2013 CHANGES TO THE MINNESOTA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LAW
INTRODUCTION
In 2013, the Minnesota Legislature undertook and passed a Bill which was signed into law by
Governor Dayton relating to workers’ compensation that intended to make “various policy and
housekeeping changes.” It also adopts certain advisory council recommendations. A copy of the
Bill that was signed into law is attached and the underlined sections of that Bill reflect the
changes to the statute.
This law includes a significant change to compensability for mental-mental claims, a significant
change limiting the provision of rehab services in the form of job search assistance and
development, some changes to attorney’s fees (including Subd. 7 attorney fee reimbursement), a
requirement for the Workers’ Compensation Division to adopt rules relating to the long-term use
of opioids or other scheduled medications and to include the use of written contracts between the
injured worker and the healthcare provider. It also provides for a maximum rate change and
Minn. Stat. §176.645 adjustment change with regard to indemnity benefits along with some other
minor changes that will have little impact on claims handling on a daily basis.
MENTAL-MENTAL INJURIES
The legislature amended Minn. Stat. §176.011, Subd. 15 Occupational disease and Subd. 16
Personal injury in a way to allow compensability of so-called mental-mental claims in a limited
fashion. The statute has been amended and redefined Occupational disease and Personal injury
to allow for compensability of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) claims.
The definitions in Subd. 15 and 16 of Minn. Stat. §176.081 both refer to mental impairment
which is now defined in Minn. Stat. 176.011, Subd. 15(d) to be “a diagnosis of post-traumatic
stress disorder by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist. For the purpose of this chapter,
“post-traumatic stress disorder” means the condition as described in the most recently
published edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders by the
American Psychiatric Association.” The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders is also known as DSM and the most recent and current iteration of that document is
DSM 5.
The statutory changes do not impact physical stimulus resulting in mental injury and mental
stimulus resulting in physical injury. These circumstances remain compensable. That is not a
change in the law. The change comes where the statute now reads that mental stimulus resulting
in a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder and resulting disability and need for treatment is
now compensable.
The amendments to the statute go on to further state that there are certain mental impairments
from specified causes not considered a disease or injury. Mental Impairment that “results from a
disciplinary action, work evaluation, job transfer, layoff, demotion, promotion, termination,
retirement, or other similar action taken in good faith by the employer,” is not compensable.
The normal stresses and strains of a job and interaction with the employer and co-workers are not
to be considered sufficient to lead to a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder resulting in a
compensable mental injury.
This would be consistent with DSM 5 which seems to suggest in its definition of post-traumatic
stress disorder that it must be caused by exposure to death, threatened death, actual or threatened
serious injury, or actual or threatened sexual violence. This is contained in DSM 5. This portion
of DSM 5 is attached. If that is the standard, then, it is axiomatic that disciplinary action, work
evaluation, job transfer, layoff, demotion, promotion, termination, retirement, or similar action
taken in good faith by the employer would not be sufficient to lead to the diagnosis of PTSD.
The statute also states that the diagnosis of PTSD must be made by a licensed psychiatrist or
psychologist. Therefore, a family doctor or a general practitioner, for instance, cannot diagnose
a compensable case of post-traumatic stress disorder if the actual words of the statute are to be
given meaning and force and effect.
2
SUMMARY

The only mental injury that is compensable under this law is post-traumatic stress
disorder.

PTSD must be diagnosed by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist.

The diagnosis must be consistent with DSM 5 which states that the diagnosis comes from
exposure to death, threatened death, actual or threatened serious injury, or actual or
threatened sexual violence, and not standard work place stressors.

This change in the law only applies to injuries occurring on or after the effective date of
October 1, 2013.
3
CHANGES TO REHABILITATION SERVICES
One important and significant change and other more minor changes were made to Minn. Stat.
