to investigate or redress fraud or other misconduct. Learn more here.

For Help With Investigations, Policy Review & Updates Or Other Needs

If you need help investigating or responding to fraud or other misconduct affection a health or other employee benefit plan, dealing with an employee benefit plan investigation or enforcement action by the Labor Department, private plaintiffs or another public or private party, reviewing current or proposed health plan processes or procedures, or responding to other employee benefit, labor and employment or other related controls and practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on HIPAA and other privacy and data security, health plan, health care and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters.

For more than 23 years, Ms. Stamer has counseled, represented and trained employers and other employee benefit plan sponsors, plan administrators and fiduciaries, insurers and financial services providers, third party administrators, human resources and employee benefit information technology vendors and others privacy and data security, fiduciary responsibility, plan design and administration and other compliance, risk management and operations matters. In connection with this work, Ms. Stamer regularly counsels and helps clients to defend a broad range of clients about employee benefit plan fraud and other fiduciary responsibility concerns. Throughout her career, she has represented and served as special counsel to health and other employee benefit plans, plan sponsors, plan service providers, officers, directors and other management officials, bankruptcy trustees, debtors and creditors, and others in connection with health and other employee benefit plan fraud and other fiduciary responsibility and related investigations, prosecutions and other actions involving the Labor Department, IRS, HHS, Justice Department, state insurance and attorneys general, bankruptcy actions, and participant, beneficiary and vendor disputes. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other employee benefits, insurance and human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Solutions Law Press™ provides business risk management, legal compliance, management effectiveness and other resources, training and education on health care, human resources, employee benefits, data security and privacy, insurance, and other key compliance, risk management, internal controls and other key operational concerns. If you find this of interest, you also be interested reviewing some of our other Solutions Law Press resources including:

Comments Off on Avoiding Liability For Another’s Health Plan Fraud | Defined Benefit Plans, Defined Contribution Plans, Disability Plans, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Malpractice, Professional Liability, Retirement Plans, Risk Management | Tagged: co-fiduciary liability, embezzlement, employee benefit, ERISA, Fiduciary Liability, fraud, Health Plan | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Health Plans & Employers Beware! $4.3 Million Civil Penalty Shows OCR Serious About HIPAA Enforcement

February 23, 2011

A $4.3 million civil monetary penalty (CMP) imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) against Cignet Health of Prince George’s County, Md., (Cignet) signals the growing need for health plans and their sponsors, health care providers, health care clearinghouses and their business associates covered by the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule to get serious about HIPAA compliance.

The first CMP ever assessed by OCR under the HIPAA Privacy Rule, the Cignet CMP assessment announced February 22, 2011, the $4.3 million CMP against Cignet announced February 22, 2011 applies the expanded HIPAA violation categories and increased HIPAA civil monetary penalty amounts authorized as part of the expansion of HIPAA obligations and penalties enacted as part of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act in 2009.

The Cignet penalty announcement is the latest in a series of developments documenting the rising risks that health care providers, health plans, health care clearinghouses and their business associates (“covered entities”) face for violations of HIPAA.

Even before the announcement of the Cignet CMP, the HIPAA Privacy exposures of covered entities for failing to comply with HIPAA already had risen significantly. While OCR had not assessed any civil monetary penalties against any covered entity for violation of HIPAA before Cignet, OCR’s collection of $1 Million from Rite Aid in a 2010 Resolution Agreement, $2.25 million from CVS Pharmacy, Inc. under a 2009 Resolution Agreement and $100,000 from Providence Health & Services under a 2008 Resolution Agreement demonstrated that covered entities could face significant civil liability for willful violations of the Privacy Rules. In addition, the Department of Justice has secured several criminal convictions or pleas under HIPAA’s criminal provisions. OCR data confirms that the covered entities involved in these actions included health care providers, health plans, and others.

Health plans and other covered entities as well as their business associates should tighten privacy policies, breach and other monitoring, training and other practices to mitigate against exposures in light of recently tightened requirements and new enforcement risks. To minimize the potential that the health plan’s sharing of information with the employer will create or spread HIPAA or other privacy risks to the employer or members of its workforce, employers and other plan sponsors and members of their workforce also should take steps to ensure not only that their health plan documents, policies and procedures, as well as those policies and practices applicable to employer, its human resources, and benefits advisors when accessing or handling health plan or other medical information on behalf of the employer, rather than the plan, are appropriately designed and administered.

Read more details and get tips here.

For Help With Investigations, Policy Review & Updates Or Other Needs

If you need assistance in auditing or assessing, updating or defending your HIPAA or other health plan, or other labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, privacy and data security, or other internal controls and practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Ms. Stamer, a noted Texas-based employee benefits and employment lawyer Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, will discuss HIPAA and other privacy risks and risk management strategies for employers, health and employee benefit plan sponsors and their administrators at the Southwest Benefits Association/IRS Plan Administrator Skills Workshops to be held February 25 in Dallas and March 4 in Houston.

The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on HIPAA and other privacy and data security, health plan, health care and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters.

For more than 23 years, Ms. Stamer has counseled, represented and trained employers and other employee benefit plan sponsors, plan administrators and fiduciaries, insurers and financial services providers, third party administrators, human resources and employee benefit information technology vendors and others privacy and data security, fiduciary responsibility, plan design and administration and other compliance, risk management and operations matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on privacy and data security and other human resources, employee benefits and health care concerns. Her many highly regarded publications on privacy and data security concerns include “Privacy Invasions of Medical Care-An Emerging Perspective.” ERISA Litigation Manual. BNA, 2003-2009; “Privacy & Securities Standards-A Brief Nutshell.” BNA Tax Management and Compliance Journal. February 4, 2005; “Cybercrime and Identity Theft: Health Information Security beyond HIPAA.” ABA Health eSource. May, 2005 and many others. She also regularly conducts training on HIPAA and other privacy and data security compliance and other risk management matters for a broad range of organizations including the Association of State and Territorial Healthcare Organizations (ASTHO), the Los Angeles County Health Department, a multitude of health plans and their sponsors, health care providers, the American Bar Association, SHRM, the Society for Professional Benefits Administrators and many others.t Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

Comments Off on Health Plans & Employers Beware! $4.3 Million Civil Penalty Shows OCR Serious About HIPAA Enforcement | ARRA, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Insurance, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Privacy, Protected Health Information, Stimulus Bill, Tax | Tagged: Employer, Health Plans, HIPAA, OCR, Privacy | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Free 2/7 RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements Study Group Teleconference Call On Evolving Health Care Reform Plan Guidance

January 27, 2011

The American Bar Association (ABA) Real Property, Trust & Estates Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements Group invites interested members and other legal professionals to participate in a complimentary one hour study group conference call focusing on selected health plan developments on Monday, February 7, 2011 at 1 PM Eastern, Noon Central, 11 AM Mountain and 10 AM Pacific.

Hosted by the Group’s Welfare Plan Committee, the study group call will feature a roundtable discussion of various current Health Care Reform issues. The discussions will be lead by Sarah Brown, Associate General Counsel, HealthSmart Holdings, Inc., Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, Esq., Elizabeth Ysla Leight, Society of Professional Benefit Administrators, and Robert A. Miller, Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP, but all members will be invited to share their views and experiences.

Planned topics of discussion include the following:

105(h) issues, enforcement delay, comment opportunity and other developments
Drug card HRSA reimbursements
GINA and other wellness issues
Latest information on the Tax Section Meeting and the Baltimore TEGE discussion
Other PPACA topics

The dial-in information for the call is:

Phone Number: (866) 646-6488

Participant Pass code: 7255887619#

Participation is available on a first come, first serve basis at no charge, based on the availability of lines. Group members or others planning to participate are encouraged to R.S.V.P. via e-mail here to be included on the distribution list for materials to be shared in connection with the meeting.

For additional information about the Group, the Study Group call or other opportunities for involvement, contact Group Chair Cynthia Marcotte Stamer via e-mail here or at (469) 767-8872 or Group Vice Chair Robert Miller via email here or at (216) 622.8363. If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ provides business risk management, legal compliance, management effectiveness and other resources, training and education on human resources, employee benefits, compensation, data security and privacy, health care, insurance, and other key compliance, risk management, internal controls and other key operational concerns. If you find this of interest, you also be interested in exploring other Solutions Law Press, Inc. ™ tools, products, training and other resources here and reading some of our other Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ human resources news here.

