HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 7351
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR
October 17, 2016
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the
Disability Rates and Workers' Compensation Audit
The Office of the City Auditor recommends acceptance of the Disability Rates and Workers'
Compensation Audit. At its meeting on June 14, 2016, the Policy and Services Committee
approved and unanimously recommended that the City Council accept the report. The Policy
and Services Committee minutes are included in this packet.
Respectfully submitted,
Harriet Richardson City Auditor
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Disability Rates and Workers' Compensation Audit (PDF)
Attachment B: Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes Excerpt (June 14, 2016)
(PDF)
Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor
Page 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR
June 14, 2016
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
Disability Rates and Workers' Compensation Audit
In accordance with the Fiscal Year 2016 Annual Audit Work Plan, the Office of the City Auditor
has completed the Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit. The audit report
presents 5 findings with a total of 15 recommendations. The Office of the City Auditor
recommends that the Policy and Services Committee review and recommend to the City
Council acceptance of the Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit.
Respectfully submitted,
Harriet Richardson
City Auditor
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Disability Rates and Workers' Compensation Audit (PDF)
Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor
Attachment A
Page 2
Attachment A
Disability Rates and
Workers’ Compensation Audit
June 2016
Office of the City Auditor
Harriet Richardson, City Auditor
Yuki Matsuura, Senior Performance Auditor
Lisa Wehara, Performance Auditor II
Attachment A
Page intentionally left blank
Attachment A
Office of the City Auditor ● 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor ● Palo Alto, CA 94301 ● 650.329.2667
Copies of the full report are available on the Office of the City Auditor website at:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts.aud/reports/performance.asp
OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit
June 2016
PURPOSE OF THE AUDIT
The audit objectives were to determine if the City's Workers’ Compensation policies and Injury and Illness Prevention
Program are implemented in a manner that minimizes injuries and illnesses and workers' compensation costs.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS
Finding 1: The City’s Injury
and Illness Prevention
Program (IIPP) is
comprehensive but has lost
its effectiveness due to the
loss of its City Safety Officer
(Page 7)
The City has a comprehensive safety manual to help protect City employees from work‐
related injuries and illnesses. However, the manual has not been updated since 2000, and has
lost its effectiveness as its procedures, forms, and tools have become outdated. While the
number of workers’ compensation claims filed decreased in FY 2015 and has generally
decreased since FY 2009, the City may face a future increase in workplace injuries and
illnesses if the IIPP remains outdated.
Key Recommendations to the City Manager’s Office:
Allocate sufficient resources to implement and maintain the City’s IIPP and to monitor the
City’s compliance with the program.
Update the safety manual to redefine the roles and responsibilities and ensure compliance
with Cal/OSHA standards and other applicable safety laws.
Review departmental procedures and safety requirements to ensure they align with the
revised IIPP and City policy and procedures.
Work with York and departments to identify useful safety statistics, appropriate recipients
of this information, and establish an automated process for those statistics to be
provided.
Identify training opportunities to minimize common injuries, and coordinate with
departments to ensure regular training is provided to employees.
Finding 2: Injured employees’
benefit eligibility is not
accurately and completely
tracked and monitored,
resulting in both
overpayments and
underpayments of workers’
compensation benefits (Page
14)
The City does not have an effective process or tools to monitor benefit eligibility and the
work status of injured employees, resulting in both overpayments and underpayments of the
benefits paid to injured employees. The City’s workers’ compensation benefit structure is
highly complex due to additional City‐provided benefits defined by City policy and labor
agreements. This complexity also resulted in some disability leave payments being incorrectly
reported as compensation to CalPERS. HR staff track eligibility of each injured employee
manually because the City’s SAP system is not configured to support administration of these
benefits. York relies on HR staff to immediately communicate any changes in the work status
of injured employees to ensure that benefit eligibility is updated and communicated to the
injured employee in a timely manner as required by state law.
The former City Safety Officer used to play a key monitoring role and facilitated
communication between the City and York, but roles and responsibilities became unclear as
HR was reorganized and the processes changed. Lack of monitoring resulted in multiple
instances of benefit overpayment and underpayment.
Attachment A
Key Recommendations to the City Manager’s Office:
Continue working with ASD and CalPERS to address the disability leave benefits that were
incorrectly reported as compensation to CalPERS.
Review the 22 claims that accounted for 87 percent of the additional city benefits in
Exhibit 11, and take necessary action to address any errors identified.
Review the existing disability leave management process in Exhibit 12 and determine the
optimal monitoring structure, update the tools and procedures, and allocate sufficient and
skilled resources.
HR work with ASD to ensure that the data necessary for disability leave management is
captured through time reporting in SAP to support the process.
Work with York to identify and train responsible HR staff, and maintain online access to
York data for analyzing claims, payment transactions, and trends.
Finding 3: The City has not
met the state requirement
for timely reporting of its
workers’ compensation
claims to York, potentially
causing the cost of claims to
increase (Page 24)
California law requires employers to report within five days of their knowledge every
occupational injury or illness that results in lost time beyond the date of the incident or
requires medical treatment beyond first aid. The City has not met this requirement, which
could result in penalties and could also increase the cost of claims. A recent study concluded
that claims with more than a two‐week delay in reporting involve a longer period before the
injured worker can return to work, take longer to close, and are more complex to settle.
Key Recommendations to the City Manager’s Office:
Streamline the workers’ compensation reporting process and improve the accuracy and
completeness of the claim forms.
Finding 4: The City has not
ensured that York met all
contract terms (Page 29)
The York contract includes various terms that could help the City reduce its workers'
compensation costs, such as cost reduction guarantees and utilization review. While most
requirements are met, there are some that the City has not required York to fulfill. The City
could better manage its claims and reduce costs by fully using services York is required to
provide under the contract.
Key Recommendations to the City Manager’s Office:
Create a list of key contract terms and assign staff to monitor and follow up on York
performance against each term
Work with York to streamline the monthly, quarterly, and annual reporting process by
leveraging online access to York data
Finding 5: Workers’
compensation revenues,
costs, and performance data
are not clearly reported for
informed decision making
(Page 31)
The Workers’ Compensation Fund accounts for administration of the City’s workers’
compensation program, and the revenues and expenditures are reported in the City's
comprehensive annual financial report and budget documents. However, the Workers’
Compensation Fund does not include all of the City’s workers’ compensation costs, and the
costs presented in the budget documents are difficult to understand the nature and true cost
of each line item. Without a clear understanding of the workers’ compensation costs, Council
and management may not be able to make informed decisions regarding the City’s workers’
compensation related programs.
Key Recommendations to the City Manager’s Office:
HR work with ASD’s Office of Management and Budget to clarify the presentation of the
workers’ compensation costs in the City’s budget documents
Work with York to identify useful performance measures and establish procedures to
ensure reliable reporting of performance data using a consistent methodology.
Attachment A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Objective ................................................................................................................................................. 1
Background ............................................................................................................................................. 1
Scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 5
Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Finding 1:
The City’s Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) is comprehensive but has lost its
effectiveness due to the loss of its City Safety Officer ................................................................ 7
Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 13
Finding 2:
Injured employees’ benefit eligibility is not accurately and completely tracked and monitored,
resulting in both overpayments and underpayments of workers’ compensation benefits...... 14
Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 22
Finding 3:
The City has not met the state requirement for timely reporting of its workers’ compensation
claims to York, potentially causing the cost of claims to increase ............................................ 24
Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 27
Finding 4:
The City has not ensured that York met all contract terms ............................................................. 29
Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 30
Finding 5:
Workers’ compensation revenues, costs, and performance data are not clearly reported for
informed decision making ......................................................................................................... 31
Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 34
Appendix 1: The City’s Workers’ Compensation Costs ........................................................................ 35
Appendix 2: City Manager’s Response ................................................................................................. 37
Attachment A
ABBREVIATIONS
4850
ASD
AWW
CAL/OSHA
CalPERS
CSAC
DIR
EMS
FTE
FY
HR
IIPP
MOA
PD
RMI
SEIU
TD
TPA
California Labor Code Section 4850
Administrative Services Department
Average weekly wage
California Occupational Safety and Health Act
California Public Employees' Retirement System
California State Association of Counties
Department of Industrial Relations
Emergency medical service
Full‐time equivalent
Fiscal year
Human Resources
Injury and illness prevention program
Memorandum of agreement
Permanent disability
Repetitive motion injury
Service Employees International Union
Temporary disability
Third party administrator
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 1
INTRODUCTION
Objective The audit objectives were to determine if the City's Workers’
Compensation policies and Injury and Illness Prevention Program are
implemented in a manner that minimizes injuries and illnesses and
workers' compensation costs.
Background California State law requires employers to have workers’
compensation insurance, either by purchasing a policy or through
self‐insurance, and pay workers’ compensation benefits. Employees
are entitled to receive prompt, effective medical treatment for on‐
the‐job injuries or illnesses regardless of fault and, in return, are
prevented from suing employers for those injuries.
The City of Palo Alto is permissibly self‐insured for workers’
compensation up to $500,000 per claim, and has a workers’
compensation insurance policy through California State Association
of Counties (CSAC) Excess Insurance Authority, a joint powers
authority, with excess coverage up to the statutory limits set by the
state of California. 1 The City’s workers’ compensation policy states
that City employees and elected or appointed public officials are
generally covered under workers’ compensation, while volunteers
are not. The Risk Manager in the City’s Human Resources (HR)
Department is responsible for administering workers’ compensation
benefits.
State Oversight The California State Department of Industrial Relations (DIR),
through its Division of Workers’ Compensation: 1) administers
workers’ compensation laws, 2) resolves disputes over workers’
compensation benefits, and 3) provides information and assistance
about the workers’ compensation system. The DIR’s Office of Self
Insurance Plans is responsible for oversight and regulation of
workers’ compensation self‐insurance in California.
Third Party Administrator
(TPA)
The City has contracted with York Risk Services Group (York), a third
party administrator, since July 2006 to administer the City’s workers’
compensation claims. York claims examiners, on behalf of the City,
determine what benefits should be paid or rendered under the
applicable workers’ compensation laws in each reported claim, and
pay benefits out of City funds. The City maintains control over
authorizing appeals, settlements, awards, and all other decisions
related to benefits.
1 The maximum amount depends on various factors, such as type of benefit, loss date, or nature of injury or illness.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 2
Workers’ Compensation
Claim Types and Benefits
There are three types of workers’ compensation claims:
First aid – Minor medical treatment only, as defined by state law
Medical only – Medical treatment only beyond first aid
Indemnity – Medical treatment and wage support when the
employee cannot return to work
Exhibit 1 describes workers’ compensation benefits state law
requires the City to pay.
