Category: Daily News

The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General is conducting an audit of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Confidential Source Program. The OIG initiated the audit as a result of the OIG’s receipt of numerous allegations regarding the DEA’s handling and use of confidential sources. Its audit work thus far has been seriously delayed by numerous instances of uncooperativeness from the DEA. Nevertheless, it has uncovered several significant issues.

Among other matters, the audit learned that the DEA was providing Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA) benefits to confidential informants, yet had not established a process or any controls regarding the awarding of them. The DEA lacked a process for thoroughly reviewing FECA claims for confidential sources or determining eligibility for these benefits. In addition, the DEA did not oversee and ensure that the established pay rate for these sources was proper and inappropriately continued using and paying confidential sources who were also receiving full disability payments through FECA.

In one case, the Inspector General wrote, the DEA paid out more than $1.3 million between 1989 and 2012 to the widow of a killed informant. Payments have been ongoing in other cases since 1974.

In addition, the Inspector General says there is no legal basis for extending compensation benefits intended for federal employees to confidential informants. The law cited by the DEA as justification for the payments, the Inspector General wrote, “does not provide a legal basis for the DEA’s position that its confidential sources were appropriately categorized as non-federal law enforcement officers eligible for FECA benefits.”

In a statement, a Justice Department spokesperson said the DEA “has placed a moratorium on submitting new FECA claims for confidential sources to the Department of Labor.” “DEA has also determined that, although a determination should be based on the facts of each individual case, the presumption should be confidential sources are not ‘employees’ pursuant to FECA and should not be eligible for benefits,” the spokesperson said.

Hospitals, health insurance companies, and universities have all become a frequent target for hackers seeking massive databases of personal information. Profile data, Social Security numbers and health records sell quickly on the black market and are now more profitable in that marketplace than is credit card information. Illegal data brokers amass large databases of this stolen information, then sell access to identity thieves.

An now hackers reportedly broke into the massive hospital network of the University of California, Los Angeles, accessing computers with sensitive records of 4.5 million people. According to the story on Fox2Now, names, medical information, Social Security numbers, Medicare numbers, health plan IDs, birthdays and physical addresses – all were potentially stolen. That could affect anyone who has visited – or works – at the university’s medical network, UCLA Health, which includes four hospitals and 150 offices across Southern California. UCLA Health made this announcement on Friday – two months after it discovered the extent of the data breach.

Evidence collected by UCLA Health indicates hackers slipped into computers in September 2014. The next month, university network alarms “detected suspicious activity,” and UCLA Health called in the FBI for help. “At that time, it did not appear that the attackers had gained access to the parts of the network that contain personal and medical information,” UCLA Health said in a statement.

That changed on May 5, when UCLA claims it discovered hackers actually accessed computers with sensitive records. The hospital group is now notifying staff and patients, offering them one year of identity theft recovery services. However, UCLA Health stresses it can’t yet be sure that hackers actually accessed – or stole – the records themselves. The FBI is currently trying to determine “the nature and scope” of the incident.

The UCLA Hospital System’s president, Dr. James Atkinson, apologized to the public in a statement. The hospital group also noted it is under “near-constant attack” by hackers – blocking “millions of known hacker attempts each year.” UCLA Health said the hack forced it to employ more cybersecurity experts on its internal security team, and to hire an outside cybersecurity firm to guard its network.

Health care tends to lose larger numbers of records. When insurance giant Anthem was hacked, up to 80 million records were stolen. The Premera health insurance hack hit 11 million people. Hackers also stole data on 4.5 million Community Health System patients.

Universities get slammed as well. Last year, hackers stole 310,000 University of Maryland records. This year, Auburn University exposed its students’ Social Security numbers. North Dakota University, Butler University, and Indiana University have all exposed the private information of hundreds of thousands of students.

The DWC will implement a new online panel process for represented initial panel requests on October 1, 2015. DWC will no longer accept or process paper submissions postmarked after September 3, 2015. The new process requires parties in a represented case to submit initial QME panel requests online and immediately receive a QME panel. The requesting party will then serve the panel request form, any required documentation and the QME panel on all parties with a proof of service.

“Our goal for the new online process is to further reduce delays. In most cases the QME panel will issue immediately, allowing the injured worker to schedule an exam with a QME more quickly,” said Christine Baker, Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). DWC is a division of DIR.

The DWC has posted an online QME Form 106 Panel Request training video and FAQs on the Medical Unit website. The video demonstration details the way in which represented initial panel requests will be submitted using the new online system.

“I encourage attorneys and claims administrators to view the training video to see how easy the new system will be to use and to become familiar with the process before October 1, 2015,” said Destie Overpeck, Administrative Director of DWC.

The notices of rulemaking, text of the regulations, and the initial statements of reasons can be found at on the DWC rulemaking page. The regulations are pending final review with the Office of Administrative Law (OAL).

Continuous updates about the division’s activities are available by subscribing to the DWC Newsline. QME specific information, which includes new training materials, is also available on the DWC Medical Unit website.

The DWC has issued a notice of public hearing for the Medical Treatment Utilization Schedule (MTUS) proposed regulations. The proposed rulemaking updates the Chronic Pain Medical Treatment Guidelines and adopts Opioids Treatment Guidelines to the MTUS. A public hearing on the proposed regulations has been scheduled at 10 a.m., September 1, in the auditorium of the Elihu Harris Building, 1515 Clay Street in Oakland. Members of the public may also submit written comments on the regulations until 5 p.m. that day.