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on Free 2/7 RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements Study Group Teleconference Call On Evolving Health Care Reform Plan Guidance | 105(h), Discrimination, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Human Resources | Tagged: 105(h), Affordable Care Act, Health Care Reform, Health Plans, RPTE, Stamer | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS Expands When HFSAs & HRAS May Allow Over-The-Counter Drug Purchases With Drug Cards

January 24, 2011

Recent Internal Revenue Service (IRS) guidance loosens the conditions under which health flexible spending account (HFSA) and health reimbursement accounts may permit participants to use debit cards to purchase over-the-counter medicines or drugs after January 15, 2011. Under Internal Revenue Code rules amended by the Affordable Care Act, drug card and other over-the-counter prescription drug purchases must meet new requirements to qualify for reimbursement by a HFSA or HRA. HFSA and HRA sponsors and administrators wishing to allow participants to use debt cards to purchase over-the-counter drugs must ensure that their arrangements comply with this updated guidance. Sponsors and administrators that are unable or unwilling to meet the conditions established under the updated rules for allowing debt card reimbursement of over-the-counter drugs should act quickly to confirm that all relevant plan documents, procedures and communications clearly forbid reimbursement of over-the-counter medicines and drugs to the extent required by the updated rules.

IRS Notice 2011-5 modifies IRS guidance providing that HFSA and HRA debit cards generally could not be used after January 15, 2011 to purchase over-the-counter medicines or drugs after January 15, 2011, except with respect to “90 percent pharmacies.” previously announced in Notice 2010-59

Under the new rules announced in Notice 2011-5, after January 15, 2011, the IRS has expanded the circumstances under which HFSA and HRA debit cards may continue to be used to purchase over-the-counter medicines or drugs depends on where and how they are purchased. Different conditions must be met if the over-the-counter drug is purchased with a drug card from a vendor that under IRS rules:

Is a “90-percent pharmacy;”
Has a “health care related Merchant Code;
Is a non-health care merchant that has a pharmacy, or that sells prescription drugs via mail order or the web.

Where the applicable requirements established for each of these types of vendors is met, Notice 2011-5 permits HFSAs and HRAs to continue to allow participants to purchase over-the-counter drugs using debit cards after January 15, 2011. In contrast, if the vendor is not one of these types of vendors or is a listed vendor but the applicable requirements for allowing a debit card purchase of an over-the-counter medicine for that type of vendor are not met, HFSA and HRA debit cards may not be used to purchase over-the-counter medicines or drugs after January 15, 2011.

For More Information Or Assistance

If you need assistance evaluating or updating your HSFA, HRA or other health and cafeteria plans in response to these new rules or auditing or assessing, updating or defending other labor and employment, employee benefit or compensation practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on wage and hour, worker classification and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication see here.

Comments Off on IRS Expands When HFSAs & HRAS May Allow Over-The-Counter Drug Purchases With Drug Cards | 105(h), Cafeteria Plans, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Tax | Tagged: 105, 106, 126, Affordable Care Act, cafeteria plan, drug card, health flexible spending account, Health Plans, HFSA, HRA, over-the-counter | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

IRS, HHS & DOL To Delay Enforcement of New Insured Group Health Plan Non-Discrimination Rules Pending Guidance; Seek Public Input on Rules

January 24, 2011

Implications of Announced Reprieve on Possible Participant Suits Unclear

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Department of Labor (DOL) and Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) recently announced that the agencies do not plan to enforce new rules that prohibit non-grandfathered insured group health plans from discriminating in favor of highly compensated employees until guidance is published on the workings of certain key elements of these requirements. The IRS announced the relief from enforcement of the new insured group health plan nondiscrimination requirements enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act) in Notice 2011-1, which was published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin on January 7, 2011. According to Notice 2011-1, the Agencies determined that questions about the construction of certain aspects of the non-discrimination rules made it inappropriate to require insured group health plans to comply or to impose sanctions for their failure to comply with the new non-discrimination rules until the agencies publish certain regulations or other administrative guidance. According to Notice 2011-1, pending the publication of further guidance, the agencies do not intend to enforce sanctions for non-compliance with the new non-discrimination rules and will not require insured group health plan sponsors to file IRS Form 8928 with respect to excise taxes resulting from the incorporation of Public Health Services Act (PHS Act) § 2716 into Internal Revenue Code (Code) § 9815. Its unclear how this guidance will impact possible participant or beneficiary suits to enforce the new rules under Section 512 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

New Insured Plan Non-Discrimination Rules

As part of the Affordable Care Act health care reforms, Congress amended the PHS, Code and ERISA to require insured non-grandfathered group health plans to satisfy non-discrimination rules like those applicable to self-insured group health plans under Code § 105(h). Unlike the taxation of highly compensated participants that generally results from a discriminatory self-insured group health plan, however, the Affordable Care Act provides for potentially draconian sanctions against an insured group health plan or its sponsor when an insured group health plan violates these non-discrimination requirements.

The Affordable Care Act generally provides that if a non-grandfathered insured employer-sponsored group health plan that discriminates in favor of highly compensated employees in a manner that would violate the non-discrimination requirements of Code § 105(h)(2) in any post-September 22, 2010 plan year, the plan or plan sponsor may face significant excise taxes, civil money penalties, and lawsuits to compel it to provide nondiscriminatory benefits to non-highly compensated participants equivalent to the discriminatory benefits provided to highly compensated participants.

According to Notice 2011-1, the agencies determined from initial public comments that without regulations or other administrative guidance under PSA § 2716, plan sponsors are uncertain how to apply the nondiscrimination provisions. Accordingly, Notice 2011-1 indicates that the agencies decided that their enforcement of the new insured group health plan nondiscrimination rules should be delayed until the publication of that guidance. Notice 2011-1 invites concerned plan sponsors and others to submit comments on a broad range of concerns relating to this guidance. According to Notice 2011-1, the deadline for submission of this input is March 11, 2011.

Implications of Relief For Insured Group Health Plans

While Notice 2011-1 indicates that HHS and DOL also plan to hold off enforcement of the new non-discrimination rules, it is unclear what effect, if any, the relief announced in the Notice will have on the ability of participants and beneficiaries to enforce the requirements by filing civil lawsuits under ERISA. Under ERISA § 512, participants and beneficiaries generally have the ability to sue plans and their fiduciaries for equitable relief to enforce violations of ERISA. As amended by the Affordable Care Act, the new non-discrimination requirements for insured group health plans of ERISA § 715(a)(1) are effective for all post-September 22, 2010 plan years. Accordingly, while insured group health plans and their sponsors still potentially risk participant or beneficiary law suits if their program is discriminatory.

While awaiting further guidance from the agencies, insured and self-insured group health plans, their sponsors and fiduciaries should document their attempt to prudently evaluate and determine their responsibilities under the non-discrimination rules, and other federal laws. In addition, plans, their fiduciaries, sponsors and service providers should begin implementing and administering the data collection and other processes that they are likely to need to test their programs for discrimination and perform other requirements. To encourage the agencies to adopt regulations that are sensitive to the challenges of plan sponsors and plans in meeting these requirements, plan sponsors, fiduciaries, insurers and service providers also should provide input to the agencies and Congressional health care policy leaders about these concerns.

For More Information Or Assistance

If you need assistance submitting comments to the agencies, evaluating or updating your plans in response to these new rules or auditing or assessing, updating or defending other labor and employment, employee benefit or compensation practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, and past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer works, publishes and speaks extensively on wage and hour, worker classification and other human resources and workforce, employee benefits, compensation, internal controls and related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication see here.

Comments Off on IRS, HHS & DOL To Delay Enforcement of New Insured Group Health Plan Non-Discrimination Rules Pending Guidance; Seek Public Input on Rules | 105(h), Discrimination, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Tax | Tagged: 105(h)(2), Affordable Care Act, Group Health plans, Health Care Reform, Health Insurance, Health Plans, medical insurance, Tax | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

DOL Announces Changes To H-2B Prevailing Wage Calculation Rules

January 20, 2011

The methodology used to calculates the prevailing wages the Labor Department requires employer to pay H-2B workers and United States (U.S.) workers recruited in connection with a temporary labor certification for use in petitioning the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to employ a nonimmigrant worker in H-2B status will change effective January 1, 2012. Comments on the Final Regulation published here (Final Regulations) in the January 19, 2011 Federal Register are due March 21, 2011. Employers using or contemplating using H-2B workers should take into account these new rules when budgeting and projecting workforce costs and assessing the cost-effectiveness and compliance requirements associated with these contemplated relationships.

To comply with its H-2B program obligations, an employer must pay H-2B workers hired in connection with an H-2B application a wage that will not adversely affect the wages of U.S. workers similarly employed. The Labor Department’s H-2B procedures have always provided that adverse effect is prevented by requiring H-2B employers to offer and pay at least the prevailing wage to the H-2B workers and those U.S. workers recruited in connection with the job opportunity.