EXHIBIT 1
Workers’ Compensation Benefits Required by State Law
Benefit Category Benefit Provided by the City
Medical Treatment All reasonable and necessary medical care and incidental costs, including
transportation. The City generally is not liable for the cost of medical treatment
obtained by the employee before the City was notified of the injury.
Salary Continuation
for Safety Employees
(4850)
Eligible public safety employees (e.g., firefighters, police officers) can receive up to 365
days of full salary while on disability leave in accordance with California Labor Code
Section 4850.
Temporary Disability
(TD)
Employees who are unable to work for more than three days while recovering from
injury can receive two‐thirds of gross wages tax free up to 104 weeks within five years
from the date of injury. There are two types of TD benefits:
Temporary Total Disability benefits – payments to an employee who cannot work
at all while recovering.
Temporary Partial Disability benefits – payments to an employee who can work
part‐time while recovering.
Permanent Disability
(PD)
When maximum recovery is achieved and a permanent injury remains, the employee
may receive a settlement based on the level of permanent disability, type of injury,
continuing medical treatment, and the employee’s age and occupation.
Death The dependents receive burial expenses up to $10,000* and benefit payments up to
$320,000,* depending on the number of dependents.
Supplemental Job
Displacement
Benefits
A Supplemental Job Displacement Voucher up to $6,000,* payable to a state
accredited training school to assist with retraining, if the City cannot provide modified
or alternative work to accommodate permanent work restrictions.
* The maximum benefit set by the state of California for injuries on or after January 1, 2013.
Source: California state laws and City policies
City’s Workers’ Compensation
Claims and Costs
It is difficult to identify trends in the City’s workers’ compensation
claims without understanding the unique nature and severity of
individual cases. Exhibit 2 shows that the number of claims filed by
City employees has decreased by half in the last decade, from 154 in
fiscal year (FY) 2006 to 74 in FY 2015. However, the number of claims
does not always correlate with the cost of claims, which is highly
dependent on the severity of each case. The FY 2015 number is also
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 3
likely to increase as employees sometimes report at a later date their
injuries or illnesses that originated in the past.
Exhibit 3 shows that indemnity claims comprise the majority of the
City’s cost for workers’ compensation claims, representing more
severe injuries and illnesses with higher medical cost, wage support,
and in some cases, the cost of litigation and settlement. Although the
cost of claims incurred has decreased by 61 percent, from
$2.9 million in FY 2006 to $1.1 million in FY 2015, the cost of newer
claims is expected to increase as claims develop (e.g., a knee injury
later requiring surgery). For example, the total cost of FY 2013 claims
was $1 million as of June 30, 2013, but increased to $3.2 million by
June 30, 2015. Spikes in the cost of claims incurred in FY 2012 and
FY 2013 were due to two separate claims involving an unusually
severe injury or illness that progressed over time.
EXHIBIT 2
Number of Workers’ Compensation Claims Filed by Fiscal Year of Loss
As of June 30, 2015
Source: York data
80 76 75 73 71
45 56 42 59
36
74
57 56 57
38
46
45
39
45
37
6 9 5
5
4 1
1
4
1
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Indemnity Medical Only First Aid
Number of claims may increase as
more are filed after the loss date
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 4
EXHIBIT 3
Cost of Claims Incurred and Paid by Fiscal Year of Loss
Valued as of June 30, 2015
* The actual cost paid as of June 30, 2015, for claims grouped by fiscal year of their loss dates. The difference between the
estimated cost incurred and the actual cost paid becomes smaller as the injured employees receive benefits and the
older claims are closed.
Source: York data
Injury and Illness Prevention
Program (IIPP)
The City’s safety policy requires all employees to comply with all
California Occupational Safety and Health Act (Cal/OSHA) standards,
all applicable safety laws, and the City’s injury and illness prevention
manual (the safety manual). Cal/OSHA requires employers to
establish and implement a written injury and illness prevention
program (IIPP), and regularly update it to maintain its effectiveness.
According to Cal/OSHA, an effective IIPP must:
• Fully involve all employees, supervisors, and management
• Identify employees’ exposure to specific workplace hazards
• Correct identified hazards in an appropriate and timely manner
• Provide effective training
Modified Duty Program Helping an injured employee return to work with modified or
alternative duty can benefit both the City and the employee in
multiple ways. Not only can the City reduce workers’ compensation
costs and retain experienced employees, the employees can also
avoid financial stress and continue to be productive. Wages will be
the same rate of pay the employee received in his/her regular
$2.9
$2.1
$2.7 $2.6 $2.5
$1.9
$2.8
$3.2
$2.1
$1.1
$2.6
$1.9
$2.5
$2.1 $2.2
$1.4
$2.0
$1.7
$1.2
$0.5
$0.0
$0.5
$1.0
$1.5
$2.0
$2.5
$3.0
$3.5
FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Mi
l
l
i
o
n
s
Estimated Cost Incurred Actual Cost Paid*
Indemnity claims represent about 98% of the costs
Costs are expected to
increase as claims develop
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 5
assignment. City policy limits modified work assignments to 180 days
unless there are extenuating medical reasons approved by the Risk
Manager.
Scope We reviewed the City’s workers’ compensation claims and related
financial and operational data for the injuries and illnesses that
occurred from FY 2011 through FY 2015. Our analysis focused on
indemnity claims involving four departments that represent over
90 percent of the City’s indemnity claims cost: Police, Fire, Utilities,
and Public Works. We did not review the actual claim files, medical
records, or legal records.
Our comparison of the City’s data to York’s data was limited because:
We could not obtain the dates of disability leave covered by each
York voucher, so we compared the amount of York vouchers that
reflected the City’s disability leave payments to the actual City
payments based on the voucher issuance date. Any vouchers
reissued to make adjustments resulted in discrepancies if they
covered prior disability leave dates.
There was not a common unique data field. Although we used
the name as a common field, the employee’s name in the City’s
data sometimes differed from the claimant’s name in York’s
data, which required us to visually compare names to identify
employees.
Methodology To accomplish our audit objective, we:
Interviewed staff from the HR, the Administrative Services
Department (ASD), Police, Fire, Utilities, and Public Works
departments to understand the City’s workers’ compensation
processes.
Reviewed California DIR publications, California laws and
regulations, City policies and procedures, and labor agreements
to understand the laws, regulations, and requirements related to
the workers’ compensation claims filed by City employees.
Reviewed the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports,
Operating Budget documents, City data, and other departmental
records, including safety committee minutes for Fire, Utilities
(Water‐Gas‐Wastewater Field Operations, Electric Field
Operations), and Public Works.
Interviewed York staff, including claims examiners and the
account manager, and reviewed York data.
Identified risks that could prevent achieving the program
objectives and procedures implemented to mitigate the risks.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 6
Mapped relevant processes in coordination with HR and ASD
staff.
Compared the disability leave benefits recorded by York to the
benefits the City actually paid to the injured employees from
FY 2013 through FY 2015. Selected 22 employees with a
difference of $10,000 or more between York records and City
benefit amounts paid, and reviewed their workers’ compensation
claim data, York check register records, City’s financial records,
and the employees’ timecards. Worked with HR and ASD staff
and York staff to identify causes for the differences and
determine if the benefits were paid accurately in accordance with
state law and City policies.
Data reliability To assess the reliability of the data needed to answer the audit
objective, we reviewed the data for completeness, consistency, and
reasonableness, and discussed issues we identified with
knowledgeable City and York staff. We also cross‐referenced multiple
reports generated from the City’s SAP system and York’s system to
further understand the data and related processes.2
Although our assessment identified some discrepancies between the
City’s data and York data, we were able to understand the sources of
discrepancies and isolate them or make manual adjustments to
support our audit findings and conclusions. From these efforts, we
believe the information is sufficiently reliable for this report.
Compliance with government
auditing standards
We conducted this audit of disability rates and workers’
compensation in accordance with our FY 2016 Annual Audit Work
Plan and generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. We believe
that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objective.
We would like to thank management and staff in the Human Resources, Administrative Services,
Police, Fire, Utilities, Public Works departments and the City Attorney’s Office for their time,
cooperation, and assistance during the audit process.
2 SAP is the City’s enterprise resource planning system that supports the City’s core business functions, including
accounting, purchasing, and utilities.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 7
Finding 1 The City’s Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) is
comprehensive but has lost its effectiveness due to the
loss of its City Safety Officer
The City has a comprehensive safety manual to help protect City
employees from work‐related injuries and illnesses. However, the
manual has not been updated since 2000, and has lost its
effectiveness as its procedures, forms, and tools have become
outdated. While the number of workers’ compensation claims filed
decreased in FY 2015 and has generally decreased since FY 2009, the
City may face a future increase in workplace injuries and illnesses if
the IIPP remains outdated.
The City’s Injury and Illness
Prevention Program is no
longer effective
The City Safety Officer is responsible for maintaining an effective IIPP,
but the City has not had a City Safety Officer since 2013. HR went
through a series of reorganizations beginning in FY 2014, but it did
not redefine the roles and responsibilities over the IIPP. As a result,
the City Safety Officer’s responsibilities went unfulfilled while
departments have stopped referring to the manual in favor of their
own departmental safety procedures or practices.
The City has not had a City
Safety Officer since July 2013
due to HR reorganization
The safety manual assigns the City Safety Officer the responsibility to
maintain an effective IIPP by ensuring regulatory compliance and
coordinating all City safety activities. However, the City has not had a
City Safety Officer since the previous officer retired in July 2013. HR
went through a series of reorganizations beginning FY 2014, and
implemented a new business partner model where each department
was assigned to one of the HR business partner teams that provide a
wide range of human‐resource related services for their
departments.
HR did not revise the safety
manual to realign it with the
new business partner model
Upon reorganization, HR did not revise the safety manual procedures
or redefine the roles and responsibilities over the IIPP to ensure the
IIPP remains effective and sufficient resources are allocated to
administer the program. Between November 2013 and June 2015, HR
hired four Senior HR Administrators to lead each business partner
team. However, their involvement in the City’s IIPP has been minimal
because their job duties cover a wide range of other high priority HR
areas, and their workload, as they are trained and learn on the job,
has been full with pressing issues and no capacity left for injury and
illness prevention efforts. Exhibit 4 shows that HR staffing for the IIPP
decreased from 1.75 in FY 2011 to 0.54 in FY 2015, while the
department’s staffing increased slightly during the same period, from
16.34 in FY 2011 to 16.70 in FY 2015. This indicates that HR
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 8
reallocated its resources away from the IIPP to other functions,
rather than losing a position due to a budget reduction.
