Just like there are non-deployable medical conditions, there are also non-deployable medications. Contractors who take these medications may be excluded from working overseas. As such, when determining whether a contractor can return to work overseas after a Defense Base Act injury, the parties must consider the contractor’s medications. Here is the non-exclusive list of medications that disqualify a contractor for deployment, unless a waiver is granted: Blood modifiers. More specifically, therapeutic anticoagulants (like Coumadin and Xarelto); platelet aggregation inhibitors or reducing agents (like Plavix, Agrylin, Pradaxa, Aggrenx, Ticlopidine, Effient, Trental, Pletal); hematopoietics (like Neupogen, Leukine, Epogen and Progrit); and antihemophilics. Antineoplastics (oncologic or non-oncologic use). This includes antimetabolites, alkylators, antiestrogens, aromatose inhibitors, medroxyprogesterone, interferons, etoposide, bicalutamide, bexarotene, and oral tretinoin. Immunosuppressants, like chronic systemic steroids. Biologic response modifiers. This includes Orencia, Humira, Kineret, Enbrel, Remicade, Arava, etc. Benzodiazepaines, whether used chronically or newly prescribed. This includes Ativan, Xanax, Valium, Klonopin,Read more

This is the final installment of my Defense Base Act Industry Report Card series. So far, we have looked at the reporting and payment percentages for ACE, AIG, AWAC, and CNA. Today, I will focus on Zurich, the Division of Longshore and Harbor Workers’ (“DLHWC”) reporting and payment goals, and how the DBA insurance carrier measures up against the DLHWC goals. To recap, the DLHWC creates “report cards” for the large insurance carriers offering Defense Base Act insurance. The DLHWC focuses on timeliness of reporting the injury and timeliness of paying benefits. Each insurance carrier voluntarily provides its reporting and payment percentages to the DLHWC, which publishes the information on its website. My series of posts takes the same information and plugs it into carrier-specific line graphs. In my opinion, the line graphs make it easier to chart each carrier’s performance–and whether performance is declining. Zurich: Overall, Zurich’s self-reported dataRead more

This post continues my Defense Base Act Industry Report Cards series. The first post, which I uploaded last week, can be found here. To recap, the Department of Labor’s Division of Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation (“DLHWC”) creates “report cards” for the large insurance carriers offering Defense Base Act insurance. The DLHWC focuses on timeliness of reporting the injury and timeliness of paying benefits. Personally, I prefer looking at this information in line graph format. As such, I took the report card information on the DLHWC’s website and rendered insurer-specific line graphs. DLHWC shares the following information on its website: The First Report data, aggregated by insurance carrier, shows the percent of reports received in the DLHWC District Offices within 30, 60, and 90 days of the date of the injury or death, or the date of the employer’s knowledge of the injury and the onset of disability, whichever isRead more

Each year, the Department of Labor’s Division of Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation (“DLHWC”) creates “report cards” for the insurance carriers offering Defense Base Act insurance. Essentially, the DLHWC looks at two things: Timeliness of DBA First Reports of Injury; and Timeliness of DBA First Payments of Benefits. According to the DLHWC’s website, it adopted particular performance goals under the Government Performance Results Act to improve program effectiveness “by facilitating prompt delivery of benefits to injured workers and their families.” Keep in mind that the goal is “prompt delivery of benefits.” DLHWC shares data reported by the insurance carriers. Specifically, the DLHWC shares: The First Report data, aggregated by insurance carrier, shows the percent of reports received in the DLHWC District Offices within 30, 60, and 90 days of the date of the injury or death, or the date of the employer’s knowledge of the injury and the onset ofRead more

In a new case out of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, an airline has a big problem on its hands: it is likely going to have to defend itself in a State civil court negligence and wrongful death lawsuit. On April 29, 2013, a plane crashed immediately after taking off from Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan. Video of the dramatic crash was captured on a dashboard camera. All seven crewmembers aboard the aircraft were killed. The families of five of those crewmembers filed a lawsuit in Illinois state court against The Boeing Company, AAR Manufacturing d/b/a Telair International, Inc., Telair International, GMbH, and National Air Cargo, Inc. (“NAC”). In response, NAC removed the case to federal court asserting federal officer jurisdiction. For purposes of this post, I note that NAC argued that it had a potential defense to liability under the Defense Base Act. TheRead more