The Final Regulations are issued largely in response to an August 30, 2010 court order that set aside portions of regulations governing the H-2B temporary worker program issued on December 19, 2009 at 73 Fed. Reg. 78020 (“2008 Final Rule”). On August 30, 2010, a Federal Court found that the Labor Department violated the Administrative Procedures Act when it issued the 2008 Final Regulations. See Comit[eacute] de Apoyo a los Trabajadores Agricolas (CATA) v. Solis, Civil No. 2:09-cv- 240-LP, 2010 WL 3431761 (E.D. Pa.). In that decision, the Federal District Court ordered the Labor Department to “promulgate new rules concerning the calculation of the prevailing wage rate in the H-2B program that are in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act. The Final Regulation is issued in response to this order.

Under the Final Regulation, Labor Regulation § 655.10 generally will provide that for temporary labor certification purposes, the prevailing wage is the highest of the following:

The wage rate set forth in the CBA, if the job opportunity is covered by a CBA that was negotiated at arms’ length between the union and the employer;
The wage rate established under the DBA or SCA for the occupation in the area of intended employment if the job opportunity is in an occupation for which such a wage rate has been determined; or
The arithmetic mean of the wages of workers similarly employed in the occupation in the area of intended employment as determined by the OES. This computation will be based on the arithmetic mean wage of all workers in the occupation.

The NPC now only will consider employer provided wage surveys for purposes of determining the prevailing wage in a very limited number of circumstances where the employer is permitted to and makes a request for a prevailing wage determination in accordance with the Final Regulations.

For assistance with assessing or defending your current worker classification, wage and hour or other health care and human resources policies and controls, please contact Cynthia Marcotte Stamer at cstamer@solutionslawyer.net, 972-419-7188.

For Help With Investigations, Policy Updates Or Other Needs

If you need assistance reviewing your prevailing wage determinations under these, government contracts or other laws, or evaluating, managing or defending your organization’s existing other labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, compliance or other practices, please contact the author of this update, attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or at (469)767-8872 .

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer frequently has worked, extensively on these and other workforce and performance related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on DOL Announces Changes To H-2B Prevailing Wage Calculation Rules | E-Verify, Employers, Government Contractors, Human Resources, I-9, Immigration, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Nonresident aliens | Tagged: Employer, Employment, H-2B Visa, I-9, Immigration, International, Prevailing Wage, Visa | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

$1 Million + FLSA Overtime Settlement Shows Employers Should Tighten On-Call, Other Wage & Hour Practices

January 20, 2011

CALNET Inc. and two subcontractors providing language, intelligence and information technology services to the U.S. Army at Ft. Irwin, California have paid a combined total of $1,060,554 in back wages to settle claims they violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to properly pay for on-call time, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (DOL) announced January 19, 2011. Highlighting the growing exposure employers generally face from the heightened Labor Department emphasis on overtime and other wage and hour law enforcement, .the settlement also demonstrates the significant risks that employers face from mischaracterizing or failing to properly pay for on-call, standby or other similar times required of non-exempt employees. Employers and others providing workforce staffing should review and tighten existing worker classification, timekeeping and classification, recordkeeping and other practices and take other steps to strengthen the defensibility of their practices.

CALNET FLSA Backpay Settlement

According to its January 19, 2011 settlement announcement, the DOL, a Wage and Hour Division investigation determined that prime contractor CALNET Inc. of Reston, Va., and subcontractors Acclaim Technical Services Inc. of Huntington Beach, Calif., and McNeil Technologies of Springfield, Va., violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FSLA) by not properly compensating workers for all on-call time, resulting in overtime violations. The employers also were found to be in violation of FLSA recordkeeping requirements for failing to maintain proper records of the number of hours worked by employees and the compensation they were paid.

The three companies have paid their employees a total of $1,060,554 in back wages owed for the period between October 2008 and October 2010. CALNET paid $676,698 to 597 employees. Acclaim Technical Services paid $234,311 to 177 employees. McNeil Technologies paid $149,545 to 91 employees.

Overtime & Other Wage & Hour Enforcement Risks Rising

Government contractors and other employers increasingly risk triggering significant liability by failing to properly characterize, track and pay for on-call and other compensable time in violation of the FSLA or other laws.

The FLSA requires that covered employees be paid at least the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour for all hours worked, plus time and one-half their regular rates of pay, including commissions, bonuses and incentive pay, for hours worked beyond 40 per week. Employees must also maintain accurate time and payroll records. Improper classification of on-call or other hours that the FLSA requires an employer to treat as compensable exposes the employer to potential minimum wage, overtime and recordkeeping violations.

Under the FLSA, on-call time becomes compensable when the on-call conditions are so restrictive or the calls to duty so frequent that the employee cannot effectively use on-call time for personal purposes under the facts and circumstances.

Unfortunately, many employers often are overly optimistic or otherwise fail to properly understand and apply FLSA rules for characterizing on-call or other time, classifying workers as exempt versus non-exempt or making other key determinations.

Employers wearing rose tinted glasses when making wage and hour worker classification or compensable time determinations tend to overlook the significance of the burden of proof they can expect to bear should their classification be challenged. Under the FSLA and applicable state wage and hour laws, employers generally bear the burden of proving that they have properly paid their employees in accordance with the FLSA. Additionally, the FLSA and most applicable state wage and hour laws typically mandate that employers maintain records of the hours worked by employees by non-exempt employees, documentation of the employer’s proper payment of its non-exempt employees in accordance with the minimum wage and overtime mandates of the FLSA, and certain other records. Since the burden of proof of compliance generally rests upon the employer, employers should take steps to ensure their ability to demonstrate that they have properly paid non-exempt employees in accordance with applicable FLSA and state wage and hour mandates and that employees not paid in accordance with these mandates qualify as exempt from coverage under the FLSA.

These mistakes can be very costly. Employers that fail to properly pay employees under Federal and state wage and hour regulations face substantial risk. In addition to liability for back pay awards, violation of wage and hour mandates carries substantial civil – and in the case of willful violations, even criminal- liability exposure. Civil awards commonly include back pay, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.

The potential that noncompliant employers will incur these liabilities has risen significantly in recent years. Under the Obama Administration, Labor Department officials have made it a priority to enforce overtime, recordkeeping, worker classification and other wage and hour law requirements. While all employers face heightened prosecution risks, federal officials specifically are targeting government contractors, health care, technology and certain other industry employers for special scrutiny. Meanwhile, private enforcement of these requirements by also has soared following the highly-publicized implementation of updated FLSA regulations regarding the classification of workers during the last Bush Administration. See Minimum Wage, Overtime Risks Highlighted By Labor Department Strike Force Targeting Residential Care & Group Homes; Review & Strengthen Defensibility of Existing Worker Classification Practices In Light of Rising Congressional & Regulatory Scrutiny; 250 New Investigators, Renewed DOL Enforcement Emphasis Signal Rising Wage & Hour Risks For Employers; Quest Diagnostics, Inc. To Pay $688,000 In Overtime Backpay.

Employers Should Strengthen Practices For Defensibility

As a consequence, most employers should review and document the defensibility of their existing practices for classifying and compensating workers under existing Federal and state wage and hour laws and take appropriate steps to minimize their potential liability under applicable wages and hour laws. To minimize exposure under the FLSA, employers should review and document the defensibility of their existing practices for classifying and compensating workers under existing Federal and state wage and hour laws and take appropriate steps to minimize their potential liability under applicable wages and hour laws. Steps advisable as part of this process include, but are not necessarily limited to:

Audit of each position current classified as exempt to assess its continued sustainability and to develop documentation justifying that characterization;
Audit characterization of workers obtained from staffing, employee leasing, independent contractor and other arrangements and implement contractual and other oversight arrangements to minimize risks that these relationships could create if workers are recharacterized as employed by the employer receiving these services;
Review the characterization of on-call and other time demands placed on employees to confirm that all compensable time is properly identified, tracked, documented, compensated and reported;
Review of existing practices for tracking compensable hours and paying non-exempt employees for compliance with applicable regulations and to identify opportunities to minimize costs and liabilities arising out of the regulatory mandates;
If the audit raises questions about the appropriateness of the classification of an employee as exempt, self-initiation of appropriate corrective action after consultation with qualified legal counsel;
Review of existing documentation and recordkeeping practices for hourly employees;
Exploration of available options and alternatives for calculating required wage payments to non-exempt employees; and
Reengineering of work rules and other practices to minimize costs and liabilities as appropriate in light of the regulations.

Because of the potentially significant liability exposure, employers generally will want to consult with qualified legal counsel prior to the commencement of their assessment and to conduct the assessment within the scope of attorney-client privilege to minimize risks that might arise out of communications made in the course of conducting this sensitive investigation.