EXHIBIT 4
HR Staffing and Cost to Administer the IIPP (General Fund)
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
HR Authorized Staffing – IIPP 1.75 1.00 1.02 0.54 0.54
HR Administration Cost – IIPP $190,976 $155,518 $93,136 $75,113 $85,034
Source: City’s financial records
Citywide safety committees
have not been established as
required
The City is required to establish certain safety committees and hold
meetings as specified by its policies and labor agreements. Although
departments hold regular safety committee meetings, the citywide
committees shown in Exhibit 5 have not been established as
required. The Citywide Safety Committee, for example, is designed to
monitor departmental safety activities and monitor compliance with
safety and occupational health standards and practices, but it has not
met for years.
EXHIBIT 5: Safety Committees not Established
Safety
Committee Authority Composition Frequency Functions
Citywide Policy and Procedures
(3‐01/HRD)
SEIU MOA
SEIU Hourly MOA
Safety Manual
Ten members with equal
union and management
membership*
Upon call Review safety standards, act as
an advisory group to the
departmental safety
committees, and review all
departmental safety programs
Civic
Center
(City Hall)
SEIU MOA
Safety Manual
One facilities management,
one building inspection,
and two union
representatives, and the
City Risk Manager**
As
needed**
Safety matters of the Civic
Center (City Hall)
Ergonomics SEIU MOA None specified None
specified
Provide management with
recommendations on safe
ergonomic work practices
* Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
** According to the SEIU MOA. However, the safety manual includes the City Safety Officer, not the Risk Manager, in the
composition and requires the meeting to take place at least quarterly.
Source: City policies and procedures and labor agreements
In addition, the responsibilities of the City Risk Manager and City
Safety Officer are not consistently defined in the City’s policies and
procedures, safety manual, and labor agreements. For example, the
safety manual states the City Safety Officer is responsible for the
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 9
functions of the Citywide committee, while City procedures assign
the responsibility to the Risk Manager. HR did not clarify the
assignment of responsibility as part of the reorganization.
Ergonomic training
workshops have not been
provided as required
The SEIU labor agreement also requires that management develop
and provide training workshops on safe ergonomic work practices at
least twice a year and immediately adopt Cal/OSHA ergonomic
standards as part of the IIPP. The Cal/OSHA ergonomics standard
requires every employer that had at least two workers report a
Repetitive Motion Injury (RMI), as diagnosed by licensed physicians
within a 12‐month period, to implement a program designed to
minimize RMIs. The program must include a worksite evaluation,
control of exposures that have caused RMIs, and employee training.
Because there were two to four workers’ compensation claims
involving RMIs in each of the last five fiscal years, the City is subject
to this requirement.
Since its reorganization, HR has not had the resources to identify and
coordinate ergonomic training that the former City Safety Officer did
in the past. While the City increased its annual budget for ergonomic
evaluations from $25,000 to $55,000 in FY 2016, its current expense
is focused on office environments where office furniture and
equipment are improperly set up.
Industry specific ergonomic
training may prevent certain
sprain and strain injuries
Studies show the importance of a comprehensive ergonomics
program in preventing sprains, strains, and RMIs.3 Strains and sprains
are the highest priority concern for all public safety workers in terms
of injury frequency and amount of lost work time, and back injuries
are the most common for police and emergency medical service
(EMS) responders who often lift and carry injured people when on
medical calls.
Exhibits 6 and 7 show that strain and sprain injuries represented
more than half of the City’s indemnity claims, both in incurred cost
(52 percent) and in number of claims filed (59 percent) from FY 2011
through FY 2015. Public safety employees filed more than half
(56 percent) of the claims.
While general interventions (e.g., maintaining a healthy body weight
and staying physically fit) may have a beneficial effect on activities
3 Preventing Sprains, Strains, and Repetitive Motion Injuries (2012, State Building & Construction Trades Council of
California); Occupational Safety and Health for Public Safety Employees (2008, RAND Institute for Civil Justice and
Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment).
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 10
such as foot pursuits by police officers, specific ergonomic
interventions (e.g., training, modification to equipment) are more
effective in addressing certain risk factors, such as working in
awkward body postures and performing the same or similar tasks
repetitively. As part of their negotiated benefits, public safety
employees have a wellness or fitness program available.
EXHIBIT 6
Top Five Injuries or Illnesses for Indemnity Claims
From FY 2011 through FY 2015, Valued as of June 30, 2015
Nature of Injury or Illness Number of Claims Filed % Cost Incurred (in millions) %
Strain 120 50% $4.4 40%
Sprain 21 9% $1.3 12%
Respiratory Disorders 7 3% $2.2 20%
Laceration 6 3% $0.6 6%
Cancer 4 2% $0.5 4%
Other 80 34% $2.0 18%
Total 238 100% $10.9 100%
Source: York data
EXHIBIT 7
Number of Indemnity Claims Filed for Strain or Sprain Injury by Body Part
From FY 2011 through FY 2015
Department
Lower
Back Knee Shoulders Multiple Other Total %
Fire 6 11 6 4 18 45 32%
Police 11 5 4 6 8 34 24%
Utilities 4 6 3 2 7 22 16%
Public Works 3 2 2 0 13 20 14%
Other 4 2 1 0 13 20 14%
Total 28 26 16 12 59 141 100%
Source: York data
Police, Fire, Utilities, and
Public Works departments
incur the City’s highest
workers’ compensation costs
Exhibit 8 shows that a majority of the City’s indemnity claims (over
80 percent in number and over 90 percent in incurred cost) are filed
by employees from four departments: Police, Fire, Utilities, and
Public Works. Public safety officers who are charged with protecting
the public, such as police officers and firefighters, have a much
higher incidence and cost of injuries that result in workers’
compensation claims than other public employees. Utilities and
Public Works employees also face higher risks of injury due to the
nature of their job duties.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 11
EXHIBIT 8
Number of Indemnity Claims Filed, Cost Incurred, and Industrial Disability Retirement
By Department From FY 2011 through FY 2015, Valued as of June 30, 2015
Department
Number of Claims Filed Industrial Disability Retirement
Accepted Denied Total %
Cost Incurred
(in millions) % Number
Average Age
at Retirement
Fire 54 15 69 29%$2.9 26% 6 50
Police 51 13 64 27%$4.7* 43% 9** 40
Utilities 32 6 38 16%$1.5 13% 0 N/A
Public Works 26 4 30 13%$1.3 12% 0 N/A
Others 31 6 37 16%$0.6 6% 1 43
Total 194 44 238 100%$10.9 100% 16 44
* Includes two claims with unusually high severity filed in FY 2012 and FY 2013, valued at $0.5 million and $2.2 million,
respectively.
** One of the Police employees was not a safety officer.
Source: York data and City’s personnel records
Exhibit 9 shows that employees with one of five job titles comprise
67 percent of the total indemnity claim costs incurred from FY 2011
through FY 2015. During this period, 87 employees with these job
titles filed 115 indemnity claims, with 19 employees filing two or
more indemnity claims.
EXHIBIT 9
Top Five Job Titles by Cost of Indemnity Claims Incurred
From FY 2011 through FY 2015, Valued as of June 30, 2015
Job Title Department
Cost Incurred
(in millions)
% of City
Total
Number of
Claims Filed
% of City
Total
Police Officer Police $4.3 39% 51 21%
Fire Fighter/Paramedic Fire $1.1 10% 31 13%
Fire Captain Fire $0.8 7% 12 5%
Heavy Equipment Operator Utilities, Public Works $0.7 6% 7 3%
Firefighter Fire $0.6 6% 14 6%
Total $7.4 67% 115 48%
Source: York data
16 industrial disability
retirements resulted from
workers’ compensation cases
in the last five years
During the last five fiscal years, 16 City employees retired with
industrial disability, and 14 of them were safety employees. Safety
employees and other eligible members of the California Public
Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) may qualify for an
industrial disability retirement if they are unable to return to work
because of a job‐related injury or illness that is expected to be
permanent or last indefinitely. While an employee must be at least
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 12
age 50 and have a minimum of five years of service credit to be
eligible for a service retirement, there are no age or vesting
requirements for an industrial disability retirement. If approved,
employees generally receive the greater of:
50 percent of the highest average monthly salary within the last
three years, tax free; or
A higher percentage of the salary depending on the years of
service credit, but only the first 50 percent is tax free.
Reducing the number of industrial disability retirements is in the best
interest of both the employees and the City. The sooner employees
retire, the more contributions the City must make to fund the future
obligations of retirement benefits, while the disabled employees face
a reduced income with the inability to work. All 16 retirees had filed
one or more workers’ compensation claims involving a sprain, strain,
cumulative, or repetitive motion injury prior to applying for an
industrial disability retirement. Preventing these injuries could
potentially reduce the number of disability retirements among safety
employees.
Departments do not have
access to York injury and
illness records to better
identify and correct hazards
One of the City Safety Officer’s responsibilities is to maintain safety
statistics on City employees and participate as needed in
departmental safety committees, and direct activities of those
involved in the daily management of employee safety, including
safety training and hazard identification. In the absence of the City
Safety Officer, departmental safety committees and safety
coordinators have lost access to the workers’ compensation
statistics, which could have helped them develop better safety
programs focused on prevention of high frequency or high cost
injuries and illnesses. York staff stated that regular reporting of
safety statistics can be customized for each department and
automated using their system, as is done for their other clients.
Some of the City’s workplace
postings are outdated
All employers in California must post information regarding safety
rules, regulations, and workers’ compensation benefits in areas
frequented by employees where it may be easily read during the
workday. Although HR annually purchases labor law posters and
distributes them to City facilities to meet this requirement, there was
outdated information posted in multiple locations, including the
names and phone numbers of the City’s occupational health service
provider and the workers’ compensation claims administrator. At
City Hall, there was only one poster displayed on the A level, in an
area that may not be seen by all employees. Most of the information
posted by other departments on other City Hall floors also contained
outdated information.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 13
Recommendations We recommend that:
1.1. The City Manager allocate sufficient resources to implement
and maintain the City’s IIPP and to monitor the City’s
compliance with the program.
1.2. HR update the safety manual, including supplemental tools and
guidance posted on the intranet, to ensure:
The roles and responsibilities over the IIPP are redefined.
The City’s IIPP complies with all Cal/OSHA standards and
other applicable safety laws.
1.3. HR review departmental procedures and safety requirements
to ensure they align with the revised IIPP and City policy and
procedures.