“California continues to be on the forefront of evidence-based medicine to treat injured workers, and these regulations will help workers obtain appropriate care,” said Christine Baker, Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). DWC is a division of DIR.

The proposed Chronic Pain Medical Treatment Guidelines are based on a reformatted version of the April 6, 2015 version of the Work Loss Data Institute’s Official Disability Guidelines (ODG) Treatment in Workers’ Compensation – Pain (Chronic) chapter. This Guideline is an amazing 1062 pages in length and lists typical chronic pain treatment possibilities alphabetically. For example, on page 40 the Guideline lists “Cannabinoids.”  As with the previous guideline, this “treatment” is “Not Recommended for Pain” thus the DWC is sticking to its prior finding on this issue.

The proposed Opioids Treatment Guidelines were developed by DWC based on evidence-based guidelines available as of April 2014 and supplemented with high-level evidence from high-quality studies. The Opioids Treatment Guidelines are divided into two parts: Part 1 contains the executive summary, abbreviated treatment protocols, and complete recommendations, while Part 2 contains supplemental information. Much of the Opioids Treatment Guideline has stronger language than before, with the word “may” appearing infrequently seeming to make tools like use of the CURES database and urine testing mandatory.

“DWC is concerned about workers who suffer when chronic pain is inadequately treated or when opioid medications are improperly managed,” said DWC Executive Medical Director Dr. Rupali Das. “These are separate, but often related, issues of major public health concern that can lead to devastating consequences, including prolonged disability and delayed recovery.” She added that “we have proposed two complimentary guidelines that provide evidence-based best practices for multidisciplinary approaches to managing chronic pain as well as factors to consider for safe and effective prescribing of opioids for acute, subacute, perioperative, and chronic pain.”

The proposed changes to the MTUS Chronic Pain Medical Treatment Guidelines are set forth in section 9792.24.2 of Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and the proposed addition of the MTUS Opioids Treatment Guidelines is set forth in section 9792.24.4 of the California Code of Regulations.

DWC will consider all public comments, and may modify the proposed regulations for consideration during an additional 15-day public comment period. The notices of rulemaking, text of the regulations, and the initial statement of reasons can be found on the MTUS rulemaking page.

Governor Brown has signed a new labor code that requires that the provisions of state law that govern employment, including the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, would require a cheerleader who is utilized by a California-based professional sports team during its exhibitions, events, or games to be deemed an employee.

The new law, Labor Code section 2754, will only apply to a “California-based team” which means by the statutory definition “a team that plays a majority of its home games in California.” It also only applies to a “Professional sports team” which means a team at either a minor or major league level in the sport of baseball, basketball, football, ice hockey, or soccer.

In 2014, the Oakland Raiders were sued by a group of current and former cheerleaders who alleged that the Raiders refused to pay minimum wage or overtime, made unlawful deductions, and also refused to provide meal and rest breaks. According to the filing, Raiderettes (the name of the cheerleading squad) were paid a flat rate of $125 per game, irrespective of hours worked. The filing also noted mandatory charity appearances for the Raiderettes, for which no payment at all was received by the cheerleaders. Similar lawsuits were filed against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the New York Jets, the Buffalo Bills, and the Cincinnati Bengals.

Attorneys for the Raiderettes and the team agreed to a complex settlement formula that will cover any cheerleader who has worked for the team since the 2010-11 season. Cheerleaders will receive $2,500 in back pay and penalties for the 2013-14 season, plus $6,000 in back pay and penalties for each of the three seasons before that.

A year ago, the Raiders tacitly admitted their sins and offered their new cheerleading squad a contract that nearly tripled their pay. Instead of earning only $125 per game in a single paycheck delivered at the end of the season, Raiderettes will earn $9 an hour, plus overtime, for the estimated 350 hours each cheerleader puts in each year, including rehearsals, practices and mandatory community and charity appearances. Their annual compensation will rise from about $1,250 to about $3,200. Raiderettes will also be reimbursed for business expenses and mileage, which they had to cover themselves before. They will also receive paychecks every two weeks, per state law, rather than one lump sum at season’s end.

Teams exercise considerable control over cheerleaders. They are required to attend and participate in practices, mandatory rehearsals, fittings, preparations, drills, photo sessions, meetings, and workouts. Cheerleaders are required to finance their business expenditures, including travel and investment in their physical appearance by purchasing required cosmetics, in the normal course of their cheerleading duties.

Cheer athletes practice their routines at least 2 to 5 times a week. They must get physically fit in order to carry out intense dance routines and stunts in cheerleading. Cheerleaders are featured prominently in advertising and game-day coverage, especially leading in and out of every commercial break on the nationally broadcasted television programs. Prior to each sports season, selected cheerleaders have training camps and practice, photo shoots and swimsuit calendars obligations. Throughout the year, they have non-game day annual responsibilities, such as guest appearances at schools, charity events, or conferences

Proponents of the law argued that under the new law, professional sport cheerleaders would be guaranteed a legal wage for attending and participating in team practices, rehearsals, preparations, meetings and required workouts. In addition, they would also be covered for all required appearances at corporate, community and charity events. There was no official opposition to the new law included in the legislative record.