For Help With Investigations, Policy Updates Or Other Needs

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer frequently has worked, extensively on these and other workforce and performance related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on $1 Million + FLSA Overtime Settlement Shows Employers Should Tighten On-Call, Other Wage & Hour Practices | Employers, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Risk Management, Wage & Hour | Tagged: Backpay, Employer, Employment, employment law, Fair Labor Standards Act, FSLA, IT, Labor Department, Minimum Wage, Technology, wage & hour, wage and hour, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Medical Resident Stipend Ruling Shows Health Care, Other Employers Should Review Worker Classification, Payroll & Other Practices

January 12, 2011

Stipends paid to medical residents to provide on patient care and other medical services for 40 or more hours per week as part of an accredited graduate medical education program are wages paid to employees for Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) payroll taxes purposes and do not qualify as exempt from FICA tax or withholding as student stipends according to January 11, 201 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Mayo Foundation v. U.S. The decision is the latest reminder to health care providers and others of the need to critically review and update as necessary their organizations existing worker and wage characterization in light of evolving interpretations and the growing success of regulators and private plaintiffs in challenging these classifications.

In Mayo Foundation, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the plea of Mayo Foundation For Medical Education And Research (Mayo) that it overrule an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Regulation that provides that medical students or others providing full-time services as part of their course of instruction do not qualify as “students” for purposes of the “student” exemption of Code § 3121(b)(10) regardless of whether “the services performed . . . may have an educational, instructional, or training aspect.” See Treas. Reg.§31.3121(b)(10)–2(d)(3)(iii). Mayo Foundation, the Supreme Court ruled against Mayo Foundation. It ruled the IRS’ regulation construing Code § 3121(b)(1) as inapplicable to medical students or other workers providing full-time services as part of a residency or other educational program should stand as Congress has not directly spoken to foreclose that interpretation and because the Treasury Department’s rule is a reasonable construction of what Congress has said.

Beyond its specific holding, the Mayo Foundation decision also serves as another reminder that health industry and other employers should not take the defensibility of their worker classification and associated income and payroll tax, employee benefit, employment and other practices for granted.

Recent developments send a clear message that health industry and other employers must remain constantly diligent about confirming and documenting the defensibility of their worker classifications and other associated practices in light of evolving rules and standards, enforcement, the growing frequency and success of regulators and private plaintiff challenges, and changing workforce practices. See e.g. Review of Worker Classification Needed As Classification Scrutiny Rises;Minimum Wage, Overtime Risks Highlighted By Labor Department Strike Force Targeting Residential Care & Group Homes; Review & Strengthen Defensibility of Existing Worker Classification Practices In Light of Rising Congressional & Regulatory Scrutiny; 250 New Investigators, Renewed DOL Enforcement Emphasis Signal Rising Wage & Hour Risks For Employers; Quest Diagnostics, Inc. To Pay $688,000 In Overtime Backpay.

The IRS, Department of Labor and other federal and state regulators are stepping up scrutiny of and enforcement of worker classifications and claims of exemption from applicable employment, tax and other requirements. In light of these and other developments, health industry and other employers should take reasonable steps to guard against these and other growing risks of worker misclassification and associated non-compliance. To minimize their potential exposure, health industry and other employers should consult with qualified legal counsel for advice within the scope of attorney-client privilege concerning the need to audit or otherwise act to strengthen the defensibility of their existing worker classification, employee benefit, fringe benefit, employment, wage and hour, and other workforce policies to mitigate exposures to potential IRS, Labor Department or other risks of worker misclassification or the handling of associated payroll, employment or other responsibilities.

For Help With Investigations, Policy Updates Or Other Needs

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, management attorney and consultant Ms. Stamer is nationally and internationally recognized for more than 23 years of work helping employers; employee benefit plans and their sponsors, administrators, fiduciaries; employee leasing, recruiting, staffing and other professional employment organizations; and others design, administer and defend innovative workforce, compensation, employee benefit and management policies and practices. The Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Committee, a Council Representative on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Government Affairs Committee Legislative Chair for the Dallas Human Resources Management Association, past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, and the Managing Editor of Solutions Law Press HR & Benefits Update and other Solutions Law Press Publications, Ms. Stamer recently was a featured panelist on the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Teleconference on “Worker Classification & Alternative Workforce: Employee Plans & Employment Tax Challenges” and has worked, published and spoken extensively on worker classification and other related matters. She also is recognized for her publications, industry leadership, workshops and presentations on these and other human resources concerns and regularly speaks and conducts training on these matters. Her insights on these and other matters appear in the Bureau of National Affairs, Spencer Publications, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other national and local publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

About Solutions Law Press

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on Medical Resident Stipend Ruling Shows Health Care, Other Employers Should Review Worker Classification, Payroll & Other Practices | Employers, Employment Tax, ERISA, Human Resources, Tax | Tagged: Academic Medicine, Doctor, Employer, FICA, Health Care, Human Resources, Medical Resident, Payroll, Physician, stipend, students, Wages, Worker Classification | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Holiday Season Celebration Reminder To Manage Intoxication Risks

December 29, 2010

With New Years Eve celebrations approaching and the Holiday Season wrapping up, businesses should take some common sense steps to minimize the risk of waking up in 2011 with a liability hangover. Participation of employees and clients in company sponsored and other social celebrations and activities can promote big rewards in relationship development and morale if properly managed. However, traditional holiday toasts and the wide-spread consumption of other intoxicating substances commonly included at New Years Eve and other parties and social activities create heightened risks for business whether or not the event is company-sponsored. However these risks continue and require management all year. Read about other common Holiday Season-related celebration risks and management tips here.

Most businesses recognize that accidents caused by alcohol or other intoxication at work or work-related functions can create substantial liability exposures both to workers and any third parties injured by a drunken employee. In many states, businesses also may face “dram shop” or other claims if employees, family members or other guests attending company sponsored functions injure others after over-imbibing. Risks are heightened when an employee consuming alcohol at a company or client-related social function drives a company or his own automobile when under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Businesses concerned with these liability exposures should take steps to manage the potential risks that commonly arise when employees, clients or other guests consume alcohol at company sponsored events or while attending other business associated festivities.

Whether concerned with intoxication in the workplace, at work-related events or at off-duty social activities, the obvious starting point is to review existing drug and alcohol and related background investigation, drug and alcohol testing, privacy, off-duty conduct and related policies and procedures. In addition to ensuring these policies are appropriately tailored to meet existing legal requirements, businesses also should consider whether these policies should be revised to reach business-relevant off-duty conduct and locations.

To minimize these risks at company-sponsored events, many companies elect not to serve or limit the alcohol served to guests at company sponsored events. To support the effectiveness of these efforts, many businesses also choose to prohibit or restrict the consumption of guest provided alcohol at company events.

Businesses that elect to serve alcohol at company functions or anticipate that employees will attend other business functions where alcohol will be served need to consider the potential liability risks that may result if the alcohol impaired judgment of an employee or other guest causes him to injure himself or someone else. The relaxation of judgment that often results from the consumption of alcohol or other intoxicants also heightens sexual harassment and other discrimination risks. Any company that expects that an employee might consume alcohol at a company sponsored or other business associated event should communicate clearly its expectation that employees not over-imbibe and abstain from driving under the influence. Where off-duty socialization among employees is anticipated in light of company culture, similar reminders concerning off-duty conduct having implications on company policy or reputation also often are in order. Many businesses also find it beneficial to redistribute information about employee assistance programs (EAPs) along with this information. You can find other tips for planning workplace parties to minimize alcohol related risks on the U.S. Department of Labor’s website here.

When addressing business related alcohol consumption, many businesses will want to consider not only alcohol consumption at business related events as well as potential costs that may arise from off-duty excess alcohol consumption. Whether resulting from on or off duty consumption, businesses are likely to incur significant health and disability related benefit costs if an employee is injured in an alcohol-related accident. Furthermore, even when no injury results, productivity losses attributable to excess alcohol consumption, whether on or off duty, can prove expensive to business. Accordingly, virtually all businesses can benefit from encouraging employees to be responsible when consuming alcohol in both business and non-business functions.

Businesses also may want to review their existing health and other benefit programs, liability insurance coverage and employment policies to determine to ensure that they adequately protect and promote the company’s risk management objectives. Many health and disability plans incorporate special provisions affecting injuries arising from inappropriate alcohol use as well as mental health and alcohol and drug treatment programs. Similarly, many businesses increasingly qualify for special discounts on automobile and general liability policies based upon representations that the business has in effect certain alcohol and drug use policies. Businesses can experience unfortunate surprises if they don’t anticipate the implications of these provisions on their health benefit programs or liability insurance coverage. Reviewing these policies now to become familiar with any of these requirements and conditions also can be invaluable in helping a business to respond effectively if an employee or guest is injured in an alcohol-related accident during the Holiday Season.

Businesses also should consider reviewing their policy on the duty of an employee or contractor to notify the company of accidents, moving violations and driving while intoxicated or other criminal charges resulting from the consumption of drugs or alcohol. Requiring notification of traffic related charges and accidents can help management prepare to defend against potential liability exposures that may arise from an accident or other incident. Where a worker suffers an injury, notification may be essential to enable the business to provide required notification to worker’s compensation carriers and regulators, conduct timely investigations, and meet other critical responsibilities. In addition, driving under the influence or other criminal charges may impact company liability insurance risks, signal possible vicarious liability or other suits. To help facilitate the ability to adequately investigate these concerns, businesses also should review and update privacy, background check and other investigations and other related policies to ensure that they are legally compliant and are sufficiently broad to reach to relevant off-duty or off-site conduct.