1.4. HR work with York and departments to identify useful safety
statistics, appropriate HR and departmental recipients of this
information, and reporting frequency, and establish an
automated process for those statistics to be provided.
1.5. HR identify industry‐specific ergonomics and general wellness
training opportunities to minimize common injuries, and
coordinate with departments to ensure regular training is
provided to employees.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 14
Finding 2 Injured employees’ benefit eligibility is not accurately and
completely tracked and monitored, resulting in both
overpayments and underpayments of workers’
compensation benefits
The City does not have an effective process or tools to monitor
benefit eligibility and the work status of injured employees, resulting
in both overpayments and underpayments of the benefits paid to
injured employees. The City’s workers’ compensation benefit
structure is highly complex due to additional City‐provided benefits
defined by City policy and labor agreements. This complexity also
resulted in some disability leave payments being incorrectly reported
as compensation to CalPERS. HR staff track eligibility of each injured
employee manually because the City’s SAP system is not configured
to support administration of these benefits. York relies on HR staff to
immediately communicate any changes in the work status of injured
employees to ensure that benefit eligibility is updated and
communicated to the injured employee in a timely manner as
required by state law.
The former City Safety Officer used to play a key monitoring role and
facilitated communication between the City and York, but roles and
responsibilities became unclear as HR was reorganized and the
processes changed. Lack of monitoring resulted in multiple instances
of benefit overpayment and underpayment, as described below.
The City provides workers’
compensation disability leave
benefits beyond what is
required by state law
City policies and labor agreements provide additional workers’
compensation disability leave benefits to City employees beyond the
state requirement, as shown in Exhibit 10. The City pays these
disability leave payments directly through employees’ paychecks.
York is contractually required to determine and track benefits to be
paid or rendered under the applicable workers’ compensation laws,
and does not track these additional City benefits. York issues
vouchers to record the City’s disability leave payments, and in
theory, this amount is less than the actual City payments by the
amount of additional City benefits.
As shown in Exhibit 11, the City made disability leave payments of
$2.4 million from FY 2013 through FY 2015, which was about
$570,000 more than the amount of vouchers issued by York
($1.8 million) during the same period.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 15
EXHIBIT 10
City’s Workers’ Compensation Disability Leave Benefits Direct Payroll Categories
Benefit Category
Payroll Code
(Tax Free) Benefits under State Law Additional Benefits by the City
Salary Continuation for
Safety Employees
(Labor Code 4850)
7200 *Full salary up to 365 days N/A
Salary Continuation for
Nonsafety Employees
7200 N/A *Full salary for the initial 60 calendar
days following the injury
Temporary Disability
(TD)
7100 **Two‐thirds of gross wages
lost up to 104 weeks within
five years from the date of
injury; subject to the weekly
maximum amount set by
state law
*The greater of the amount
determined under state law or two‐
thirds of full salary regardless of the
state weekly maximum (City Policies
and Procedures 3‐03/HRD, last
updated in 2000)
***Medical
Appointments
7200 N/A Can be coded as disability leave on
the timecard
* As of the date processed by the City’s payroll. The amount of full salary is often different from the average weekly
wage (AWW) calculated in accordance with the California Labor Code.
** York determines the AWW by going back one year from the date of injury in accordance with the California Labor
Code. The AWW must consider various factors such as overtime and scheduled wage increases.
*** The City Policy and Procedures 3‐03/HRD state, “The injured employee is entitled to one day of TD (temporary
disability) for each day of wages actually lost when submitting to medical examination at the request of the City or
the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board and when off work for a medical examination to prove his/her contested
claim.
Source: Auditor’s analysis of state law and city policies and procedures
EXHIBIT 11
Summary of Disability Leave Payments
Fiscal Year
Vouchers Issued by York
(Benefits Required by State Law)
Additional
City Benefits*
City Payroll Payments Made
(Includes Additional City Benefits)
2013 $460,454 $232,825 $693,279
2014 $788,390 $213,017 $1,001,407
2015 $595,236 $124,060 $719,297
Total $1,844,080 $569,902 $2,413,983
* Includes errors the City made in paying disability leave benefits.Quantifying the monetary impact of each case would
involve in‐depth analysis of the timecard data and case files.
Source: City’s financial records and York data
Some disability leave
payments have been
incorrectly reported to
CalPERS as compensation
The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS)
defines reportable compensation that should be included in a
member’s “compensation earnable” for the purpose of determining
the member’s retirement allowance. The City has been reporting all
workers’ compensation disability leave benefits included in
Exhibit 11, captured under the payroll codes 7100 and 7200, as
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 16
compensation. However, CalPERS confirmed that only salary
continuation for safety employees as defined in Labor Code section
4850 is reportable to CalPERS, and other disability leave benefits,
including temporary disability and any other salary continuation
plans offered by the employer, are not reportable. HR has been
aware of this issue and stated that it has been working with ASD and
CalPERS to address it.
The City’s disability leave
payments included errors
The former City Safety Officer used to track benefit eligibility of
injured employees and communicate the status to York staff. HR
business partners have been tasked with this function since the
reorganization, but the change was implemented without the new
process being defined or the business partners being fully trained.
We reviewed 22 claims that accounted for about $493,300
(87 percent) of the additional city benefits in Exhibit 11, and
identified multiple errors:
In 3 cases, the City paid disability leave benefits totaling about
$221,600, before the claims had been accepted and York
determined if the employees were entitled to the benefits. One
of the claims was later accepted, and the settlement took into
account payments made by the City. Estimated overpayments
for the other two claims, which were denied, total about
$33,600.
In 2 cases, the City amended the employee's timecard after a
settlement to pay out accrued sick or vacation leave in
accordance with City policies and labor agreements but did not
take into account the disability leave check that York had already
issued. These employees either retired or resigned prior to the
settlement and were no longer on the City’s payroll. Estimated
overpayments total about $23,900.
In 8 cases, HR did not track the first 60 calendar days of salary
continuation for nonsafety employees in accordance with City
policies, resulting in estimated overpayments totaling about
$44,700 to seven employees and an underpayment of about
$3,500 to one employee.
In 14 cases, York vouchers did not reflect the employee's
timecard coding. For example, York issued vouchers after the
employee had returned to work, or conversely, York stopped
issuing vouchers when the employee was still on disability leave.
Quantifying the monetary impact of each case would involve an
in‐depth analysis of the timecard data and case files.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 17
A highly manual process
requires timely
communication to work
Exhibit 12 shows that the City’s disability leave management process
is highly manual because the City’s SAP system is not configured to
support the process. HR business partners are required to track the
injured employees' work status and benefit eligibility by reviewing
the work status notes issued by the treating physicians that describe
work capacities and restrictions and updating the HR work status
tracking sheet.
To limit the use of disability leave payroll codes to eligible
employees, HR business partners manually set a limited number of
hours, called “buckets,” to be charged to disability leave for salary
continuation (7200 time code in SAP), temporary disability (7100
time code in SAP), and modified duty (1000 time code in SAP), for
each employee based on the work status notes. The HR business
partners are also required to periodically run an SAP time report to
ensure that employees are coding their timecards appropriately.
EXHIBIT 12
The City’s disability leave management process
Source: Auditor’s analysis of City policies and procedures.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 18
This process relies heavily on the timely communication of work
status through multiple parties:
Employees obtain and immediately submit the work status note
to the supervisor
Supervisors immediately forward the note to the HR business
partner team (sometimes with a copy to York)
HR business partner teams forward the note to the York claims
examiner, determine benefit eligibility, and update the time
buckets
York claims examiners determine and update benefit eligibility
and send a notice to the employee with a copy to HR
If any of the individuals in this chain of communication is absent,
cannot get to the note, or is not trained to take timely and
appropriate action, the process may not work, creating unnecessary
delay. Department staff reported that the time buckets often run out
even if the work status note had already been submitted, and it
prevents the employee from using appropriate disability leave
payroll codes on the timecard until the buckets are adjusted. HR staff
reported that they do not always receive work status notes timely,
and are unable to update the buckets before the payroll period ends.
HR business partners do not
have effective tools to
monitor work status and time
reporting
The former City Safety Officer used to centrally monitor injured
employees’ work status and facilitate communication between
supervisors and York. The HR reorganization decentralized this
monitoring function without effective tools being implemented,
which left the business partners, most of them newly hired upon the
reorganization, unsure of how to use the tools provided. Business
partners reported that they do not have the capacity to proactively
monitor the work status or time reporting of the employees on
workers’ compensation due to their demanding workload with other
priorities. Without complete and accurate information on the work
status of all injured employees, the City is unable to ensure they
return to work in a timely manner or determine the true cost of
workers' compensation disability leave.
HR work status tracking sheet
not a useful tool
Their shared tool, the HR work status tracking sheet, is not designed
effectively to track the work status of injured employees. For
example, there are no columns to document key dates such as the
date released back to modified duty or date returned to full duty.
Business partners rely more on their calendar, email, or paper file
records to track the status. Most information on the report was
either incomplete or inaccurate regarding the employees’ work
status.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 19
Payroll codes used for time
reporting do not fully support
the disability leave
management process
The business partners also run an SAP time report for monitoring
disability leave, but the payroll codes are not structured to capture
all information necessary for efficient, systematic monitoring:
Salary continuation and medical appointments share the same
payroll code (7200), and the report cannot distinguish the two.
Timecard information does not include the date and type of
injury as required by the payroll procedures, and leave is not
clearly tracked by specific claims. HR reported that it has been
working with ASD to create a separate code for medical
appointments.
The modified duty code (1000) is also used by employees who
are on modified duty due to nonwork related injury or illness.
These employees are required to note on the timecard that the
modified duty is nonindustrial. Only 2 percent of the total
modified duty hours was noted as nonindustrial during the 5‐
year period, but the notes were inconsistent. It is questionable if
all employees with nonindustrial injuries enter the notes in SAP
or if supervisors review the notes to ensure accurate and
complete time recording.
About 40 percent of the Fire Department’s modified duty leave is
coded as 24‐hour shift (1200), because 24 hours exceeds the
daily maximum set for coding modified duty (1000) in the SAP
system. HR staff was not aware of these modified duty hours
coded as 24‐hour shift.
Exhibits 13 and 14 summarize the disability leave and modified duty
hours recorded in SAP from FY 2011 through FY 2015.
