Cannibal Negotiation

/by

Cannibal negotiation refers to a deal where parties figure out how to get money from an entity not at the table.

The term originates from an arrangement where OldCo paid NewCo to keep NewCo’s cheaper, competing product off the market. NewCo is paid for not selling anything. The buyers who need that product have to pay OldCo’s high price. The buyers are being cannibalized.

Honest disagreement can thwart parties’ good intentions to reach a workers compensation settlement. Cannibal negotiations can ethically resolve disputes over the value of future medical benefits.

The first place a true cannibal negotiator should turn is Medi-Cal. Medi-Cal can fill the gap between parties’ valuations and provide a safety net to pay for the injured worker’s health care at no cost to any party. A special needs trust or structured settlement may be needed to keep an applicant eligible for traditional Medi-Cal. Under expanded Medi-Cal, the applicant can receive a settlement of any size without losing eligibility so long as Modified Adjusted Gross Income is under the limit. Caution: home health care and non-emergency medical transportation are not included in expanded Medi-Cal. 

Medicare is the next source a cannibal should think of for a funding entity not at the negotiating table. Medicare is different from Medi-Cal in that the injured worker had to contribute the required number of quarters to achieve eligibility. Also, a Medicare Set-Aside must be depleted before additional funds can be tapped to pay for a claim-related Medicare-eligible expense.

Lastly, the parties may be able to use part of the settlement to fund health insurance premiums for the injured worker. A health insurance agent can provide a quote for Affordable Care Act coverage regardless of the injured worker’s pre-existing condition. A (cannibalized) subsidy may indeed keep the premium cost affordable.

Cannibal negotiators can “prey” on more than one source. Some applicants are “Medi-Medi”, enrolled in both Medicare and Medi-Cal. MSAs should not be tapped until the applicant is eligible for Medicare; for the period up to 30 months before then, Affordable Care Act insurance can provide coverage.

How Did You Get To That Number?

/2 Comments/by

Case evaluation is part art and a lot of math. We’re not talking calculus; we’re talking arithmetic.

A surprisingly large number of lawyers tell me they’re bad at math. They’re not alone. CNN anchor Chris Cuomo recently got his math corrected by his co-anchor Michaela Pereira while discussing Powerball lottery numbers.
 

You can’t come up with a realistic evaluation of a Workers Compensation claim if you can’t quantify the component parts: Permanent Disability, Life Pension, and Medicare-eligible and non-Medicare-eligible Future Medical.

In mediation caucus, when parties give me their offer or demand I often ask, “How did you come up with that number?” I want their best argument that will convince the other side. The first answer I get is often vague, like “We thought it would settle the case.” Workers compensation professionals often neglect running the numbers. Getting parties to see the same numbers moves them to settlement.

I recently got a call about an offer in a personal injury case. I questioned the plaintiff’s attorney about what he thought this number represented. It didn’t sound right to me. “Did you ask them how they came up with that number?” No, he hadn’t. I suggested the attorney ask opposing counsel that question to allow movement forward toward settlement.

Random demands and offers are unlikely to settle a claim. Before you assume the other side is being unreasonable or you respond, ask: How Did You Get To That Number?

‘Twas the Night before Mediation

/0 Comments/by

(c) Teddy Snyder SnyderMediations.com

‘Twas the night before mediation
And all through the firm
Not a creature was stirring,
Not even a worm

But then one lawyer
Asleep on a couch
Shot up, hit his head
And said with an “Ouch”

Oh my, I’ve got
That mediation tomorrow
I didn’t do a brief
Much, much to my sorrow

Then what to his exhausted eyes should appear
But Mediator Snyder with news of good cheer

You don’t need it fancy
You don’t need it long
Just give me some clues
So the time’s not spent wrong

Just send me an “e”
It’s all confidential
Tell me the issues
What’s the dollar potential?

With that she was gone
The lawyer banged out a brief
He’d be ready tomorrow
Oh what a relief.

This holiday season
When your time seems too short
Turn to mediation
And stay out of court.

Happy Holidays!

 

Tactics vs. Strategy

/0 Comments/by

Tactics are steps you take to win short term goals on the way to achieving your strategic objective. Sometimes tactical skirmishes distract workers compensation professionals from pursuit of their strategic goal. On the other hand, you can’t reach your strategic objective without well-thought-out tactics.

