Okla. Exclusive Remedy Bill May See Changes

The sponsor of an Oklahoma bill designed to ensure that the workers' compensation system remains the exclusive remedy for employees hurt at work said the language of his measure may be modified.

State Rep. Ben Sherrer, D-Chouteau, introduced the measure after an Oklahoma State Supreme decision last June that would make it easier for employees to sue employers in civil court if they were intentionally exposed to injury.

Generally an employee injured on the job has the workers' comp system as their sole or exclusive remedy when they seek compensation. An exception occurs when the employer intentionally injures the worker.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court case involved a worker who was electrocuted after being asked to work on lighting involving a live wire fully charged with current. The court found because the employer had a "substantial certainty" that its actions could kill or injure the worker, these actions amounted to intentional injury.

Mr. Sherrer said there were lots of dangerous lines of work where there was "a substantial certainty that employees are going to be injured," and he is concerned that a liberal interpretation of the courts ruling will mean workers' compensation court "is over and general liability insurance costs will blow through the roof."

Action on his bill, he said, "is kind of standing still right now" because, while the response to its language has been positive, he feels it may need further work.

"I don't want it to be over- or under- inclusive," he explained, saying he wants to ensure that workers are treated fairly, while making sure that comp courts remain in business.

Mr. Sherrer, a municipal attorney, whose background also includes work at pig farming, said he will be watching to see how the lower courts apply the Supreme Court ruling.

If it is narrowly applied in, for example, a case where a protective guard is left off a piece of equipment, "I think that's appropriate," he explained.

The legislator said his action on the bill had also been delayed because up to now he had not obtained a Senate sponsor on a companion measure. He said he was told today there was a Senator ready to carry the bill, but he had yet to contact that lawmaker.

Mr. Sherrer said he has, at this point, not sought a hearing for the measure by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is necessary for the bill to move forward.