EXHIBIT 13
Disability Leave Hours* by Department from FY 2011 through FY 2015
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total FTE**
Police 7,102 4,300 6,848 7,770 5,872 31,890 18.7
Fire 3,624 4,805 5,015 7,953 6,770 28,168 16.5
Utilities 2,317 1,423 2,632 4,697 4,766 15,833 9.3
Public Works 1,372 2,659 3,428 6,187 1,890 15,536 9.1
Others 501 972 1,095 643 580 3,791 2.2
Total 14,916 14,158 19,017 27,250 19,878 95,219 55.8
* Includes hours coded as disability leave for medical appointments
** Full‐time equivalent. Based on the productive time of 1,706 hours (2,080 hours x 82%) used by ASD’s Office of
Management Budget.
Source: City’s financial records
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 20
EXHIBIT 14
Modified Duty Hours* by Department from FY 2011 through FY 2015
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total FTE**
Police 5,784 5,611 3,121 4,322 4,662 23,500 13.8
Fire*** 419 560 972 3,632 1,898 7,481 4.4
Utilities 2,792 1,963 1,765 853 1,199 8,572 5.0
Public Works 3,677 5,648 1,935 2,422 1,821 15,503 9.1
Others 2,754 2,333 159 1,096 893 7,235 4.2
Total 15,426 16,115 7,952 12,325 10,473 62,291 36.5
* Includes modified duty hours resulting from employees’ personal injuries.
** Based on the productive time of 1,706 hours (2,080 hours x 82%) established by ASD using a consultant’s study.
*** Includes 24‐hour modified duty hours coded 1200, which was 41 percent of the total Fire Department modified duty
hours.
Source: City’s financial records
The Disability Pay section of the City’s payroll procedures (2‐06/ASD,
last updated in 2001) contains outdated instructions for disability
time reporting, because procedures were written for the old process
involving manual paper timecards, before SAP was implemented.
Better data tracking needed
to measure the true cost and
effectiveness of the modified
duty program
Exhibits 13 and 14 also demonstrate the importance of monitoring
modified duty hours and the additional staffing impact. From
FY 2011 through FY 2015, 158 employees worked a total of about
62,300 hours, or 39 FTEs of modified duty, including six employees
whose modified duty exceeded 180 days during the five‐year
period.4 State workers’ compensation law requires the rate of pay
for modified duty to stay the same as the employee’s regular
assignment without any impact on benefits or accruals, and the City
cannot hire new employees to fill the regular duty positions while
employees are out on disability or modified duty.
As a result, those regular duty positions need to be backfilled, often
with overtime, unless overstrength positions are available or
temporary employees are hired to fill the gap.5 The cost of backfilling
can be significant. However, there was insufficient information on
the timecards to quantify the actual financial impact of overtime
charged for filling in for a disabled employee. The Fire Department
4 The City’s modified duty policy, Policy and Procedures 3‐02/HRD, limits modified duty assignments to 180 days unless
there are extenuating medical reasons that are approved by the Risk Manager. The Risk Manager confirmed that she
approved five of the six cases. The unapproved case involved three separate indemnity claims, and the employee was
back on full duty between injuries.
5 Overstrength positions are additional positions, over and above the quantity approved in the Table of Organization,
authorized to cover temporary shortages in staffing.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 21
reports the number of FTE positions that require backfilling in its
quarterly performance report.
Similarly, we could not systematically evaluate whether the City is
successful at getting employees back to work as soon as medically
appropriate to minimize loss of productivity and disruption of
service. Neither the City nor York record when the employee has
received a medical clearance from the treating physician, and as
mentioned earlier, the HR work status tracking sheet did not
accurately and completely capture key dates such as when the
employee was released to modified duty or returned to full duty.
HR business partners do not
have the technical expertise
to determine benefit
eligibility and must
coordinate with York
Administration of workers’ compensation claims is highly complex
and technical, involving various laws and regulations. HR business
partners do not have prior background in workers' compensation
and do not possess York’s technical expertise. York makes the initial
eligibility determination to accept, delay, or deny the claim within
the first 14 days after the City learns about the injury. Throughout
the life of the claim, York relies on City staff to immediately
communicate any changes in the work status of injured employees
so that benefit eligibility is updated and communicated to the
injured employee in a timely manner.
HR business partners do not
review benefit notices issued
by York
York is required by state law to send benefit notices to the claimants
with a copy to HR to explain:
• How disability leave payment amounts were determined.
• When and why benefits are delayed, denied, starting, changing,
or ending (with a list of all benefits paid).
These notices contain critical information regarding benefit
eligibility, and should be closely reviewed to ensure that the work
status report and time reporting are consistent with York’s eligibility
determination. The business partners were not trained to review
these notices, and therefore, did not identify discrepancies.
Because York does not track additional City benefits, the notices are
based on the benefits as required by state law, and do not always
reflect the benefits the employees actually receive from the City.
York also provides a monthly Payment Transaction Report, which
lists checks and vouchers that York issued on behalf of the City, but
the business partners do not review the vouchers to ensure that the
information is consistent with the benefits paid through payroll.
For the business partners to be able to effectively monitor
employees’ benefit eligibility and time reporting, they need to be
equipped with better tools and fully trained to:
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 22
Interpret the benefit notices and vouchers issued by York
Understand eligibility criteria for additional City benefits
Facilitate communication between York and departments
Monitor consistency between York records and City records
HR business partners do not
have access to York data
The City Safety Officer used to have online access to York’s system to
view all claims documentation and to export data to analyze claims,
payment transactions, and trends. As of December 2015, none of the
HR business partners had such access to York data. York recently
implemented a new risk management information system that
provides a user‐friendly interface with graphical information,
analytics, and reports. HR stated that it plans to have York provide
access to the new system and training to enhance its ability to
monitor claims and payment transactions.
Recommendations We recommend that HR:
2.1. Continue working with ASD and CalPERS to address the
disability leave benefits that were incorrectly reported as
compensation to CalPERS.
2.2. Review the 22 claims that accounted for 87 percent of the
additional city benefits in Exhibit 11, and take necessary action
to address any errors identified.
2.3. Review the existing disability leave management process in
Exhibit 12 and determine the optimal monitoring structure,
update the tools and procedures, and allocate sufficient and
skilled resources to ensure:
a. Benefit eligibility and work status of injured employees is
accurately, completely, and timely tracked including:
Start date of disability
Date released back to work by the treating physician
Date returned to modified duty, including the
assignment and payroll code used
Date returned to full duty
b. Any changes in work status are communicated to York
c. Disability leave time buckets are updated as soon as HR is
notified of the status change.
d. Benefit notices and vouchers issued by York are consistent
with the timecards and actual benefits paid through payroll.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 23
e. Employees comply with the City policy requiring timely
submission of work status notes.
2.4. Work with ASD to ensure that the data necessary for disability
leave management is captured through time reporting in SAP
to support the process, including:
a. Revising the City’s payroll procedures, Policies and
Procedures 2‐06/ASD, to provide clear instruction for
reporting disability leave on SAP timecards.
b. Configuring the SAP system to:
Track compensation reportable to CalPERS separately.
Track medical appointments that qualify as disability
leave by creating a separate payroll code.
If feasible and cost‐effective, limit the number of days
each employee can code disability leave or modified
duty on their timecard based on their position.
2.5. Work with York to identify and train responsible HR staff, and
maintain online access to York data for analyzing claims,
payment transactions, and trends. Establish and maintain
written procedures for granting, monitoring, and removing
access to the York data and appropriate handling and
safeguarding of the data.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 24
Finding 3 The City has not met the state requirement for timely
reporting of its workers’ compensation claims to York,
potentially causing the cost of claims to increase
California law requires employers to report within five days of their
knowledge every occupational injury or illness that results in lost
time beyond the date of the incident or requires medical treatment
beyond first aid. The City has not met this requirement, which could
result in penalties and could also increase the cost of claims. A recent
study concluded that claims with more than a two‐week delay in
reporting involve a longer period before the injured worker can
return to work, take longer to close, and are more complex to
settle.6
Delays in reporting caused by
various reasons, and further
affected by HR reorganization
Exhibit 15 shows that only 52 percent of the claims were reported to
York within 5 days from the City’s knowledge in FY 2015, as
compared to 70 percent in FY 2011 and 83 percent in FY 2012. This
decline coincides with the loss of the City Safety Officer and the HR
reorganization. The City Safety Officer used to support department
staff in timely completion of the required forms, but this role has
diminished as HR implemented the new business partner model
without redefining the reporting process.
EXHIBIT 15
Number of Days from Knowledge to Date Reported to York (Excludes Denied Claims)
Number of Days
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total
Claims % Claims % Claims % Claims % Claims % Claims %
5 days or less 57 70% 75* 83% 51 68% 49 53% 34 52% 266* 66%
6 to 10 days 14 17% 5 6% 16 21% 16 17% 16 25% 67 16%
11 to 30 days 9 11% 4 4%5 7% 22 24% 10 15% 50 12%
31 to 60 days 0 0% 2 2%1 1%1 1%3 5% 7 2%
61 days or more 2 2% 4 4%2 3%5 5%2 3% 15 4%
Total 82 100% 90 100% 75 100% 93 100% 66 100% 405 100%
* Includes one claim that was reported to York before the City’s knowledge. York set up this claim based on the medical
legal evaluator’s opinion for an old claim involving a cumulative injury.
Source: York data
City policies are in place to
meet the state requirement
City policies require employees to report all known or even potential
work‐related injuries to their supervisors as soon as possible.
6 The Relationship Between Accident Report Lag and Claim Cost in Workers Compensation Insurance, May 2015, National
Council on Compensation Insurance Inc.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 25
Supervisors must immediately provide a copy of the Employee Claim
Form (State form DWC‐1), to the employee for the employee section
to be completed. Once returned, supervisors must complete the
employer section of the DWC‐1, the Employer’s Report of
Occupational Injury (State form 5020), and the Supervisor's Report of
Injury/Exposure (City form), and forward all three forms to HR within
24 hours. HR then forwards the forms to York, if they are not already
copied on the email.