The Disputed Doctor’s Deposition
Take the case where an attorney insisted that the deposition of the doctor who provided the most recent report had to precede settlement discussions. The problem was that by the time that could happen, all the permanent disability would be paid out. After providing for future medical expense, that would leave no cash for the applicant or the attorney fees, jeopardizing the chance of a future Compromise & Release. When I pointed this out, the parties realized that a tactical victory could prevent achieving the strategic goal. The case C&R’d.

The Tale of the Two Interpreters
I arrived at a recent mediation to find the attorneys at loggerheads because both had ordered an interpreter. Both interpreters were court-certified. I convinced one of the attorneys that agreeing to dismiss the interpreter that attorney’s office had ordered would create a negotiating advantage. In the give-and-take of negotiation, opposing counsel might well feel beholden to make the next concession. Conceding the interpreter battle demonstrated the attorney’s reasonableness and set the stage for a productive mediation. The case C&R’d.

A litigation plan should be more than a checklist. Every tactic should further the effort to achieve the strategic goal.

Understanding Insurance Reserves

/0 Comments/by

 

Understanding insurance reserves can help settle a claim. A reserve is a pot of money set aside to pay for a specific expense category. Typically, there are separate pots for indemnity, medical and med-legal expenses.

Sometimes a negotiator finds that a claim can be closed for an amount more than remains in the indemnity and medical reserves. However, part of the settlement can be classified as a med-legal expense. By spending the money from the med-legal reserve, settlement can be achieved while staying within current reserve limits.

Ghosts, Goblins and Mediators

/0 Comments/by

Halloween is just around the corner, a time when people love to be scared. It’s fun, because everyone knows there’s really nothing scary at all.

Mediation isn’t scary. Yet some claim and legal professionals fear it.

Fear of losing control
Adjusters and attorneys know their jobs. They may bristle at the idea of someone else getting involved in the settlement process. Yet, they don’t hesitate to call in other experts.

Claim and legal professionals retain control in mediation. Only the parties can choose an outcome. The mediator cannot order anyone to take any action. What the mediator can do is help parties define issues, resolve differences, and see new routes to settlement.

Fear of looking bad
Some professionals worry that calling in a mediator makes them look like they couldn’t do their job. On the contrary, professionals who use every tool in their arsenal look smart. Referring a claim for mediation can short-cut litigation, saving time and money. This makes you look like someone who knows how to get things done.

What are you scared of?
You don’t need a costume, and you don’t need a candy bucket to get started.  Treat yourself to mediation to move that difficult case forward.  Mediation can benefit all parties, and that’s no Halloween trick.

Get “In Pro Per” Claims Off The Books

/0 Comments/by

You know the claims I’m talking about: the really old claims where the Injured Worker is representing himself/herself. Let’s call them “in pro per”s.  Active in pro pers file one court paper after another, causing the insurer or self-insured employer to fund what seems like a never-ending stream of money to send a representative to the Board. The in pro per’s papers may not state a recognizable claim. Pressed for time, the Information and Assistance officer may give the in pro per short shrift.  Defense attorneys with varying degrees of patience usually do, too.

But what if what the parties really need is a sort of an interpreter, a mediator.

Mediating an in pro per’s claim demonstrates respect for the in pro per.  The feeling of lack of respect and inability to get heard is often what drives the in pro per to keep summoning the employer to court.

“Why would I waste time and money on a worthless claim?” you may ask. Because you’re spending time and money now, and mediation is a way to end that endless cycle.

Sometimes the in pro per has a bona fide complaint, but without professional assistance has not been able to communicate it. The neutral mediator is often able to re-state the concern in a way the parties can address and put past them. The mediator can help each party see the other side’s point of view.

HOW POLITICS DRIVES UP THE COST OF YOUR MSA

/0 Comments/by

For President George W. Bush and Congress to get Medicare Part D drug coverage passed in 2003, they had to make significant concessions to big business, including the drug industry. One of the law’s provisions forbids the government from setting rules for negotiating better drug prices. The “noninterference” section says:

In order to promote competition . . . the Secretary [of Health and Human Services]:
(1) may not interfere with the negotiations between drug manufacturers and pharmacies and PDP [Prescription Drug Plan] sponsors; and
(2) may not require a particular formulary or institute a price structure for the reimbursement of covered part D drugs.
42 USC 1395w-111(i)

The result according to a new policy brief from the Carlton University School of Public Policy and Administration is that Medicare Part D plans pay on average 73% more than Medicaid and 80% more than the Veterans Health Administration for brand-name drugs. If Part D plans could negotiate drug costs the way Medicaid and the VA do, savings could reach $16 billion a year.

