Reinier Razon began working for Southern California Permanente Medical Group at its Kaiser Sunset location in January 2014, as a clinical laboratory scientist.

In 2016 Razon was involved in a dispute with Darren Wallace, the union steward assigned to the clinical laboratory scientists. According to Razon, Wallace assaulted him. Razon was treated two days later at the Kaiser emergency room for anxiety and diagnosed with “emotional stress reaction,” which he believed was due to his encounter with Wallace.

Razon filed a workers’ compensation claim for stress and anxiety arising from his encounter with Wallace. That claim was pending when he filed his lawsuit against SCPMG in April 2017, for disability discrimination, failure to accommodate and failure to engage in the interactive process in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

In March 2018 Razon settled his workers’ compensation claim for $45,000, as reflected in a standard, preprinted compromise and release form. He also signed a separate voluntary resignation letter. The document states it “releases Kaiser from any and all claims, known or unknown, which may exist at the time of execution of this Agreement.” It specifically included “causes of action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (race, color, religion, sex and national origin discrimination); the Americans with Disabilities Act; 29 USC section 62 (age discrimination). However, this list is expressly understood by the parities [sic] not to be all-inclusive.”

The trial court granted SCPMG’s motion for summary judgment and entered judgment in favor of SCPMG, ruling Razon’s civil FEHA lawsuit was barred by his written release of all claims relating to his employment with SCPMG. The court of appeal affirmed the dismissal in the unpublished case of Razon v. Southern California Permanente.

Razon argues the release set forth in his voluntary resignation letter is enforceable only if the letter was attached to the preprinted compromise and release form used to resolve his workers’ compensation claims. No authority cited by Razon established attachment as a requirement. To the contrary, the Supreme Court in Claxton Court (34 Cal.4th at pp. 370, 378) expressly recognized release of the non-workers’ compensation claims could be effected through a separate document, independent of the workers’ compensation preprinted form. That is exactly what occurred here

Razon argues the absence of any express reference to his FEHA claims in the release creates a triable issue of fact whether the lawsuit, pending at the time the release was executed, was included within its scope. The Supreme Court in Claxton expressly rejected the need for the specificity that Razon suggests.

In his declaration in opposition to the summary judgment, Razon insisted he did not intend by signing the letter to release his FEHA claims. That undisclosed intent, however, is irrelevant to the interpretation of the release. (Otay Land Co., LLC  v. U.E. Limited, L.P. (2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 806, 855).

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has awarded $1.5 million over three years to the University of Illinois at Chicago and Worcester Polytechnic Institute to fund projects aimed at reducing workers’ exposures to hazards through the development and use of collaborative robots, or co-robots.

CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) partnered with the National Science Foundation (NSF) to fund studies of co-robots in the workplace through NSF’s National Robotics Initiative. The Initiative supports research in the U.S. that will accelerate the development and use of co-robots, an emerging robotic technology that complements, not replaces, human workers. Co-robots work alongside people or other robots and can help improve worker safety.

“The future of work includes a workplace where robots work in tandem with, or are even worn by, human workers,” said NIOSH Director John Howard, M.D. “This important research will help guide the development and use of co-robots that can help minimize health and safety risks to workers.”

In healthcare, remote-controlled nursing robots have the potential to reduce workload and the risk of infection, especially in quarantine and intensive care environments. Researchers at Worcester Polytechnic Institute will develop a more intuitive interface to make it easier for nurses to operate robots from a distance. Researchers also will investigate best practices for integrating robots into current nursing education.

In manufacturing, lifting heavy objects can lead to costly and disabling work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Wearable robots, which provide mechanical assistance to the user’s joints, have the potential to reduce injuries from heavy lifting. Researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago will develop and investigate the effectiveness of a personalized wearable robot worn on the lower body that senses the wearer’s physical effort and responds accordingly using soft-wearable electronics.

Through its Center for Occupational Robotics Research, NIOSH is proactively working across industrial sectors to guide the development and use of occupational robots that enhance workers’ safety, health, and well-being. The Center’s research looks at traditional industrial robots that work in robotic cells and cages away from human workers as well as at emerging robotic technologies such as co-robots; wearable robotics or powered exoskeletons; remotely controlled or autonomous vehicles and drones; and future robots that increasingly use advanced artificial intelligence.

NIOSH is the federal institute that conducts research and makes recommendations for preventing work-related injuries, illnesses and deaths. Additional information on NIOSH grant opportunities via the NIOSH Extramural Research and Training Programs can be found https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/ here.