State law requires the City to submit the Form 5020 to the third
party administrator within five days from the date the injury is
reported by the employee. State law also requires the TPA to decide
whether to accept, deny, or delay the claim within 14 days after the
employer learns about the injury or illness. The claim can be delayed
for 90 days after the injury is reported by the employee if there are
any issues requiring investigation or medical evaluation. In such
cases, the TPA must send a letter to the injured employee explaining
the reason for the delay, what information is needed, and when a
decision will be made. If there are unreasonable delays in temporary
disability payments, the injured employee could be awarded a total
of 25 percent of each late payment, up to $10,000. Although we did
not identify any instances of penalties, If the employer or TPA
discovers such delays prior to the employee claiming a penalty, a
self‐imposed penalty in the amount of 10 percent of the late
payment can be paid within 90 days of the date of discovery, in lieu
of the 25 percent penalty.Exhibit 16 shows the City’s reporting
process.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 26
EXHIBIT 16
The City’s workers’ compensation claim reporting process
Source: Auditor’s analysis of City policies and procedures
Manual paper forms cause
delays and insufficient or
missing information
Until recently, supervisors had to manually complete a hard copy of
the required forms. Manual forms cause:
Delays – If the injured employees were not on site when the
injuries were reported, supervisors had to either hand deliver or
mail the Employee Claim Forms (DWC‐1) to have the employees
complete, sign, and return.
Insufficient information – Some fields, such as a description of
how the injury/illness occurred, may not have enough room for
the supervisor to provide sufficient detail, requiring the HR
business partner team or York claims examiner to follow up. For
example, the Police Department does not use the City form and
instead documents the required information in a memo because
the department policy and procedures require detailed
documentation of the incident and description of the injury.
Missing information – Form 5020 includes fields that may not be
readily available to supervisors, such as gross wages, date of hire,
and location code, which is different from the codes defined in
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 27
SAP. Many supervisors leave these fields blank, expecting the HR
business partner team to fill out the missing fields. However,
York reported that the forms submitted by the City are often
incomplete.
HR recently made electronic, fillable state forms available to
employees on the City’s intranet and is planning to add the capability
to electronically sign and submit.
The state forms require sensitive, confidential information, such as
social security numbers, and need to be handled with great care. City
policies and procedures provide no additional guidance as to how to
obtain or safeguard personnel or payroll information. York stated
that it is a common practice for HR staff to complete and submit
Form 5020 on behalf of the supervisors, which helps ensure that
personnel and payroll information is entered accurately and that
sensitive information is safeguarded within the HR department.
Availability of the immediate
supervisor or HR staff may
cause further delays
Even when the employee immediately reports his or her injury, the
supervisor or the responsible HR business partner may be absent or
may not get to the forms right away to take necessary action. To
address this issue, the Fire Department now requires staff to notify
all battalion chiefs of any injury to ensure timely paperwork
completion when the direct supervisor is off work. Battalion chiefs
are also required to copy both deputy fire chiefs and administrative
staff when submitting claim forms to the HR business partner team.
Similarly, the Police Department copies York when submitting the
forms to HR, which notifies York of the need to follow up on the
injury.
Using York’s online claims
reporting and modified City
form can streamline the
process and improve accuracy
of the claims data
Most fields on the City form are included in the other two state
forms, and there is an opportunity to significantly streamline the
reporting process. York encourages its clients to use its online claims
reporting for the Form 5020 submission, which prevents simple
errors with a drop‐down list of valid entries and does not allow
submission of an incomplete form. As of March 2016, Utilities
Electric Operations is the only business unit that consistently uses it.
Form 5020 is the source of most of the City’s workers’ compensation
claims data recorded by York. Improving the accuracy and
completeness of the Form 5020 could greatly enhance the ability of
the York claims examiners to provide their service in a timely
manner.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 28
Recommendations We recommend that HR:
3.1. Streamline the workers’ compensation reporting process and
improve the accuracy and completeness of the claim forms by:
Revising the procedures to clarify the roles and
responsibilities. This should include determining whether
departments should be responsible for completing only the
Employee Claim Forms (DWC‐1) and Supervisor’s Report of
Injury and Exposure (City form), with HR staff being
responsible for completing the Form 5020.
Revising the City form for supervisors to complete with
necessary information that can be easily copied and pasted
to the Form 5020.
Ensuring the use of York’s online claims reporting to submit
the Form 5020, and having appropriate and trained staff
enter any sensitive personnel or payroll information.
Making the required forms and procedures available online
in one place with clear instructions and adding electronic
signature capability, if feasible and cost‐effective.
Regularly reviewing the forms, procedures, and
performance to ensure their compliance with state law.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 29
Finding 4 The City has not ensured that York met all contract terms
The York contract includes various terms that could help the City
reduce its workers' compensation costs, such as cost reduction
guarantees and utilization review.7 While most requirements are
met, there are some that the City has not required York to fulfill. The
City could better manage its claims and reduce costs by fully using
services York is required to provide under the contract.
The City could reduce cost of
claims by fully using York
services
The following contract terms are not fully met:
Quarterly file review – York is required to coordinate and attend
quarterly file review meetings with HR and department staff to
discuss strategies to help employees return to work, close claims,
and minimize costs. However, these meetings had not been
regularly and effectively carried out recently due to staff
turnover and scheduling issues on both sides.
Required reports – York has not provided certain required
reports, such as a report of claims with no activity for the
previous six months. These reports are readily available from the
York system, and can be replaced with HR’s direct online access
to the system data. As described in Finding 2, York does not track
the City’s additional disability leave benefits, and its reports do
not always reflect the benefits actually paid by the City.
Indemnity claim closure ratio – The cost reduction guarantee
section of the contract requires York to pay $5,000 to the City if
at least 32 percent of the indemnity claims reported during each
fiscal year are not closed by the end of that year.8 HR was not
aware that York did not achieve the required ratio for FY 2013
and had not made the required payment.
No data available to evaluate
York performance for
returning employees to
modified duty
York is also required to aggressively pursue a release to modified
duty for all City employees through written and verbal
communication with the medical provider. The contract also states
that employees on lost time status shall be returned to modified
work status within 30 days if an appropriate position is available. As
described in Finding 2, HR does not have data necessary to monitor
York performance because neither HR nor York track modified duty
completely and accurately.
7 Utilization review (UR) is a process of reviewing medical treatment recommended by a physician to determine if it is in
accordance with the medical treatment utilization schedule. All employers or their workers' compensation claims
administrators are required by law to have a UR program.
8 The City and York subsequently agreed to revise the contract language to base the closure ratio on claims closed within
12 months from reporting to York.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 30
Recommendations We recommend that HR:
4.1. Create a list of key contract terms and assign staff to monitor
and follow up on York performance against each term,
including recovery of $5,000 from York for not meeting the
indemnity claim closure ratio for FY 2013.
4.2. Work with York to streamline the monthly, quarterly, and annual
reporting process by leveraging online access to York data (see
recommendations 1.3 and 2.5).
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 31
Finding 5 Workers’ compensation revenues, costs, and performance
data are not clearly reported for informed decision
making
The Workers’ Compensation Fund accounts for administration of the
City’s workers’ compensation program, and the revenues and
expenditures are reported in the City's comprehensive annual
financial report and budget documents. However, the Workers’
Compensation Fund does not include all of the City’s workers’
compensation costs, and the costs presented in the budget
documents are difficult to understand the nature and true cost of
each line item. Without a clear understanding of the workers’
compensation cost, Council and management may not be able to
make informed decisions regarding the City’s workers’ compensation
related programs.
The City’s budget documents
do not clearly present
workers’ compensation costs
There are multiple elements to the City’s workers’ compensation
cost structure, and the City’s budget documents do not clearly
present those elements to assist Council and management in
understanding the complete cost information. Including a simple
narrative to assist readers in navigating and understanding the
complete cost structure could enhance the City’s ability to better
allocate its resources.
The City’s Workers’
Compensation costs are
included in separate areas of
the budget document
The City’s Workers’ Compensation Fund does not include:
Disability leave benefits – Disability leave benefits paid directly
by the City through its payroll, which are included in the
department budgets.
HR administration costs – HR staff cost to administer the IIPP and
workers’ compensation program, which is included in the
General Fund.
As shown in Exhibit 17, the actual total cost is much higher than the
cost included in the Workers’ Compensation Fund. In addition, the
estimated self‐insured liability fluctuates year over year based on the
estimate of unpaid claim costs and expenses developed by an
actuarial study. If we exclude this liability, we can see the total
workers’ compensation cost actually paid by the City in a given year.
Different conclusions may be drawn depending on the line item used
to evaluate the workers’ compensation program.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 32
EXHIBIT 17
The City’s Workers’ Compensation Cost
Workers’ Compensation Fund FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Claims paid* $2,269,098 $2,069,975 $1,468,630 $2,451,424 $2,184,858
Change in estimated self‐insured liability**$2,527,098 $1,813,409 $559,747 $485,109 ($1,656,783)
CSAC excess insurance premium $285,530 $263,399 $398,376 $454,032 $461,365
Actuarial services $4,850 $4,750 $4,750 $4,750 $2,375
TPA administration fees $238,083 $294,667 $226,684 $232,050 $230,006
State self‐insurance fees $45,564 $52,180 $69,252 $45,993 $93,259***
Workers’ Compensation Fund Subtotal $5,370,224 $4,498,379 $2,727,038 $3,673,358 $1,315,080
Disability leave benefits (direct payroll) $688,167 $504,032 $693,279 $1,001,407 $719,297
HR administration cost (General Fund) $313,157 $314,319 $200,948 $182,866 $221,260
Grand Total $6,371,548 $5,316,730 $3,621,265 $4,857,631 $2,255,637
Adjusted Total (excludes change in
estimated self‐insured liability) $3,844,450 $3,503,321 $3,061,518 $4,372,522 $3,912,420
* Represents checks issued by York on behalf of the City, and does not include disability leave benefits paid directly
through the City’s payroll.
** Determined based on an actuarial study. The City is required to record a liability for the ultimate cost of claims and
expenses associated with all reported and unreported claims in accordance with accounting standards.
*** Includes about $9,300 in ergonomic evaluation expenses that should have been recorded in the General Benefits Fund.
Source: City’s financial records
Exhibit 18 shows that the budget line items under the Workers’
Compensation Fund do not always represent the underlying costs.
For example, administrator fees paid to York and State self‐insurance
fees are presented as part of salaries and benefits. Without
additional explanation, readers may assume salaries and benefits
under this fund represent HR staff cost to administer the workers’
compensation program, which instead is included in HR’s General
Fund budget.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 33
EXHIBIT 18
The City’s budget presentation of the workers’ compensation revenues and costs
Source: Auditor’s analysis of the City’s financial records
Performance data does not
reflect the City’s actual
performance
Our annual performance report includes performance data for
workers’ compensation as shown in Exhibit 19. HR provides the
numbers based on York data, but as described in Finding 2, York
data does not accurately and completely reflect the City’s actual
performance because York:
Does not track the additional disability leave benefits
provided by the City.
Does not have accurate and complete records of the injured
employees’ work status.
