Don’t Forget to Post OSHA Injury and Illness Data at Your Worksite
Employers who are covered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) record-keeping rule must post a summary of 2018 work-related injury and illnesses in a noticeable place from Feb. 1 to April 30. Read this blog post from SHRM to learn more.
Employers that are covered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) record-keeping rule must post a summary of 2018 work-related injury and illnesses in a noticeable place from Feb. 1 to April 30. Here are some compliance tips for employers to review.
Required Posting
Many employers with more than 10 employees—except for those in certain low-risk industries—must keep a record of serious work-related injuries and illnesses. But minor injuries that are treated only by first aid do not need to be recorded.
Employers must complete an incident report (Form 301) for each injury or illness and log work-related incidents on OSHA Form 300. Form 300A is a summary of the information in the log that must be posted in the worksite from Feb. 1 to April 30 each year.
"This information helps employers, workers and OSHA evaluate the safety of a workplace, understand industry hazards, and implement worker protections to reduce and eliminate hazards," according to OSHA's website.
Employers should note that they are required to keep a separate 300 log for each "establishment," which is defined as "a single physical location where business is conducted or where services or industrial operations are performed."
If employees don't work at a single physical location, then the establishment is the location from which the employees are supervised or that serves as their base.
Employers frequently ask if they need to complete and post Form 300A if there were no injuries at the relevant establishment. "The short answer is yes, " said Tressi Cordaro, an attorney with Jackson Lewis in Washington, D.C. "If an employer recorded no injuries or illnesses in 2018 for that establishment, then the employer must enter 'zero' on the total line."
Correct Signature
Before the OSHA Form 300A is posted in the worksite, a company executive must review it and certify that "he or she has examined the OSHA 300 Log and that he or she reasonably believes, based on his or her knowledge of the process by which the information was recorded, that the annual summary is correct and complete," according to OSHA.
A common mistake seen on 300A forms is that companies forget to have them signed, noted John Martin, an attorney with Ogletree Deakins in Washington, D.C.
There are only four company representatives who may certify the summary:
- An owner of the company.
- An officer of the corporation.
- The highest-ranking company official working at the site.
- The immediate supervisor of the highest-ranking company official working at the site.
Businesses commonly make the mistake of having an HR or safety supervisor sign the form, said Edwin Foulke Jr., an attorney with Fisher Phillips in Atlanta and Washington, D.C., and the former head of OSHA under President George W. Bush.
They need to get at least the plant manager to sign it, he said, noting that the representative who signs Form 300A must know how numbers in the summary were obtained.
Once the 300A form is completed, it should be posted in a conspicuous place where other employment notices are usually posted.
Electronic Filing
The Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses rule requires covered establishments with at least 20 employees to also electronically submit Form 300A to OSHA.
Large establishments with 250 or more employees were also supposed to begin electronically submitting data from the 300 and 301 forms in 2018, but the federal government recently eliminated that requirement. However, those establishments still must electronically submit their 300A summaries.
The deadline to electronically submit 2018 information is March 2.
SOURCE: Nagele-Piazza, L. (1 February 2019) "Don’t Forget to Post OSHA Injury and Illness Data at Your Worksite" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/don%E2%80%99t-forget-to-post-osha-injury-and-illness-data-at-your-worksite.aspx/
The DOL Audit: Understanding the spectrum of risk
Will the Department of Labor (DOL) audit my plan? The likelihood that the DOL will audit your plan is low, but it can happen. Continue reading to learn more.
Risk is discussed in many contexts in the retirement plan industry. It comes up as a sales tactic; as good counsel from trusted advisors preaching procedural prudence; or, often, in the form of intimidating industry vernacular like fiduciary liability, fidelity bond or the big, bad Department of Labor (DOL).
This DOL paranoia is an underlying motivation that drives the risk conversation with distributors and retirement plan sponsors. Naturally, the question of probability comes up: What is the likelihood the DOL will audit my plan? The answer is low, but it can happen.
When evaluating retirement plans in terms of risk, it’s best viewed as a spectrum. Generally, risk falls into three principal areas of concern.
Lawsuit risk: The likelihood of a fiduciary-based lawsuit for most plan sponsors is very low. However, if this does arise, it will be unpleasant and expensive, both financially and in terms of reputation.
Administrative breach: Upon inspection, most plans will have some kind of operational defect. Typically, these are either an administrative, fiduciary or a document-level defect. If left uncorrected, they are potentially disqualifying. The good news is the IRS has corrective methods in place for the most common errors. Generally, these are relatively inexpensive to correct but will cost clients a little time and money, and likely some aggravation.