Businesses also should make advance arrangements to minimize foreseeable safety risks from intoxication at social or other events. When in doubt, company policy and practice should be to regulate consumption to safe levels, to require the arrangement of safe alternative transportation of any employee or guest at risk of intoxication, and to provide other safeguards to minimize the risk of injury to workers or others. The cost of arranging a taxi ride home quickly pales when compared to the significant legal costs that can result if an accident results.

Businesses faced with suspicions or allegations of intoxication or other misconduct also should act promptly to investigate any concerns and if necessary, take appropriate corrective action. Delay in investigation can undermine the reliability and effectiveness of investigation efforts. Delay also can increase the liability exposure of a business presented with a valid complaint and complicate the ability to defend charges that may arise against the business. Additionally, delay also increases the likelihood that a complaining party will seek the assistance of governmental officials, plaintiff’s lawyers or others outside the corporation in the redress of his concern.

If a report of an accident, or other liability related event arises, remember to consider as part of your response whether you need to report the event to any insurers or agencies. Injuries occurring at company related functions often qualify as occupational injuries subject to worker’s compensation and occupational safety laws. Likewise, automobile, employment practices liability, and general liability policies often require covered parties to notify the carrier promptly upon receipt of notice of an event or claim that may give rise to coverage, even though the carrier at that time may not be obligated to tender a defense or coverage at that time.

Finally, businesses should keep in mind that the risks highlighted by Holiday Season celebrations continue to exist whenever employees, contractors or others consume alcohol or other intoxicants at social or other events throughout the year. Sporting events, marketing dinners and happy hours and other social gatherings that commonly occur during the year commonly create similar risks while engendering less attention. Accordingly, businesses should remind employees periodically throughout the year about substance abuse, intoxication and other similar policies throughout the year.

For Help With Investigations, Policy Updates Or Other Needs

If your organization needs assistance investigating a reported concern, reviewing and updating its policies or assessing, managing or defending these or other labor and employment, compensation or benefit practices, or needs other assistance auditing, updating or defending its human resources, corporate ethics, and compliance practices, or responding to employment related or other charges or suits, please contact management attorney and consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer at cstamer@solutionslawyer.net, (468) 767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and Chair of the American Bar Association RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and a nationally recognized author and speaker, Ms. Stamer helps business manage people, operations and risk. She is experienced with advising and assisting employers with these and other labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, risk management and internal controls matters. Her experience includes helping management both manage performance and manage legal risk and compliance. While helping businesses define and manage the conduct and performance of their employees, contractors and vendors, she also assists employers and others about compliance with federal and state equal employment opportunity, compensation, health and other employee benefit, workplace safety, and other labor and employment laws, advises and defends businesses against labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, fraud and other regulatory compliance and other related audits, investigations and litigation, charges, audits, claims and investigations by the IRS, Department of Labor, Department of Justice, SEC, Federal Trade Commission, HUD, HHS, DOD, Departments of Insurance, and other federal and state regulators. She has counseled and represented businesses and their management on workforce and other internal controls and risk management matters for more than 23 years. Ms. Stamer also speaks and writes extensively on these and other related matters. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Helpful Resources & Information

If you found this article of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other Breaking News, articles and other resources available CynthiaStamer.com or Solutions Law Press articles authored by Ms. Stamer including:

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here. If you do not wish to receive these updates in the future, unsubscribe by updating your profile here.

About Solutions Law Press

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on Holiday Season Celebration Reminder To Manage Intoxication Risks | Drug & Alcohol, Employers | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Avoiding Post-Holiday Celebration Sexual Harassment & Discrimination Liability

December 29, 2010

With New Years Eve celebrations approaching and the Holiday Season wrapping up, businesses should take some common sense steps to decrease the risk of waking up in 2011 with a liability hangover. Participation of employees and clients in company sponsored and other social celebrations and activities can promote big rewards in relationship development and morale if properly managed. However, the music, food, game playing, toasting with alcohol and other aspects of the celebratory atmosphere at New Years Eve and other parties and social activities heighten the risk that certain employees or other business associates will engage in, or be subject to, risky or other inappropriate behavior that can create liability exposures or other business concerns for your business whether or not company sponsored. Read about other common Holiday Season-related celebration risks and management tips here.

Celebrations Raise Foreseeable Risks

Whether or not company-sponsored, holiday parties and other celebrations where employees celebrate with other employees or clients tend to fuel bad behavior by inviting fraternization, lowering inhibitions and obscuring the line between appropriate and inappropriate social and business behavior. The relaxation of the environment heightens the risk that certain employees or clients will make unwelcome sexual advances, make sexually suggestive or other inappropriate statements, or engage in other actions that expose the business to sexual harassment or other employment discrimination liability. Businesses also should use care to manage other discrimination exposures in the planning of holiday festivities, gift exchanges, and other activities. Businesses also should be vigilant in watching for signs of inappropriate patterns of discrimination in the selection of employees invited to participate in company-connected social events as well as off-duty holiday gatherings sponsored by managers and supervisors. In addition, businesses also should critically review their own plans for possible insensitivity. Business connected holiday parties, communications, gifts and other festivities should be designed to show appropriate sensitivity to religious and other cultural diversity.

To minimize these exposures, businesses should take steps to communicate and reinforce company policies and expectations about sexual harassment, discrimination, fraternization and other conduct viewed as inappropriate by the company and communicating reminders about these policies to employees and business associates during the Holiday Season.

Timely Investigation & Notification

Businesses faced with allegations of discrimination, sexual harassment or other misconduct also should act promptly to investigate any concerns and if necessary, take timely corrective action. Delay in investigation or redress of discrimination or other improprieties can increase the liability exposure of a business presented with a valid complaint and complicate the ability to defend charges that may arise against the business. Additionally, delay also increases the likelihood that a complaining party will contact governmental officials, plaintiff’s lawyers or others outside the corporation in the redress of his concern.

If a report of an accident, act of discrimination or sexual harassment or other liability related event arises, remember to consider as part of your response whether you need to report the event to any insurers or agencies. Injuries occurring at company related functions often qualify as occupational injuries subject to worker’s compensation and occupational safety laws. Likewise, automobile, employment practices liability, and general liability policies often require covered parties to tell the carrier promptly upon receipt of notice of an event or claim that may give rise to coverage, even though the carrier may not be obligated to tender a defense or coverage at that time.

For Help With Investigations, Policy Updates Or Other Needs

If your organization needs help investigating a reported concern, reviewing and updating its policies or assessing, managing or defending these or other labor and employment, compensation or benefit practices, or needs other assistance auditing, updating or defending its human resources, corporate ethics, and compliance practices, or responding to employment related or other charges or suits, please contact management attorney and consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer at cstamer@solutionslawyer.net, (468) 767-8872.

Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and Chair of the American Bar Association RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group and a nationally recognized author and speaker, Ms. Stamer helps business manage people, operations and risk. She is experienced with advising and assisting employers with these and other labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, risk management and internal controls matters. Her experience includes helping management both manage performance and manage legal risk and compliance. While helping businesses define and manage the conduct and performance of their employees, contractors and vendors, she also assists employers and others about compliance with federal and state equal employment opportunity, compensation, health and other employee benefit, workplace safety, and other labor and employment laws, advises and defends businesses against labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, fraud and other regulatory compliance and other related audits, investigations and litigation, charges, audits, claims and investigations by the IRS, Department of Labor, Department of Justice, SEC, Federal Trade Commission, HUD, HHS, DOD, Departments of Insurance, and other federal and state regulators. She has counseled and represented businesses and their management on workforce and other internal controls and risk management matters for more than 23 years. Ms. Stamer also speaks and writes extensively on these and other related matters. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to get access to other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Helpful Resources & Information

About Solutions Law Press

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here. If you do not wish to receive these updates in the future, unsubscribe by updating your profile here.

Comments Off on Avoiding Post-Holiday Celebration Sexual Harassment & Discrimination Liability | ADA, Affirmative Action, Corporate Compliance, Disability Plans, Discrimination, EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employers, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Uncategorized | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Small Employers Should Weigh If Health Premium Tax Credit Justifies Changing Employee Leasing Arrangements

December 5, 2010

Accessing more affordable health care coverage often is a major driver behind the decision of many small businesses to enter into employee leasing arrangements. Many of these small businesses should consider if changing existing employee leasing practices makes sense to avoid unknowingly forfeiting or otherwise qualify to claim valuable health insurance premium tax credits under new Internal Revenue Code (Code) § 45R.