As a result, estimated cost and claims paid are generally
understated, and days lost to work related illness or injury do
not reflect the actual number of days the injured employees
were off work on disability as recorded in the SAP timecards.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 34
EXHIBIT 19
Workers’ Compensation Performance Data
Estimated cost
incurred1
(in thousands)
Claims Paid1
(in thousands)
Estimated cost
outstanding1
(in thousands)
Number of claims
filed with days
away from work2
Days lost to work‐
related illness or
injury3
FY 06 $2,858 $2,601 $258 80 ‐
FY 07 $2,114 $1,937 $177 76 2,242
FY 08 $2,684 $2,460 $224 75 1,561
FY 09 $2,628 $2,145 $483 73 1,407
FY 10 $2,521 $2,165 $356 71 1,506
FY 11 $1,918 $1,402 $516 45 1,372
FY 12 $2,843 $1,963 $880 56 1,236
FY 13 $3,182 $1,713 $1,469 42 1,815
FY 14 $2,088 $1,217 $871 59 1,783
FY 15 $1,121 $518 $602 36 1,366
Change from:
Last year ‐46% ‐57% ‐31% ‐39% ‐
FY 06 ‐61% ‐80% +134% ‐55% ‐23%
1 Estimates of claim costs incurred during each fiscal year, and associated costs paid and outstanding as of June 30, 2015.
Costs are expected to increase as claims develop. Prior‐year costs were updated to reflect current costs as of
June 30, 2015.
2 Restated to reflect the number of claims filed during each fiscal year that resulted in days away from work as of
June 30, 2015. Numbers may increase as claims develop.
3 Based on calendar days. Federal requirements limit each claim to 180 days.
Source: City of Palo Alto 2015 Performance Report
Recommendations We recommend that HR:
5.1. Work with ASD’s Office of Management and Budget to clarify
the presentation of the workers’ compensation costs in the
City’s budget documents.
5.2. Work with York to identify useful performance measures and
establish procedures to ensure reliable reporting of
performance data using a consistent methodology.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 35
APPENDIX 1: The City’s Workers’ Compensation Costs
EXHIBIT 20
The City’s Workers’ Compensation Cost
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Workers’ Compensation Fund
Claims paid* $2,269,098 $2,069,975 $1,468,630 $2,451,424 $2,184,858
Change in estimated self‐insured liability**$2,527,098 $1,813,409 $559,747 $485,109 ($1,656,783)
CSAC excess insurance premium $285,530 $263,399 $398,376 $454,032 $461,365
Actuarial services $4,850 $4,750 $4,750 $4,750 $2,375
TPA administration fees $238,083 $294,667 $226,684 $232,050 $230,006
State self‐insurance fees $45,564 $52,180 $69,252 $45,993 $93,259***
Workers’ Compensation Fund Subtotal $5,370,224 $4,498,379 $2,727,038 $3,673,358 $1,315,080
Disability Leave Benefits (Payroll)
Police $317,099 $193,488 $365,163 $386,892 $257,413
Fire $250,445 $181,709 $164,299 $258,035 $238,475
Utilities $61,703 $41,221 $60,585 $160,664 $146,044
Public Works $43,921 $62,048 $78,557 $173,007 $58,813
Others $15,000 $25,566 $24,675 $22,809 $18,552
Disability Leave Benefits Subtotal $688,167 $504,032 $693,279 $1,001,407 $719,297
HR Administration Cost (General Fund)
Injury and Illness Prevention Program $190,976 $155,518 $93,136 $75,113 $85,034
Worker's Compensation Program $122,182 $158,801 $107,812 $107,753 $136,227
HR Administration Cost Subtotal $313,157 $314,319 $200,948 $182,866 $221,260
* Represents checks issued by York on behalf of the City, and does not include disability leave benefits paid directly
through the City’s payroll.
** Determined based on an actuarial study, and includes claim costs incurred but not reported.
*** Includes about $9,300 in ergonomic evaluation expenses that should have been recorded in the General Benefits Fund.
Source: City’s financial records
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 36
EXHIBIT 21
Number of Indemnity Claims Filed* by Department by Fiscal Year of Loss
As of June 30, 2015
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total %
Police 7 18 10 15 14 64 27%
Fire 16 18 6 19 10 69 29%
Utilities 10 3 11 12 2 38 16%
Public Works 3 8 7 7 5 30 13%
Others 9 9 8 6 5 37 16%
Total 45 56 42 59 36 238 100%
* Includes denied claims
Source: York data
EXHIBIT 22
Cost of Indemnity Claims Incurred by Department by Fiscal Year of Loss
Valued as of June 30, 2015
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Total %
Police $294,487 $1,344,485* $2,434,200* $298,675 $351,797 $4,723,643 43%
Fire $764,297 $865,850 $241,461 $455,446 $544,447 $2,871,501 26%
Utilities $440,441 $5,771 $140,473 $826,783 $42,513 $1,455,980 13%
Public Works $303,986 $436,044 $198,444 $274,319 $80,530 $1,293,323 12%
Others $85,690 $144,714 $139,430 $180,478 $53,345 $603,657 6%
Total $1,888,901 $2,796,864 $3,154,008 $2,035,701 $1,072,632 $10,948,104 100%
* The FY 2012 increase is due to one Police claim valued at $0.5 million, and the FY 2013 increase is due to another claim
valued at $2.2 million.
Source: York data
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 37
APPENDIX 2 – City Manager’s Response
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 38
The City Manager has agreed to take the following actions in response to the audit recommendations in this report. The City Manager will report progress on
implementation six months after the Council accepts the audit report, and every six months thereafter until all recommendations have been implemented.
Recommendation Responsible
Department(s)
Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree
and Target Date and Corrective Action
Plan
Status
Finding 1: The City’s Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) is comprehensive but has lost its effectiveness due to the loss of its City Safety
Officer.
1.1. The City Manager allocate sufficient
resources to implement and maintain the
City’s IIPP and to monitor the City’s
compliance with the program.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: December 1, 2016
Action Plan: The Human Resources Department
requested a new dedicated position (1 FTE) in
FY17 Budget. As soon as the position is approved
and can be filled this position will review and
update the City’s IIPP to ensure effective program
compliance.
1.2. HR update the safety manual, including
supplemental tools and guidance posted on
the intranet, to ensure:
• The roles and responsibilities over the
IIPP are redefined.
• The City’s IIPP complies with all Cal/OSHA
standards and other applicable safety
laws.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: March 2017
Action Plan: Once appropriate staff resources are
in place, the roles and responsibilities can be
reestablished to ensure the safety manual (IIPP)
is reviewed and updated as necessary.
While a few safe work practices have been
updated, such as the Heat Stress Prevention
Guidelines in July 2014, a thorough review will be
conducted and any necessary updates will be
completed.
1.3. HR review departmental procedures and
safety requirements to ensure they align
with the revised IIPP and City policy and
procedures.
Concurrence:Agree
Target Date: December 15, 2016
Action Plan: HR is in process of securing a safety
specialist to conduct periodic inspections of City
facilities for hazard assessment. This
comprehensive evaluation will include
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 39
Recommendation Responsible
Department(s)
Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree
and Target Date and Corrective Action
Plan
Status
determining if any corrections need to be
completed, including updating or implementing
work procedures.
1.4. HR work with York and departments to
identify useful safety statistics, appropriate
HR and departmental recipients of this
information, and reporting frequency, and
establish an automated process for those
statistics to be provided.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: December 16 , 2016
Action Plan: HR will work with York to identify
useful reports that identify injury and illness
trends and implement an automated process for
those reports to be emailed to department
representatives.
1.5. HR identify industry‐specific ergonomics and
general wellness training opportunities to
minimize common injuries, and coordinate
with departments to ensure regular training
is provided to employees.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: September 16, 2016
Action Plan: HR will coordinate industry‐specific
ergonomic training, similar to training provided
to Parks maintenance employees in 2010 and
Library employees in 2014. We agree industry‐
specific ergonomic training serves as a reminder
for example, that the best way to prevent back
injuries is to develop habits that reduce the strain
placed on the back.
Finding 2: Injured employees’ benefit eligibility is not accurately and completely tracked and monitored, resulting in both overpayments and
underpayments of workers’ compensation benefits.
2.1. HR continue working with ASD and CalPERS
to address the disability leave benefits that
were incorrectly reported as compensation
to CalPERS.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: February 2017
Action Plan: HR worked with Payroll to identify
wage codes and required corrections needed to
fix CalPERS payroll report.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 40
Recommendation Responsible
Department(s)
Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree
and Target Date and Corrective Action
Plan
Status
2.2. HR review the 22 claims that accounted for
87 percent of the total additional city
benefits difference in Exhibit 11, and take
necessary action to address any errors
identified.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: July 2016
Action Plan: HR working on timecard
amendments to address errors with 2 Public
Safety officers whose claims were initially
delayed when claims first submitted and final
determination resulted in denial and non‐
acceptance.
2.3. HR review the existing disability leave
management process in Exhibit 12 and
determine the optimal monitoring structure,
update the tools and procedures, and
allocate sufficient and skilled resources to
ensure:
a. Benefit eligibility and work status of
injured employees is accurately,
completely, and timely tracked including:
• Start date of disability
• Date released back to work by the
treating physician
• Date returned to modified duty,
including the assignment and payroll
code used
• Date returned to full duty
b. Any changes in work status are
communicated to York
c. Disability leave time buckets are updated
as soon as HR is notified of the status
change.
d. Benefit notices and vouchers issued by
York are consistent with the timecards
and actual benefits paid through payroll.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: December 16, 2016
Action Plan:
a. HR is exploring better methods to track
temporary disability and return‐to‐work
status accurately, completely and timely.
b. HR will also improve process of
maintaining timely communication with
York.
c. HR staff will explore how to improve
management of disability leave buckets
in SAP.
d. HR will explore how to audit benefit
notices and vouchers issued by York to
ensure they are consistent with
timecards. This would be a manual
process that may not be able to be
supported.
e. HR will work with supervisors to ensure
employees comply with City policy
requiring timely submission of work
status notes.
f. HR will explore options for improved
disability leave management and
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 41
Recommendation Responsible
Department(s)
Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree
and Target Date and Corrective Action
Plan
Status
e. Employees comply with the City policy
requiring timely submission of work
status notes.
tracking as part of the SAP replacement
RFP process.
2.4. HR work with ASD to ensure that the data
necessary for disability leave management is
captured through time reporting in SAP to
support the process, including:
a. Revising the City’s payroll procedures,
Policies and Procedures 2‐06/ASD, to
provide clear instruction for reporting
disability leave on SAP timecards.
b. Configuring the SAP system to:
• Track compensation reportable to
CalPERS separately.