§176.102 and Minn. Stat. §176.106 as it impacts Minn. Stat. §176.102. At Subd. 5 of that
statutory section, job development is defined and limited. It is defined as “systematic contact
with prospective employers resulting in opportunities for interviews and employment that
might not otherwise have existed, and includes identification of job leads and arranging for
job interviews.” In other words, job search assistance – once an employee is out looking for
work.
Those services can often times be rendered and billed at excessive rates and expense. They are
now subject to limitations. The first limitation is that those services provided by either a
qualified rehabilitation consultant firm or a registered rehabilitation vendor must not exceed 20
hours per month. Furthermore, those services cannot be provided for a period of more than 26
weeks – consecutive or intermittent. Additionally, once 13 weeks – consecutive or intermittent –
of job development have been provided, the QRC on the case is required to consult with the
parties and come up with a plan amendment reflecting agreement of the parties to extend job
development services for up to an additional 13 consecutive weeks – or some lesser term of time.
If an agreement is not reached, the QRC must file a request for a rehabilitation conference to
address the provision of ongoing and continuing job development services.
This statutory change does not impact the QRC’s provision of the services during job search
beyond that which already exists in the statute. This change in the statute is directed at job
placement vendors.
Since the statute expressly provides that the services can be provided on an intermittent basis,
some thought needs to be given to how to best control the expense by requesting or requiring
consecutive weeks to buy down the number of weeks available or to allow intermittent or
periodic job development services to be provided and spread out over a longer period of time.
Negotiation of the rehab plan when job placement is to begin may help to develop a less costly
job search.
One potential impact of this change relating to job development services and limitation is that
retraining claims and permanent total disability claims may surface a little earlier than they have
in the past.
There was also a change to Minn. Stat. §176.102, Subd. 10 which impacts the provision of
disability case management services and QRCs.
The new statutory section reads as follows:
“(b) An individual qualified rehabilitation consultant registered by the
Commissioner must not provide any medical, rehabilitation, or disability
4
case management services related to an injury that is compensable under this
chapter when these services are part of the same claim, unless the case
management services are part of an approved rehabilitation plan.”
It is the intent of this section to prevent a disability case manager that is placed on the case
before statutory rehab services begin, (usually 90 days or 13 weeks after disability began) from
staying on the case as the QRC.
Effectively, that means there will be a change from the disability case manager to a new person
assigned as the QRC. There are not likely to be any QRCs that will then allow disability case
management services to continue, thereby rendering useless the final phrase of that change that
says “unless the case management services are part of an approved rehabilitation plan.” No
QRC is going to write a plan that allows a disability case manager that was already in existence
to remain on the file or a new one to be involved.
One potential way to walk around or avoid a new QRC becoming involved is to assign a QRC
earlier than normal to act as a QRC and not a disability case manager. In other words, start
statutory rehab with assignment of a QRC right away, do not use a disability case manager. That
call will have to be made on a case by case basis.
Another change to the statute affecting rehab services is that rehabilitation conferences pursuant
to Minn. Stat. §176.106, Subd. 3 that involves a rehabilitation issue “must be held within 21 days
unless it only involves fees for rehab services, or there is good cause for holding a conference
later than 21 days. “That timing could become very problematic for schedules of those who are
involved in rehab issues.
These changes are effective on October 1, 2013 to all dates of injury.
5
HOUSEKEEPING CHANGES
COMPENSATION RATE AND ADJUSTMENT TO BENEFITS
The maximum compensation rate pursuant to Minn. Stat. §176.101, Subd. 1 is now a floating
rate. It is 102% of the statewide average weekly wage beginning October 1, 2013. The
maximum rate effective October 1, 2013 is $963.90. Over a 130 week temp total claim at the
max compensation rate, the employee would be paid $125,307. At the $850 max rate applicable
currently and before October 1, 2013, an employee would have been paid $110,500 over that
same 130 week timeframe. A maximum rate employee will be paid almost $15,000 more over
the course of the 130 week TTD schedule at the new max rate.
This max rate is floating, which means that it will be subject to amendment and change each and
every October 1 based upon the statewide average weekly wage being determined each year.