Enacted as part of the sweeping health care reforms included in the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act), Code § 45R generally offers a small employer that meets Code § 45R’s conditions (qualifying employer) to claim a tax credit for premiums that it pays for health insurance coverage to employees if:

The employer had fewer than 25 full-time equivalent employees (“FTEs”) for the tax year;
The average annual wages of its employees for the year must be less than $50,000 per FTE; and
The employer pays premiums to provide employee health care coverage under a “qualifying arrangement.”

For purposes of Code § 45R, “qualifying arrangement” is an arrangement under which an qualifying employer pays premiums for each employee enrolled in health insurance coverage offered by the employer in an amount equal to a uniform percentage (not less than 50 percent) of the premium cost of the coverage.

An analysis of an advance copy of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Notice 2010-82, scheduled for official publication on December 20, 2010, reveals that a small business that leases rather than employs directly workers gives up the ability to claim a Code § 45R tax credit for amounts paid toward health insurance premiums charged for leased employees when the leasing organization employs the worker even though the business could have claimed those amounts if it employed the worker and paid the premiums directly.

According to Notice 2010-82, leased employees as defined in Code § 414(n) are counted in computing FTEs and average annual wages of businesses leasing their services (Service Recipient). This means that that the use of leased employees will disqualify the business for the Code § 45R tax credit if its total workforce exceeds 25 FTEs when leased employees are taken into account.

Although Service Recipients must count these leased employees when calculating FTEs, and compensation for purposes of determining if the business is a qualified employer, the IRS says Code § 45R does not allow a Service Recipient to claim the Code §45R credit for health insurance premiums paid by or through a leasing organization for coverage of leased employees. Since leasing organizations usually employ more than 25 FTEs, this means that neither business can claim any credit.

While the IRS won’t let Service Recipients claim credit for health premiums paid by a leasing company, Notice 2010-82 suggests that an otherwise qualifying small business can claim the tax credit for health premiums accessed through a leasing organization or other arrangement when the Service Recipient, and not the leasing organization, employs the workers and pays health premiums for coverage for the worker. Assuming a business otherwise is a qualifying employer, Notice 2010-82 suggests that the business may claim the tax credit for premiums it pays to purchases qualifying health insurance for individuals employed as the common law employee of the business directly to a licensed insurer or to obtain insured coverage from a multiemployer plan that otherwise meets the requirements of Code § 45R.

As with any decision about the use of leased employees, the feasibility and potential costs and benefits of structuring or restructuring the relationship with a worker who otherwise would be leased through a staffing company to claim the Code § 45R tax credit needs to be carefully evaluated before a business acts. Businesses should carefully evaluate both the change in insurance costs, if any, and how the structuring of the relationship will affect other costs and liabilities. Changing the relationship with a worker from employee to leased employee or visa versa can impact unemployment, employee benefit, employment liability, contractual, tort and other costs, obligations and other responsibilities. In some instances, increased health insurance or other costs and liabilities may outweigh the tax benefits that a small business otherwise could get by qualifying for the Code § 45R tax credit. Where the existing or contemplated relationship between business and the leasing organization already creates a co-employment relationship for many legal or financial purposes, however, restructuring the relationship to allow the business to directly employ workers but continue to use the payroll services of and access health coverage and other benefits for the worker under multiple employer benefit plans sponsored by the leasing organization may prove a viable and attractive option. Moreover, as many businesses misunderstand legal risks and benefits of their employee leasing and other contingent workforce relationships, businesses should consult with competent legal counsel within the scope of attorney-client privilege to ensure that they have an accurate understanding of the legal implications of their existing employee leasing arrangements when evaluating these potential costs and benefits to avoid making misinformed decisions.

Employers Urged To Seek Advice To Determine Tax Eligibility, Manage Legal Risks

Given the high cost of health insurance coverage, the Code § 45R credit may offers valuable savings for qualifying small employer. Before providing coverage or estimating tax liabilities in reliance on the expectation of claiming the credit, however, an employer interested in claiming the credit should seek guidance from qualified tax counsel familiar with the Code § 45R rules and guidance as well as other applicable federal mandates impacting employer provided coverage. The clarifications set forth in Notice 2010-82 illustrate that the rules for determining if an employer qualifies to claim a tax credit for health insurance premiums paid for employees under Code § 45R are anything but simple. In addition to meeting these conditions, employers offering or contributing to health coverage for employees can face a broad range of other legal and financial risk if they fail to properly understand and manage the organizational and personal responsibilities that can arise under applicable federal laws. Where it is contemplated that health coverage will be accessed or provided through an employee leasing, staffing or multiple employee plan arrangement, other additional considerations also will apply. Accordingly, small and other businesses that provide health coverage to employees or paying to lease the services of workers from a leasing organization that provides health coverage should review their options with experienced legal counsel within the scope of attorney-client privilege.

For More Information Or Assistance

You can learn more about these and other federal health plan mandates by listening to the recording of the 2010 Health Plan Update Briefing or reviewing other resources available here. If you need help with these or other employee benefit, compensation or employment regulations or other related matters please contact Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or (469)767-8872.

Management attorney and consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer has more than 23 years experience advising and representing employers, employee benefit plans, their sponsors, fiduciaries, plan administrators, service providers, consultants, vendors, outsourcers, insurers, financial services providers, governments and others about health and other employee benefit, compensation, employment, insurance and financial services, and a wide range of other performance, legal and operational risk management practices and concerns. Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefit & Other Compensation Group, a Council Member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, and Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, Ms. Stamer is nationally recognized for her work helping clients to design, document, administer and defend health and other employee benefit plans and other related financial and insurance products and to manage risks associated with the offering and administration of these arrangements. Her experience includes extensive work advising and representing employers, plans, plan fiduciaries, trustees, investors, and others about managing and resolving risks relating to fiduciary, contracting and other risks and responsibilities involved in the design, selection and administration of investments for employee benefit plans, and other fiduciary responsibility matters. She also has extensive experience assisting these and other clients to investigate and determine the appropriateness of retirement plan investment selections to comply with ERISA and other fiduciary responsibility rules, as well as to defend challenges to investment offerings or decisions against complaints or actions brought by private plaintiffs, the Labor Department, state and federal securities regulators, insurers and others. A prolific author and popular speaker, Ms. Stamer also publishes, conducts client and other training, speaks and consults extensively on employee benefit, compensation and human resources practices and concerns for the ABA, World At Work, SHRM, American Health Lawyers Association, Institute of Internal Auditors, Society for Professional Benefits Administrators, HCCA, Southwest Benefits Association and many other organizations. Her insights on these and related topics have appeared in Atlantic Information Service, Bureau of National Affairs, World At Work, The Wall Street Journal, Business Insurance, Managed Healthcare, Health Leaders, various ABA publications and a many other national and local publications. To learn more about Ms. Stamer, her experience, involvements, programs and publications, see here or contact Ms. Stamer.

Other Resources & Developments

If you found this information of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other recent updates by Ms. Stamer about the tax credit on Code §45R or other benefits, compensation or human resources matters including:

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates and notices about upcoming programs and events, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail- by creating or updating your profile at here. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail with “Unsubscribe” in the subject here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on Small Employers Should Weigh If Health Premium Tax Credit Justifies Changing Employee Leasing Arrangements | Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Health Plans, Human Resources, Insurance, Tax, Tax Credit, Tax Qualification | Tagged: 45R, Affordable Care Act, contingent workforce, employee leasing, health costs, Health Plan, health premium, small employer, tax credit | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

2011 Standard Mileage Rates Announced

December 5, 2010

The Internal Revenue Service on December 3, 2010 published the 2011 optional standard mileage rates used to calculate the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, charitable, medical or moving purposes in Revenue Procedure 2010-51 for 2011.

Beginning on Jan. 1, 2011, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (also vans, pickups or panel trucks) will be:

51 cents per mile for business miles driven
19 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes
14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations

A taxpayer may not use the business standard mileage rate for a vehicle after using any depreciation method under the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS) or after claiming a Section 179 deduction for that vehicle. In addition, the business standard mileage rate cannot be used for any vehicle used for hire or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously.

Taxpayers always have the option of calculating the actual costs of using their vehicle rather than using the standard mileage rates.

Revenue Procedure 2010-51 contains additional details regarding the standard mileage rates.

For More Information Or Assistance

If you need help updating your organization’s mileage reimbursement policy or other employee benefit, compensation or employment regulations or other related matters please contact Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or (469)767-8872.