The study shows that the average per capita expenditure by Americans for pharmaceuticals is more than double the average of 32 other industrialized nations. Contrary to their publicity, American drug companies do not devote the wealth gained from Part D on new research initiatives. Half of new medical research initiatives come from non-profit entities such as universities. Rather, drug companies have spent their millions in recent years on increased lobbying. If drugs costs decreased, Medicare beneficiaries could expect Part D premiums to also decrease.

Although private insurers pay Part D medical expenses, workers compensation professionals are painfully aware that anticipated Part D-covered expenses must be included in a Medicare Set-Aside. The increased use and rising cost of pharmaceuticals has torpedoed many a proposed workers compensation buy-out. If the purpose of an MSA is to protect Medicare, why are Part D expenses which are paid by private insurers included in the allocation anyway?

Casualty insurance companies and the American Association for Justice are big political players. With the 2016 election cycle coming up, now would seem to be the time for their lobbyists to twist some arms to modify the noninterference provision for the benefit of all Americans.

WHAT TO EXPECT AT MEDIATION

/0 Comments/by
Mediation remains unfamiliar to most California Workers Compensation professionals. To succeed, you– and your client– need to know what to expect. While all mediations share some similarities, each mediator has a unique style. Here’s what you can expect at one of my mediations.
We usually start in joint session. The discussion might be limited to the logistical: introductions, bathrooms, lunch, etc.  People get to look each other in the eye.The first real step will be for the Applicant to tell how the injury happened and how things are going now. The purpose of this is to allow catharsis and to build empathy and trust between the injured worker and the mediator. Usually this is in a separate session known as a “caucus,” but if the defense needs to hear this information or wants to ask questions, it might happen while the parties are still in joint session. If the defense has heard the Applicant’s story many times, I may have Applicant do the venting in caucus.

I usually start negotiations with the Applicant’s side. If there were prior offers and demands, I will review those to make sure we are all at the same starting point. Then comes exploring the positions which support those offers and demands. The parties’ briefs should explain the issues; the more complicated the case, the more important the briefs. Defining issues for the mediator in the brief makes for a more efficient mediation. But the briefs do not limit the number of issues; sometimes new issues emerge in mediation.

I might speak with one or more attorneys outside the hearing of their clients, for example, to discuss a point of law.  All parties might reconvene to brainstorm solutions to an issue.  If parties are disrespectful of one another, I will stop a joint session.
In the give and take of numbers, issues will be discussed and swapped.  Cases do not settle without compromise.  Parties should expect give and take to finalize the settlement terms.
Participants may be surprised by the amount of time spent in caucus with the other side.  As mediator, my job is to give all parties adequate time to express their concerns.   While there are certainly exceptions, a typical workers compensation mediation lasts three to five hours.

YOU CAN’T SETTLE IF YOU DON’T KNOW THE ISSUES

/0 Comments/by
HOW MANY PIECES ARE THERE TO THE SETTLEMENT PUZZLE?  
Answer:  Probably more than you think.

The more issues there are in a negotiation, the greater the opportunity for give and take across issues. This adds flexibility for parties to shape a settlement acceptable to all. Trading across issues in negotiation is called “logrolling.”Every case has its own unique issues. Here is a partial list, some obvious, some I have seen people miss.

INCOME ISSUES
  • Disability percentage, including whether the disability is caused by an industrial injury
  • Apportionment
  • Applicable Date of Injury
  • Past payments- when were Permanent Disability payments supposed to start? Was the right rate used? Were past payments properly characterized as PD- or should they have been TD, Temporary Disability. Is there a TD overpayment?
  • If Life Pension payments will be due, when should they start?
  • Average Weekly Wage- Have you taken into account overtime and the value of non-cash compensation?
  • Ability to perform future work
  • Return to Work issues- will the employer provide modified work?
  • What about training? Check the new California law about computer purchases.
  • Liens
  • Penalties
MEDICAL ISSUES
  • What are the accepted body parts?
  • What expenses are reasonable and necessary? This can include issues about support services.
  • What is the appropriate medical specialty?
  • Is the treatment the Applicant wants compensable?
  • Is the Applicant’s over-all medical condition likely to shorten life expectancy?