DOL/IRS audit risk: It’s usually the administrative breach discussed above that leads to the DOL/IRS investigation or audit. These agencies are not interested in disqualifying plans; they are more interested in correcting them and protecting the participants from misdeeds (intentional or not).
When a DOL audit does happen, it tends to occur because someone invited investigation. This could be the result of a disgruntled former employee, a standard IRS audit that somehow spiraled into a full DOL investigation or a variety of other reasons. So, what can employers and their service providers do to avoid an audit?
The IRS and DOL don’t publish an official list of items that could lead to an investigation, but it’s a good idea to look at your plan’s most recent IRS Form 5500 filings to decrease the likelihood of an audit. This is publicly available information that can signal to government agencies that something might be wrong and they should take a closer look. Some of the more common red flags include:
- Line items that are left blank when the instructions require an answer
- Inconsistencies in the data disclosed on the Form 5500 schedules
- A large drop in the number of participants from one year to the next
- A large dollar amount in the “Other” asset line on the Schedule H
- Having an insufficient level for the plan’s required Fidelity Bond
- Consistently late deposits or deferrals and hard-to-value or non-marketable investments (including self-directed brokerage accounts or employer stock) could be counted as red flags as well.
Plan sponsors should make sure that 5500s are completed with the same care and attention to detail used when filling out IRS 1040, and ensure the plan is being governed properly and in compliance with ERISA. This can be a challenge even for the most well-intentioned plan sponsors, given the complexity of the task and the fact that most employers don’t have the expertise in-house.
Calling in a specialist
But you don’t need to navigate these waters on your own. Instead, you might consider the “Prudent Man” rule, which implies that when expertise is required yet absent, a prudent person outsources the needed expertise. There is a wealth of talented retirement plan specialists and advisors available to help guide you through the audit process or, better yet, steer clear of it altogether.
When considering whether to employ one of these specialists, you will need to evaluate their experience, expertise and training, as well as if they provide services to help the plan sponsor keep the DOL (and the IRS) out of their offices. Some commonly available services include:
- 5500 reviews to help plan sponsors avoid potential audit triggers
- Coaching services to help plan sponsors identify and eliminate some of those difficult-to-value assets like employer stock or self-directed brokerage accounts
- Service provider evaluations to help plan sponsors identify those who will work as a plan fiduciary and put the appropriate guardrails in place on an automated basis
In conclusion, the best way to survive a potential DOL investigation or IRS audit is to avoid one altogether. Committing to best practices for running the plan may mean outsourcing a great deal of the work to specialist retirement plan providers and advisors. Plan sponsors would be wise to consider working with service providers who operate as plan fiduciaries themselves. In this way, you’re more likely to avoid problems and achieve better plan results, leading to better outcomes for everyone.
SOURCE: Grantz, J (7 June 2018) "The DOL Audit: Understanding the spectrum of risk" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://www.benefitnews.com/opinion/dol-audit-understanding-the-spectrum-of-risk?feed=00000152-18a5-d58e-ad5a-99fd31fe0000
Concerned About Losing Your Marketplace Plan? ACA Repeal May Take Awhile
Worried about your healthcare plan? Check out this interesting article from Kaiser Health News, by Michelle Andrews
President-elect Donald Trump has promised that he’ll ask Congress to repeal the Affordable Care Act on Day One of his administration. If you’re shopping for coverage on the health insurance marketplace, should you even bother signing up? If everything’s going to change shortly after your new coverage starts in January anyway, what’s the point?
While it’s impossible to know exactly what changes are coming to the individual market and how soon they’ll arrive, one thing is virtually certain: Nothing will happen immediately. Here are answers to questions you may have.
Q. How soon after Trump takes office could my marketplace coverage change?
It’s unlikely that much, if anything, will change in 2017.
“It’s a complex process to alter a law as complicated as the ACA,” said Sara Rosenbaum, a professor of health law and policy at George Washington University. It seems unlikely that congressional Republicans could force through a repeal of the law since Democrats have enough votes to sustain a filibuster blocking that move. So Congress might opt to use a budget procedure, called “reconciliation,” that allows revenue-related changes, such as eliminating the premium tax credits, with simple majority votes. Yet even that process could take months.
And it wouldn’t address the other parts of the health law that reformed the insurance market, such as the prohibition on denying people coverage if they’re sick. How some of those provisions of the law will be affected is still quite unclear.
“It will likely be January 2019 before any new program would be completely in place,” said Robert Laszewski, a health care industry consultant and long-time critic of the law.
The current open enrollment period runs through January 2017. Shop for a plan, use it and don’t focus on what Congress may do several months from now, Rosenbaum advised.