About Ms. Stamer

Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefit & Other Compensation Group, a Council Member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, management attorney and consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer has more than 23 years experience advising and representing employers, health and other employee benefit plans, their sponsors, fiduciaries and plan administrators, consultants, vendors, outsourcers, insurers, governments and others about employment, employee benefit, compensation, and a wide range of other performance, legal and operational risk management practices and concerns. As a part of this work, Ms. Stamer has worked extensively with clients to manage risks and defend practices under a wide range of laws and circumstances. Her experience includes extensive work advising and representing employers, plans, plan fiduciaries, trustees, investors, and others about managing and resolving risks relating to distressed pension and other employee benefit plans, downsizing and other workforce reengineering and other similar matters. A prolific author and popular speaker, Ms. Stamer also publishes, conducts client and other training, speaks and consults extensively on GINA and other employment and employee benefit risk management practices and concerns for the ABA, World At Work, SHRM, American Health Lawyers Association, Institute of Internal Auditors, Society for Professional Benefits Administrators, HCCA, Southwest Benefits Association and many other organizations. Her insights on these and related topics have appeared in Atlantic Information Service, Bureau of National Affairs, World At Work, The Wall Street Journal, Business Insurance, Managed Healthcare, Health Leaders, various ABA publications and a many other national and local publications. To learn more about Ms. Stamer, her experience, involvements, programs and publications, see here or contact Ms. Stamer.

Other Resources & Developments

If you found this information of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other recent Solutions Law Press updates including:

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates and notices about upcoming programs and events, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail- by creating or updating your profile at here. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail with “Unsubscribe” in the subject here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on 2011 Standard Mileage Rates Announced | Employers | Tagged: Fringe Benefit, Mileage | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Free 12/6/10 ABA RPTE Employee Benefit Groups Study Group Conference Call Examines PBGC Enforcement of Downsizing Liability, Updated Reporting & Other PBGC Developments

November 19, 2010

The American Bar Association RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements Group invites members and other interested legal counsel and benefit practitioners to catch up on the latest Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC) enforcement and regulatory developments by participating in its next regular one hour Study Group Conference Call on Monday, December 6, 2010, at 1 PM Eastern, Noon Central, 11 AM Mountain and 10 AM Pacific. There is no charge to take part in the Study Group Conference call.

During the call the Plan Transactions and Terminations Committee, chaired by Harold Ashner of Keightley & Ashner LLP (former PBGC Assistant General Counsel for Legislation and Regulations) will discuss recent PBGC reporting, monitoring, and enforcement developments, with a focus on PBGC’s pursuit of “downsizing liability” under ERISA Section 4062(e) and on how to deal with this liability effectively.

The dial-in information for the call is:

Phone Number: 866/646-6488

Participant Pass code: 7255887619

If your client or organization maintains a PBGC-covered pension plan, you need to understand the various circumstances that may lead PBGC to pursue a claim for as much as the plan’s full termination-based underfunding — even though the pension plan remains ongoing with no intention to terminate it. These circumstances go well beyond a traditional plant closing, and may include a going-concern asset sale, a stock sale, a transfer of operations to another facility, a temporary suspension of operations, or the discontinuance of one operation with all other operations continuing.

Topics covered will include PBGC reporting requirements, triggers for 4062(e) liability, issues relating to how the liability is calculated, and options for settling the liability. Come prepared with your questions!

To receive handout materials, please RSVP, email Committee Vice Chair Robert Miller (rmiller@calfee.com) to let the Committee know you plan to attend. If you have questions you’d like to have discussed on the call, you can include those questions along with your RSVP. There is no charge for participating.

Membership In RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group Offers Many Benefits

Chaired by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, membership in the Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Arrangements Group offers attorneys and others employee benefit professionals a broad range of opportunities to develop and expand their employee benefit knowledge, provide leadership and input on evolving employee benefit policies and practices, to network and collaborate with fellow practitioners, and to participate in a broad range of other activities designed to advance employee benefit knowledge and professionalism. The Group focuses on all aspects of employee benefit plans and other compensation arrangements, including issues relating to qualified plans, medical and other welfare plans and nonqualified deferred compensation plans, the fiduciary responsibilities of plan trustees, plan administrators and other plan fiduciaries, plan administration, plan transactions, plan terminations, and litigation involving this area of practice. If you would like more information about the Group or getting involved in its activities, please see RPTE Website orcontact its Chair, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, at cstamer@solutionslawyer.net or (469) 767-8872.

About Ms. Stamer

Other Resources & Developments

If you found this information of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other recent Solutions Law Press updates including:

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates and notices about upcoming programs and events, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail- by creating or updating your profile at here. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail with “Unsubscribe” in the subject here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on Free 12/6/10 ABA RPTE Employee Benefit Groups Study Group Conference Call Examines PBGC Enforcement of Downsizing Liability, Updated Reporting & Other PBGC Developments | Employee Benefits, Employers, Retirement Plans | Tagged: Bankruptcy, Distressed Company, Employee Benefits, PBGC, Retirement Plans | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Proposed New Defined Benefit Plan Annual Funding Notice Rule Reminder of Need to Carefully Manage Pension Plan Responsibilities

November 18, 2010

Plan sponsors and administrators of defined benefit plans must carefully monitor and comply with the funding, notification, insurance and other associated requirements of the minimum funding rules imposed under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and the Internal Revenue Code. The Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration today (November 18, 2010) its Pension Protection Act web page with the Annual Funding Notice for Defined Benefit Plans Proposed Rule, available at here, a fact sheet, available here, a model notice for single employer plans, available here, and a model notice for multiemployer plans, available here.

Pension plan funding, reporting and disclosure and termination requirements are complicated in non-distress situations. This complexity and the potential legal exposures of non-compliance can grow exponentially when a pension plan or one or more of its contributing employers becomes distress. Furthermore, special controlled group, lien and successor liability rules incorporated into these funding requirements often create hidden risks for affiliated employers, lenders, potential purchasers and others dealing with these plans or the businesses that sponsor them. As a consequence, all parties dealing with these plans should exercise care to understand and properly manage these exposures to avoid unintentionally triggering liability under these rules.

For More Information Or Assistance

If you need help reviewing or responding to the defined benefit plan funding or other employee benefit, compensation or employment regulations or other related matters please contact Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or (469)767-8872.

About Ms. Stamer

Other Resources & Developments

If you found this information of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other recent Solutions Law Press updates including:

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates and notices about upcoming programs and events, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail- by creating or updating your profile at here. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail with “Unsubscribe” in the subject here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on Proposed New Defined Benefit Plan Annual Funding Notice Rule Reminder of Need to Carefully Manage Pension Plan Responsibilities | Bankruptcy, Corporate Compliance, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Internal Controls, Reporting & Disclosure, Restructuring, Retirement Plans | Tagged: defined benefit plan, disclosure, ERISA, funding, Labor Department, notices, PBGC, pension plans, reporting, underfunded plans | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Affordable Care Act Grandfathered Plan Rules Loosened To Allow Insured Plans Making Some Insurance Changes To Qualify

November 17, 2010

A change to regulations implementing the “grandfathered plan” rules of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act) announced yesterday has opened up the possibility that some insured group health plans changing insurers may continue to qualify as “grandfathered health plans” exempted from certain health care reform mandates. Because policy or insurer changes can create challenges in meeting other conditions required to get grandfathered plan status, however, sponsors and administrators of insured group health plans should prepare to timely comply with all applicable Affordable Care Act mandates unless they have verified their ability to prove that their program meets all requirements to qualify for grandfathered plan status will need to confirm that with or without the insurance-related change.

The Affordable Care Act generally requires that insured and self-insured group health plans and group and individual health insurance policies comply with many new federal mandates beginning with the first day of the plan or contract year that begins after September 22, 2010. If a group health plan or health insurance policy existed on March 23, 2010 and otherwise qualifies as a “grandfathered health plan,” however, it may qualify as exempted or for a delayed effective date from some but not these new mandates. By shaping the mandates applicable to group health plans, the grandfather rules will impact both the cost and the design of affected group health plans.

Original Rule About Insurance Changes

Interim Final Regulations issued by jointly by the Departments of Labor, Health & Human Services and Treasury (Agencies) last June established a series of detailed requirements that a group health plan or health insurance policy must meet to qualify as a grandfathered health plan or policy beyond merely existing on March 23, 2010. As part of these requirements, the Interim Final Regulations identified a number of changes and other events that would disqualify a group health plan or insurance policy as a grandfathered plan.

In the case of insured group health plans, changing insurance policies or insurers was not an allowable change for a plan desiring to qualify as grandfathered. As originally interpreted by the Agencies in the Interim Final Regulations, self-insured group health plans were permitted to change third-party administrators without forfeiting grandfathered health plan status as long as the change did not otherwise change the plan terms or design in a way that would disqualify the plan for grandfathered status. In contrast, however, the Agencies original interpretation stated that entering into a new policy, certificate, or contract of insurance for an insured non-collectively bargained group health plan in and of itself would disqualify the group health plan as a grandfathered health plan. The modified rule published on November 16, 2010 (Amended Rule) eliminates this distinction in response to public comments received since its publication of the original guidance.

