Prepared statements, letters, supplemental materials, et cetera-Cont. Fisk, Clyde, W, Chief, Security and Employee Relations Division, Office of Page Letter to James M. Stephens, minority assistant labor counsel, with 184 Statement by 174 Hewlett, A. G., general president, Indianapolis, Local American Postal Letter to Chairman Gaydos, dated September 21, 1977, enclosing 436 Letter to U.S. Department of Labor, dated December 5, 1977, enclosing 471 Hicks, James, civilian personnel officer, Anniston Army Depot, statement Hill, Donald B., Director, Division of Employee Relations, Office of Human Ingram, Perry L., safety director, Anniston Army Depot: Lloyd, Hon. Marilyn, a Representative in Congress from the State of 318 Marshall, Hon. Ray, Secretary of Labor, letter to Chairman Gaydos, dated 357 Morris, Kenneth C., civilian personnel officer, Sharpe Army Depot, statement by 45 Nilan, Patrick J., legislative director, American Postal Workers Union (AFL-CIO), statement of.. 331 Pease, Hon. Don J., a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio: "Disability Fraud: Now Government Fights Back," U.S. News & World Report, May 22, 1978..... 149 Prepared statement of.... 145 Returns on FECA-COP survey 173 "The Disability Game-I," Baltimore Sun, February 19, 1978. 154 157 "The Disability Game-III," Baltimore Sun, February 21, 1978. 159 161 162 156 Pickle, Hon. J. J. "Jake," a Representative in Congress from the State of 328 Robinson, Hon. J. Kenneth, a Representative in Congress from the State of 318 Schroeder, Theresa B., civilian personnel officer, Sacramento Army Depot, special format for reporting physical effort and working conditions on job descriptions, submitted by.. 14 Suter, Alice, bioacoustical scientist, Office of Noise Abatement Control, 126 Swatek, Phillip M., Director, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, letter to Chairman Gaydos, enclosing questions and answers, dated April 17, 1978. 341 Vacca, J. Joseph, president, National Association of Letter Carriers, AFL- 312 Wethington, Terry A., business representative, District 110, International 328 OVERSIGHT HEARINGS ON THE FEDERAL Part 2 MONDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1977 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION, HEALth, and SafetY Washington, D.C. The subcommittee convened at 10:10 a.m., pursuant to notice, Hon. Joseph M. Gaydos (chairman) presiding. Members present: Representatives Gaydos and Cornell. Staff present: Paul F. Dwyer, staff counsel; James M. Stephens, minority counsel; and Marsha Gray, staff assistant. Mr. GAYDOS. The Subcommittee on Compensation, Health, and Safety will be in order. According to the rules, we have established a quorum. On behalf of the committee, I am very happy to welcome representatives from the U.S. Department of the Army. First, Mr. Harry M. Ewing- Mr. EWING. My personnel officer, Mrs. Schroeder, is with me. We each have our own statements. I would like to be first, and having discussed with counsel the witness list, the Sacramento Army Depot presentation will be followed by the Sharpe Army Depot presentation. Mr. GAYDOS. Amongst you, you may make your own arrangement. On behalf of the committee, as our first witness, I am very happy to recognize Mr. Harry M. Ewing, safety and health manager, Sacramento Army Depot. Mr. EWING. Yes, sir. Mr. GAYDOS. You may proceed in the manner you deem best. STATEMENT OF HARRY M. EWING, SAFETY AND HEALTH Mr. EWING. Mr. Chairman, I am Harry Ewing, the safety and health manager of Sacramento Army Depot, and have had the responsibility of administering the Federal Employees' Compensation Act for that installation continuously since 1966. During recent years, our compensation workload increased from 3.10 cases per 100 employees in 1972 to 4.03 in 1974, and with the advent of the continuation of pay amendment, to 4.63 in 1976. The first half of 1977 has produced 2.44. Projecting the last half of 1977 to be similar, our caseload will reach a new high of 4.85. Since the implementation of continuation pay on November 6, 1974, through June 30, 1977, a total of 166 of the depot's employees have filed continuation of pay claims; 9 have had 2 claims each; and 2 employees have had 3 claims each. Included as appendix I to my prepared testimony is a brief statistical analysis of my installation's experience. Implementation of the continuation of pay provisions of the Compensation Act has, in my opinion, been a mixed blessing. Our claimants have benefited in that their pay continues without the usual 6-week delay previously experienced, and also eliminated are the many administrative actions caused placing an employee in a leave-without-pay status. Implementation procedures established have, however, placed the employing agency in an inadequate or noncontrol position when abuse or misuse may be indicated. Enclosed as appendix II to this testimony is the Sacramento Army Depot Regulation 690-35 that by virtue of paragraph 6C places responsibility for first and/or emergency medical treatment, together with determination of duty status, with the medical director. Additional provisions of this regulation assure our employees of all rights as provided by the law. Even though we require immediate reporting of injuries, no matter how slight, we are required by Public Law 93-416, as it amended chapter 81 of subpart 6 of title 5, U.S.C., to honor and pay for real or alleged injuries reported within 30 days of the stated Occurrence. My employing agency does have the latitude to controvert the claim, but must not terminate the claimant's pay until the agency receives medical information from the attending physician that the employee is no longer disabled, or the agency is notified by Office of Workers' Compensation Programs that pay should be terminated, or at the expiration of 45 calendar days. It is interesting to note that during the period of November 6, 1974, through June 30, 1977, Sacramento Army Depot has recommended controversion of 12 claims. The Office of Workmen's Compensation has agreed in three cases, directed the depot to pay the claim in seven cases, and did not respond in two cases. I have worked with the region 13 Office of Workers' Compensation Programs in San Francisco for 12 years. It has been our experience that in a clearly documented case of injury we have no problems of consequence. However, when clear documentation is lacking, or when medical reports are not clearly conclusive, many problems arise. Extensive questionnaires are required, and obtaining determinations and decisions are extremely slow. Letters and/or phone calls are not responded to in a timely fashion. These delays elicit many complaints from the claimant, the local medical community, and the installation managerial personnel. In closing, I wish to thank all concerned for the opportunity to appear before this committee and respectfully ask that consider ation be given to the four suggestions I have detailed in appendix III to the written statement. These are: (a) More restrictive definition of a traumatic injury; (b) Limit reporting of a traumatic injury to 3 days; (c) Provide control to employing agencies for the granting of continuation of pay; (d) Clarification of the duration of aggravation of preexisting conditions. I believe these suggestions would improve the administration of the Federal employees compensation program. Thank you. [The attachments follow:] |