Modifies provisions relating to workers' compensation
SB 667 is a workers’ compensation bill that revises several provisions of Missouri law governing permanent total disability benefits, occupational disease claims, and the administration of workers’ compensation cases. The bill repeals and reenacts sections of the workers’ compensation chapter to clarify that permanent total disability benefits are paid for life from the date of maximum medical improvement, but that only accrued benefits survive the employee’s death. It also preserves the rule that benefits may be suspended if an injured worker is restored to regular work through the use of glasses, prosthetics, or rehabilitation, while requiring the division and employer to keep the file open for the employee’s lifetime. The bill further adds a mechanism for changing attorney name, information, or fee arrangements in a claimant’s case upon written agreement signed by the claimant and attorney.
A major substantive change concerns occupational diseases due to toxic exposure, especially mesothelioma. For claims filed on or after January 1, 2014, the bill establishes additional employer-paid benefits for toxic exposure claims and creates a special mesothelioma framework that allows employers to elect to accept mesothelioma liability through insurance, self-insurance, or a group pool. Employers that reject mesothelioma liability would lose the protection of the workers’ compensation exclusive remedy provision for that liability. The bill also provides that certain additional benefits are not subject to suspension and may pass to a surviving spouse, children, or estate if the employee dies before payment is complete. These provisions are set to expire on December 31, 2038.
The bill also makes administrative changes to the workers’ compensation adjudication system. It removes outdated provisions for retention votes and performance-audit-based review of administrative law judges, while preserving and clarifying the division director’s authority to discipline or remove an administrative law judge through the Administrative Hearing Commission for specified causes such as felony or misdemeanor conduct, corruption, incompetency, or willful neglect of duty. It updates salary provisions for administrative law judges and administrative law judges in charge, and it revises definitions and retirement-benefit provisions for administrative law judges and legal advisors, including a rule suspending benefits for a beneficiary charged with intentionally killing the employee.
The bill’s impact on state law would be to reshape both benefit calculations and the administrative structure of Missouri’s workers’ compensation system. It affects injured workers, employers, insurers, self-insured employers, and claimants with toxic exposure or mesothelioma claims, while also changing how workers’ compensation judges are compensated and disciplined. It additionally amends the Administrative Hearing Commission statute to expressly cover cases brought by the division of workers’ compensation against administrative law judges and keeps in place settlement and default procedures for professional licensing cases.
No committee transcript or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded debate or roll-call evidence of support or opposition in the supplied materials. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a technical and policy-heavy workers’ compensation revision rather than a broadly controversial omnibus bill, but the mesothelioma liability provisions and the changes to administrative law judge oversight are the most likely areas of interest or dispute. The overall tone of the bill is procedural and reform-oriented, with a focus on clarifying benefits, liability allocation, and agency administration.
SB 667 would amend Missouri’s workers’ compensation statutes by changing permanent total disability rules, adding and restructuring benefits for toxic exposure and mesothelioma claims, and revising administrative law judge compensation, discipline, and related procedures. It would affect injured employees, dependents, employers, insurers, self-insured groups, and the Division of Workers’ Compensation, while also updating Administrative Hearing Commission authority over certain workers’ compensation adjudication matters.
No committee discussion or voting record was provided, so sentiment cannot be measured from debate or floor action. From the bill text, the measure appears generally reform-minded and administrative in nature, with provisions that may be viewed favorably by claimants seeking clearer or expanded toxic-exposure benefits and by administrators seeking updated procedures, while employers and insurers may scrutinize the mesothelioma liability changes and exclusive-remedy carveouts.
The most notable potential contention is the mesothelioma liability framework, especially the option for employers to elect coverage or reject it and thereby lose exclusive-remedy protection for that liability. Employers, insurers, and self-insured groups may also focus on the cost implications of the added benefits and the long-term expiration date of the special provisions. Separately, changes to administrative law judge discipline, compensation, and the removal of older retention-review language could draw attention from labor, management, and judicial-administration stakeholders.