Q. Will my subsidy end next year if the new administration repeals or changes the health law?
Probably not. Mike Pence, the vice president-elect, said on the campaign trail that any changes will allow time for consumers receiving premium subsidies to adjust.
Timothy Jost, an emeritus professor at Washington and Lee University School of Law in Virginia who is an expert on the health law, also predicts a reasonable transition period.
Congress and the new administration are “not eager to have a bunch of angry, uninsured voters,” Jost said.
Theoretical conversations about changing the health law are one thing, but “I think that Congress may be less willing to just wipe the subsidies out if a lot of people are using them,” Rosenbaum said. More than 9 million people receive subsidies on the marketplace, according to the federal Department of Health and Human Services.
Q. Can my insurer drop out once the new administration takes over, even if the law hasn’t been repealed?
No, insurers are generally locked in contractually for 2017, according to experts. But 2018 could be a whole different story, said Laszewski.
Many insurers are already losing money on their marketplace offerings. If they know that the health insurance marketplaces are being eliminated and replaced by something else in 2019, why would they stick with a sinking ship?
“The Trump administration could be left with a situation where Obamacare is still alive, the subsidies are still alive, but not the insurers,” said Laszewski. To prevent that, the Trump administration might have to subsidize insurers’ losses during a 2018 transition year, he said.
Q. My state expanded Medicaid to adults with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level (about $16,000). Is that going to end if Obamacare is repealed?
It may. Trump has advocated giving block grants to finance the entire Medicaid program on the theory that it provides an incentive for states to make their programs more cost-effective. But that strategy could threaten the coverage of millions of Americans if the block grants don’t keep pace with costs, Jost said.
So far, 31 states and the District of Columbia have expanded Medicaid under the health law. Republican governors in these states may play a key role in arguing against taking the expansion money away, Rosenbaum said.
Q. I have a heart condition. Does this mean I’m going to have a hard time finding coverage?
It’s possible. The health law prohibits insurers from turning people away because they’re sick and may be expensive to insure.
Republicans have generally promised to maintain that guaranteed insurability, but what that would look like is unclear. Some of their plans would require people to remain continuously insured in order to maintain that guarantee, said Laszewski.
“I would advise people who are sick to get good coverage now and hang onto it,” said Jost.
Q. Since Republicans have pledged to repeal the law, can I ignore the law’s requirement that I have health insurance?
The individual mandate, as it’s called, is one of the least popular elements of Obamacare. As long as it’s the law, you should follow it, experts said.
Insurers have argued that the requirement that they take all comers who apply for health insurance only works if there’s a coverage mandate or other mechanism that strongly encourages people to have insurance. Otherwise why would they bother unless they were sick?
For the past few years, Republicans have been pushing hard to eliminate the mandate, Laszewski noted.
“One of the easy things they could do is just not enforce it,” he said.
See the original article Here.
Source:
Andrews, M. (2016 November 10). Concerned about losing your marketplace plan? ACA repeal may take awhile [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://khn.org/news/concerned-about-losing-your-marketplace-plan-aca-repeal-may-take-awhile/
High-level executives often do not understand company risks
Originally posted July 25, 2013 by Rodd Zolkos on https://www.businessinsurance.com
A new report from Forbes Insights sponsored by Zurich Insurance Group Ltd. suggests that many executives don't understand their companies' exposure to risks or their strategies to manage them.
The survey of 414 U.S. executives in the banking and financial services, real estate, health care and construction industries found that 28% indicated their company had suffered financial damage as a result of operational risk, 27% because of regulatory or compliance risk and 26% as a result of financial risk.
But when asked about the top barriers to effective risk management, 36% of executives in banking and financial services and 29% of those in real estate cited a lack of understanding of how to mitigate exposures as the top barrier. Among construction executives, 43% cited a lack of understanding of the sources of risk as the top barrier, while insufficient risk management budget was cited as the top barrier by 33% of health care executives.
A lack of understanding of how to mitigate risks was the second-greatest barrier cited by construction executives, at 27%, and health care executives, at 30%.
However, large percentages of executives in each industry category indicated they would manage risk no differently in the next three years: 41% of banking and financial services executives, 50% of construction executives, 42% of health care executives and 47% of real estate executives.
Of the total group, 76% of executives rated the need to align risk management with their company's growth strategy as very or extremely important, and 68% said they thought their company was doing so. But only 54% said they were confident or very confident of how aware they were of the risks associated with their company's growth strategies.
The report, “The Sharp Side of Risk: Understanding, Anticipating and Managing Business Risk,” is available here.