Coupled with the change in the maximum rate, Minn. Stat. §176.645 was changed to allow for a
maximum adjustment of 3% per year for injuries occurring on or after October 1, 2013. This is
up from the 2% for injuries prior to that date.
Also, the adjustment will now apply on the 3rd anniversary of the date of injury rather than the
4th year. Furthermore, there is a floor on adjustments. An adjustment can never be less than
zero.
ATTORNEY’S FEES
The 25/20 percent attorney fee formula of Minn. Stat. §176.081 is gone. Minn. Stat. §176.081
has been amended to provide that an employee’s attorney is entitled to a straight 20 percent fee
up to a maximum of $26,000. An employee would have to have received $130,000 in
compensation to entitle an attorney to the maximum fee of $26,000.
The $26,000 fee limit does not affect the right to claim Irwin/excess fees with proper proofs.
Another change, which should be well received by employers and insurers, is that the Subd. 7
attorney fee section of Minn. Stat. §176.081 has been modified. There is no longer the windfall
of Subd. 7 attorney’s fees reimbursement payable on hourly fee claims under Roraff, Heaton or
otherwise. Subd. 7 attorney’s fees reimbursement will, again, be just that – reimbursement.
They are once again only payable as reimbursement on contingent fees payable to an employee’s
attorney from the employee’s indemnity benefits.
These changes to the attorney’s fees are effective for dates of injury on or after October 1, 2013.
6
You are still subject to Subd. 7 attorney fee reimbursement claims on Heaton, Roraff, or other
hourly fee claims for dates of injury prior to October 1, 2013.
SETTLEMENT STIPULATION APPROVAL
The statute no longer provides for approval of a Settlement Stipulation by the Workers’
Compensation Court of Appeals. If a settlement occurs in a matter that is pending before the
Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals, the matter will be sent back to the Office of
Administrative Hearings for review and approval of the Stipulation. A letter to the WCCA
should be sent advising them that the matter has settled and a Stipulation will be provided to
OAH for review. Good practice would suggest that OAH be copied on that letter.
SPECIAL COMPENSATION FUND
There were changes made to Minn. Stat. §176.183 that affect the Special Compensation Fund’s
procedure and methodology to obtain approval of settlement in an uninsured employer claim.
The Special Compensation Fund must notify the uninsured employer of a pending settlement and
the employer has a period of time, 15 days, within which to object to a proposed settlement in an
uninsured case.
Also, there was a change in Minn. Stat. §176.129, Subd. 13 regarding insurer bankruptcies and
reimbursements to insolvent insurers for second injury or supplementary benefits after a
declaration of bankruptcy.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY
This bill, signed into law by Governor Dayton also compels the Department of Labor and
Industry, Workers’ Compensation Division to study possible reforms to drive down medical
costs in the work comp system. One of the statutory mandates is that the Department of Labor
and Industry must develop a criteria for long term use of opioids and other scheduled
medications to include use of written narcotic contracts between the injured worker and the
medical provider. The new law also provides that there is to be an advocate pilot program
relating to back fusion candidates. As a general proposition, the Department of Labor and
Industry is also to study possible reforms to the Healthcare Provider Reimbursement system that
would effectively reduce expense and the department is authorized to conduct a study towards
that end.
© Arlen R. Logren, Esq.
7
Peterson, Logren, & Kilbury, P.A.
Suite 315
2233 University Avenue West
St. Paul, MN 55114
Phone: 651-647-0506
Fax: 651-647-0532
Larry J. Peterson
LJP@plklaw.net
Arlen R. Logren
ALogren@plklaw.net
T. Michael Kilbury
TMK@plklaw.net
Brent C. Kleffman
BKleffman@plklaw.net
Krista Hiner
KHiner@plklaw.net
Paralegals
Sandra L. Roesner
sroesner@plklaw.net
Kat J. Berube
kberube@plklaw.net
Cassie J. Gunderson
cgunderson@plklaw.net
8