Amended Rule About Insurance Changes

Under the Amended Rule, the same standards now will determine the effect of a change in vendor or contract on the grandfathered health plan status of a group health plan whether the plan is insured or self-insured. Accordingly, with respect to changes in group health coverage contracts, the Interim Regulations, as modified by the Amended Rule, now provides where insured or self-insured, a group health plan (including a group health plan that was self-insured on March 23, 2010) or its sponsor that enters into a enters into a new policy, certificate, or contract of insurance after March 23, 2010 that is effective before November 15, 2010 generally will cease to be a grandfathered health plan unless the plan meets certain specified conditions. The group health plan must provide to the new health insurance issuer (and the new health insurance issuer must require) documentation of plan terms (including benefits, cost sharing, employer contributions, and annual limits) under the prior health coverage sufficient to demonstrate that except for the contract change, the group health plan otherwise has not been modified or experienced any other event that would otherwise result in its disqualification for grandfathered health plan status under the Interim Final Regulations as modified by the Amended Rule.

As currently drafted, the relief provided in the Amended Rule does not expressly apply to a change in insurer or insurance contract made by a non-collectively bargained group health plan after November 14, 2010 regardless of whether the change in made before deadline for the group health plan to begin complying with the Affordable Care Act (i.e., the first day of the first plan year beginning after March 22, 2010). Additionally, the relief set forth in the Amended Rule does not apply to individual health insurance policies. Where insured coverage is provided not through a group health plan but instead in the individual market, a change in issuer still remains a change in the health insurance coverage after March 22, 2010 that disqualifies the new individual policy, certificate, or contract of insurance for status as a grandfathered health plan for purposes of the Affordable Care Act.

For a more detailed discussion of the grandfathered plan rules and the changes made this week, see here.

For More Information Or Assistance

If you need help reviewing or responding to the grandfather regulations or other health benefit regulations or other related matters please contact Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here or (469) 767-8872.

About Ms. Stamer

Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefit & Other Compensation Group, a Council Member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, management attorney and consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer has more than 23 years experience advising and representing employers, health and other employee benefit plans, their sponsors, fiduciaries and plan administrators, consultants, vendors, outsourcers, insurers, governments and others about employment, employee benefit, compensation, and a wide range of other performance, legal and operational risk management practices and concerns. As a part of this work, Ms. Stamer has worked extensively with clients on health care reforms and regulations under the Affordable Care Act and other federal and state laws. A prolific author and popular speaker, Ms. Stamer also publishes, conducts client and other training, speaks and consults extensively on GINA and other employment and employee benefit risk management practices and concerns for the ABA, World At Work, SHRM, American Health Lawyers Association, Institute of Internal Auditors, Society for Professional Benefits Administrators, HCCA, Southwest Benefits Association and many other organizations. Her insights on these and related topics have appeared in Atlantic Information Service, Bureau of National Affairs, World At Work, The Wall Street Journal, Business Insurance, Managed Healthcare, Health Leaders, various ABA publications and a many other national and local publications. To learn more about Ms. Stamer, her experience, involvements, programs and publications, see here or contact Ms. Stamer.

Other Resources & Developments

If you found this information of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other recent Solutions Law Press updates including:

About Solutions Law Press

Solutions Law Press™ provides business risk management, legal compliance, management effectiveness and other resources, training and education on human resources, employee benefits, compensation, data security and privacy, health care, insurance, and other key compliance, risk management, internal controls and other key operational concerns. If you find this of interest, you also be interested reviewing some of our other Solutions Law Press resources available for review here. If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates and notices about other upcoming Solutions Law Press events, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail- by creating or updating your profile at here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on Affordable Care Act Grandfathered Plan Rules Loosened To Allow Insured Plans Making Some Insurance Changes To Qualify | Affordable Care Act, Claims Administration, Employee Benefits, Employers, ERISA, Fiduciary Responsibility, Health Plans, HIPAA, Human Resources, Insurance, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Preemption, Reporting & Disclosure, Tax | Tagged: Affordable Health Choices Act, essential benefits, Health Plans, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Update Employment Practices To Manage Genetic Info Discrimination Risks Under New EEOC Final GINA Regulations

November 9, 2010

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today issued final regulations (“Final Regulations”) implementing the employment provisions (Title II) of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA). Employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, joint labor-management committees, and others impacted by GINA should carefully review and update their hiring and background check, sick and family leave, disability accommodation, and other existing policies and practices to comply with the updated guidance provided by the Final Regulations to avoid liability under new GINA’s rules governing genetic information collection, use, protection and disclosure

Effective since November 21, 2009, Title II of GINA prohibits employers of 15 or more employees from discriminating in employment based on genetic information and restricts the acquisition and disclosure of genetic information by covered employers and certain other parties.

Under GINA, employers, employment agencies, labor organizations and joint labor-management committees face significant liability for violating the sweeping nondiscrimination and confidentiality requirements of GINA concerning their use, maintenance and disclosure of genetic information. Under GINA, employees and individuals can sue for damages and other relief like currently available under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other nondiscrimination laws.

Meanwhile, Title I of GINA prohibits group health plans and health insurers from discriminating in eligibility or premium based on genetic information and requires these plans and insurers to protect the privacy of genetic information (Title I) for plan years beginning after May 20, 2009.

When assessing potential GINA risks and exposures, employers and others covered by its provisions must exercise care not to overlook or underestimate the genetic information collected or possessed by their organizations and the risks attendant to collecting or using this information. Many employers will be surprised by the breadth of the depth of “genetic information.” Because of GINA’s broad definition of “genetic information,” its provisions create potential liability concerns for a surprisingly wide range of employment and health plan practices.

The Final Regulations published today implement the employment discrimination rules of GINA Title II. The EEOC previously published proposed regulations interpreting Title II of GINA in March, 2009. Concurrent with its release of the Final Regulations, the Commission also issued two question-and-answer documents on the final GINA regulations. For links to today’s guidance and more details, see here.

Failing to properly address GINA compliance could expose employers to substantial risk. Violation of the employment provisions of Title II subjects an employer to potentially significant civil judgments like those that generally are available for race, sex, and other federal employment discrimination claims covered by the Civil Rights Act. Accordingly, employers and others who have not already done so should act quickly to review and update their policies and procedures to manage their new compliance and liability exposures under GINA. Employers and others covered by GINA also should assess their leave and other records and practices for data that could be considered genetic information and take appropriate steps to safeguard this information to comply with the confidentiality, nondiscrimination and anti-retaliation rules of GINA, the Americans with Disabilities Act and other applicable laws.

For More Information Or Assistance

If you need assistance evaluating or defending existing or proposed practices under GINA or with other workforce, employee benefit, compensation, internal controls or risk management practices, please contact the author of this update, Board Certified Labor & Employment attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer at (469) 767-8872 or via e-mail here.

About Ms. Stamer

Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, Chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) RPTE Employee Benefit & Other Compensation Group, a Council Member of the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits, Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, management attorney and consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer has more than 23 years experience advising and representing employers, health and other employee benefit plans, their sponsors, fiduciaries and plan administrators, consultants, vendors, outsourcers, insurers, governments and others about employment, employee benefit, compensation, and a wide range of other performance, legal and operational risk management practices and concerns. As a part of this work, Ms. Stamer has worked extensively with client to manage risks and defend practices under GINA, the ADA and a wide range of employment discrimination, privacy and other laws. A prolific author and popular speaker, Ms. Stamer also publishes, conducts client and other training, speaks and consults extensively on GINA and other employment and employee benefit risk management practices and concerns for the ABA, World At Work, SHRM, American Health Lawyers Association, Institute of Internal Auditors, Society for Professional Benefits Administrators, HCCA, Southwest Benefits Association and many other organizations. Her insights on these and related topics have appeared in Atlantic Information Service, Bureau of National Affairs, World At Work, The Wall Street Journal, Business Insurance, Managed Healthcare, Health Leaders, various ABA publications and a many other national and local publications. To learn more about Ms. Stamer, her experience, involvements, programs and publications, see here or contact Ms. Stamer.

Other Resources & Developments

If you found this information of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other recent Solutions Law Press updates including:

About Solutions Law Press

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates and notices about upcoming programs and events, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail- by creating or updating your profile at here. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail with “Unsubscribe” in the subject here. For important information concerning this communication click here.

Comments Off on Update Employment Practices To Manage Genetic Info Discrimination Risks Under New EEOC Final GINA Regulations | Disability, Discrimination, EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employers, GINA, Human Resources, Privacy, Risk Management, Union | Tagged: ADA, EEOC, Emloyment Discrimination, Employment, GINA, Privacy | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

COLA Increases for Dollar Limitations on Benefits and Contributions

Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy

Email Subscription

Pages

Recent Posts

Archives

Share this blog

Solutions Law Press HR & Benefits Update