A little over two years after its $753 million acquisition of the prescription medicine delivery service Pillpack, Amazon has finally launched Amazon Pharmacy, its online and mobile prescription medication ordering and fulfillment service.

The launch of the new Pharmacy service within Amazon is a blow to other discount prescription services like the publicly traded GoodRx and companies like RxSaver and delivery services like ExactCare Pharmacy.

The competition from Amazon was likely one reason why GoodRx began offering telemedicine services as a point of differentiation and to move up the value chain. It will be interesting to see if Amazon will also move to providing virtual care for more than its employees.

Last year, the company rolled out Amazon Care for its workers in Seattle as part of a pilot service that provided both in-person and telemedicine services.

Using a secure pharmacy profile, Amazon customers can add their insurance information, manage prescriptions and choose payment options all through Amazon’s service. And in another small push towards wider healthcare services, and not just selling items, users are provided with “self-service help” tools on Amazon’s portal, and they also have the option to speak to pharmacists either via over the phone, for advice: “Friendly and knowledgeable pharmacists are available 24/7 to answer questions about medications.”

After launching its own line of over-the-counter drugs in 2019, this is arguably Amazon’s broadest push into the healthcare business to-date, one that could open up very large, new revenue opportunities for the company, especially as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic pushes consumers both toward more remote care, and using online channels for all their shopping needs.

While Amazon Pharmacy looks to be a US-only launch for now, it’s a global opportunity. Online pharmacy services are projected to hit revenues of $131 billion by 2025 worldwide. Prescription drugs, meanwhile, have been estimated to be a $904 billion industry this year, growing to nearly $1.3 trillion by 2025.

Amazon is also letting customers compare prices with their insurance co-pay, without insurance or with the savings available through the Prime prescription savings plan to choose the lowest option. Amazon is also staffing a pharmacy service accessible at all hours so that customers can answer questions about their medications.

In August, Amazon launched its fitness tracker, Halo. The personal health and wellness monitoring and advice service includes a $64.99 wrist tracker and an application suite for monitoring health.

This year, CMS has been quite active announcing several updates to its Medicare Secondary Payer Recovery Portal and holding a recent webinar on redetermination requests. CMS trends regarding post-settlement Total Payment Obligation to Claimant (TPOC) beneficiary recovery have been causing some challenges for workers’ compensation carriers from another angle. CMS will also be holding a webinar on the NGHP Beneficiary Recovery Process on December 9th.

In September, CMS and the Commercial Repayment Center (CRC) held a webinar session to address “redetermination” requests as part of the administrative appeals process regarding conditional payment disputes of non-group health plans (NGHP). CMS reviewed the five levels of the administrative appeals process before the CRC discussed the various appeals available to primary payers in the administrative appeals process.

The CRC outlined the specific arguments it will accept as part of a redetermination request as follows:

— Termination of Ongoing Responsibility for Medicals (ORM) due to benefits exhaustion;
— Termination of ORM due to settlement or other claim resolution;
— Benefits denied/revoked by applicable plan;
— Non-covered services;
— Unrelated services; and
— Duplicative primary payment.

As part of this session, the CRC emphasized adherence to established appeal timelines and other related requirements is critical. On this point, the CRC advised redeterminations must be received within 120 days from the date a Medicare demand letter is received by the named debtor, which CRC noted is presumed to be five days after the date of demand.

CMS’s trend of having the BCRC pursue the claimant post-settlement is currently causing some challenges and frustration particularly in workers’ compensation settlements.

Specifically, the BCRC is increasingly opening conditional payment recovery cases upon receipt of TPOC information and issuing final demands with the claimant named the debtor. This occurs even in situations where the parties have previously worked with the CRC to resolve conditional payment cases related to ORM.

When this happens, the carrier cannot interact with the BCRC on the claim without having a separate Proof of Representation (POR) executed by the claimant. This, in turn, complicates the workers’ compensation carrier’s ability to ensure that Medicare’s recovery is resolved if they cannot secure a POR from the claimant post-settlement.

To prevent this, workers’ compensation carriers wishing to ensure conditional payment exposure is fully resolved may need to consider securing a POR from the claimant as part of the settlement process to avoid having to chase the claimant post-settlement for this required authorization.

CMS has recently announced that it is holding a Non-Group Health Plan (NGHP) Beneficiary Recovery Process Webinar on December 9, 2020, at 1:00 p.m. ET. CMS indicates that its primary intended audience is “attorneys who represent beneficiaries and other beneficiary representatives.”