• Track medical appointments that
qualify as disability leave by creating a
separate payroll code.
• If feasible and cost‐effective, limit the
number of days each employee can
code disability leave or modified duty
on their timecard based on their
position.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: February 2017
Action Plan:
a. HR following up with ASD Payroll on
feasibility to revise City payroll procedures;
otherwise, will include steps in City’s
Workers Compensation policy.
b. ASD and HR have determined how to code
public safety temporary disability as
“PERSable” and non‐public safety temporary
disability as “non‐PERSable” by using
different SAP codes.
‐ A separate timecard code (7600) is being
developed to track medical
appointments.
‐ Limiting the number of hours each
employee can code disability leave can
be accomplished when disability leave
bucket is established; may not be feasible
for modified duty and requires further
review.
2.5. HR work with York to identify and train
responsible HR staff, and maintain online
access to York data for analyzing claims,
payment transactions, and trends. Establish
and maintain written procedures for
granting, monitoring, and removing access to
the York data and appropriate handling and
safeguarding of the data.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: December 2016
Action Plan: Training will be provided to HR staff
newly assigned to oversee workers
compensation.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 42
Recommendation Responsible
Department(s)
Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree
and Target Date and Corrective Action
Plan
Status
Finding 3: The City has not met the state requirement for timely reporting of its workers’ compensation claims to York, potentially causing the
cost of claims to increase.
3.1. HR streamline the workers’ compensation
reporting process and improve the accuracy
and completeness of the claim forms by:
• Revising the procedures to clarify the
roles and responsibilities. This should
include determining whether
departments should be responsible for
completing only the Employee Claim
Forms (DWC‐1) and Supervisor’s Report
of Injury and Exposure (City form), with
HR staff being responsible for completing
the Form 5020.
• Revising the City form for supervisors to
complete with necessary information that
can be easily copied and pasted to the
Form 5020.
• Ensuring the use of York’s online claims
reporting to submit the Form 5020, and
having appropriate and trained staff enter
any sensitive personnel or payroll
information.
• Making the required forms and
procedures available online in one place
with clear instructions and adding
electronic signature capability, if feasible
and cost‐effective.
• Regularly reviewing the forms,
procedures, and performance to ensure
their compliance with state law.
Concurrence: Partially Agree
Target Date: February 2017
Action Plan: HR agrees the reporting process
needs to be improved and streamlined. HR will
determine if using York’s online claim reporting
to submit the Form 5020 is most efficient
process. As an alternative, HR will evaluate
ability to create DocuSign Form 5020 which
Department would initiate, completing facts
related to employee filing claim and details
regarding injury or illness. DocuSign Form 5020
could then be submitted by departments to HR
staff who would complete salary data. HR staff
could then submit DocuSign form to York.
Attachment A
Disability Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit 43
Recommendation Responsible
Department(s)
Agree, Partially Agree, or Do Not Agree
and Target Date and Corrective Action
Plan
Status
Finding 4: The City has not ensured that York met all contract terms.
4.1 HR create a list of key contract terms and
assign staff to monitor and follow up on York
performance against each term, including
recovery of $5,000 from York for not meeting
the indemnity claim closure ratio for FY 2013.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: July 29, 2016
Action Plan: HR will create a list of key contract
terms that require follow‐up. New HR staff
assigned to administer workers compensation
program will monitor and follow up with York
regularly on contract terms.
4.2. HR work with York to streamline the
monthly, quarterly, and annual reporting
process by leveraging online access to York
data (see recommendations 1.3 and 2.5).
Concurrence: Partially Agree
Target Date: August 30, 2016
Action Plan: The York data is readily available,
currently 8 reports are provided to HR monthly.
However the contract calls out for reports that
are no longer in use. This can be cleaned up in
next contract RFP and in any future contracts.
HR will review reporting capabilities to determine
how to improve use of data.
Finding 5: Workers’ compensation revenues, costs, and performance data are not clearly reported for informed decision making.
5.1. HR work with ASD’s Office of Management
and Budget to clarify the presentation of the
workers’ compensation costs in the City’s
budget documents.
Concurrence: Agree
Target Date: December 16, 2016
Action Plan: HR staff will meet with Budget
Manager to clarify presentation for workers
compensation costs for FY18 Budget and
determine changes or improvements.
5.2. HR work with York to identify useful
performance measures and establish
procedures to ensure reliable reporting of
performance data using a consistent
methodology.
Concurrence: Partially Agree
Target Date: January 2017
Action Plan: HR will explore best practice
performance measures and establish procedure
to ensure reliable reporting.
Attachment A
Special Meeting
June 14, 2016
Chairperson DuBois called the meeting to order at 6:10 P.M. in the Community
Meeting Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California.
Present: DuBois (Chair), Kniss, Scharff
Absent: Berman
Agenda Items
1.Disability Rates and Workers' Compensation Audit.
Chair DuBois: I guess we'll go on to Item 1, which is disability rates and
workers' compensation audit.
Council Member Kniss: I'll be listening. I'm going to grab some tea.
Harriet Richardson, City Auditor: I know that you're not feeling well, so I'm
going to try and get through this first item.
Council Member Kniss: How did you know that?
Ms. Richardson: Beth told us that we might lose a quorum. I'm going to try
and get through the first item (crosstalk) ...
Council Member Kniss: I'll make it for a little while.
Ms. Richardson: ... little more time for the second item. Harriet Richardson,
City Auditor, here to present the audit of disability rates and workers'
compensation. Yuki Matsuura was the Senior Auditor on this, and she can't
be here tonight. Lisa Wehara, who worked on this audit, is right over here in
the audience.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Welcome.
Ms. Richardson: I'm assuming you've read the audit. Instead of going
through the normal process, I have a PowerPoint that talks about the—(inaudible) the PowerPoint—audit scope objectives and the findings and the
recommendations. What I really want to do is just skip over to the main
finding, which is Finding Number 1, and spend a little bit of time on that. If
Attachment B
you have questions, we also have Sandra Blanch here from Human Resources
(HR), who works as the Risk Manager for the City. We also have a
representative from York Risk Services Groups. Sherri is—where'd she go—
right back here, in case you have any questions for her. York is our third-
party administrator for workers' compensation. The main finding is that the
City's injury and illness prevention program has lost its effectiveness, and
there's several reasons for that. The main one is that when the previous City
Safety Officer left the City, that position was cut. His duties were distributed
among all of the different Staff, the Senior HR Analysts in People Strategy and
Operations (PSO). PSO reorganized; they redistributed the Staff, but yet they
did not provide appropriate training to those people on workers'
compensation. They've been working with an outdated safety manual that
describes how to do things in a way other than what they currently do. There's
also been a lack of Citywide safety committee meetings. There's also been insufficient City employee training throughout the City on safe, economic work
practices, which increases the risk that you're going to have more repetitive
motion injuries. Our recommendations really focus a lot on making sure that
adequate resources are provided to the workers' compensation program.
Right now, we have not seen an increase in injuries or costs since that loss.
As that position remains unfilled, the risk increases that you're going to have
more costs because people don't know how to adequately monitor the
programs to minimize those costs. That's really what I wanted to focus on for
this first audit. I think Suzanne wanted to make some comments regarding
the audit.
Suzanne Mason, Assistant City Manager: I just wanted to comment that our
response is in the audit. I really appreciate Sandra's work on responding. I
do think with reduced resources and dedicated resources to a program such
as injury prevention and workers' compensation monitoring, there's a loss.
You can't take a job and divide it among five people and make sure that every
day you're staying on top of the program, making sure training is happening.
Last night in the budget, you adopted the budget that included a dedicated
position focused on workers' comp funded through our insurance fund. I think
that's going to pay dividends and that we will be able to focus. I do think we are also working on securing the services of a Safety Officer on a contractual
basis for the City. The Utilities Department does have a Safety Officer and
does a very good job. They're a significant part of our workforce. It is
important that we have someone providing our safety inspection. Finally, I
know that—Sandra has shared with me and York that York does have a computer solution that can help us address the timeliness on some of the
issues. We've been using a manual process. The computer system that's
recently been updated by York will allow us to do immediate reporting from
departments directly to York and Human Resources simultaneously. That will
dramatically improve some of the findings addressed in this report. I don't
Attachment B
want to spend a lot of time going into detail; we can respond to detail. I do
think the dedicated position in combination with the contracted Safety Officer
functions and then the new computerized system that we'll be implementing
Citywide, that York's providing, will address most of this audit.
Ms. Richardson: From our perspective, the dedicated resources were really
the big concern here. As Suzanne said, you start splitting up those tasks and
you start losing the effectiveness because people don't know exactly what
their responsibilities are and the law, what the law requires them to do.
Council Member Kniss: Tom, could I ask a quick question? Just a little ...
Chair DuBois: I was just going to say could we just go straight to questions.
Council Member Kniss: Just to inform us on this. You didn't include any
measurements, data or so forth. Is it in here somewhere and I didn't see it?
Ms. Richardson: You mean comparisons with other jurisdictions?
Council Member Kniss: Also percentage-wise what's happened with us. You said it's costing us more, right?
Ms. Richardson: The risk is that it will cost us more. When you look at Exhibits
2 and 3 on Packet Pages 12 and 13, you see some fluctuation and you see '14
and '15 actually look like they've gone down, but what happens a lot of times
is the full cost of the claims is not known within a short period of time. Those
costs will continue to go up for the recent years until those claims are fully
closed. If you go back to our Performance Report, which isn't part of this,
you'll see that there's some open claims pretty far back. Part of that is
because some of these costs continue over a period of years. Right now, our
number of claims did go down. Fiscal Year (FY) '13 is where we lost the City
Safety Officer. You're still seeing some of the effect of what that person did.
Now as we start seeing in the program in the day-to-day operations some of
the things that are happening, we can see that it's likely that those costs are
going to start going up because they don't know how to administer the ...
Council Member Kniss: What we should do is take this way back to 2006? Is
this a good judge of what that person did?
Ms. Richardson: I think from 2006 ...
Vice Mayor Scharff: What page are you on?
Ms. Richardson: Packet Page 12 and 13. Exhibits 2 and 3.
Attachment B
Chair DuBois: Do you know how it's accounted for in a particular year? When
expenses come in for 2014, do they hit our books this year or do they go
back?
Ms. Richardson: I'm not certain on that.
Sandra Blanch, Assistant Director of Human Resources: Yes, they do.
Chair DuBois: The expense is actually incurred in this year even though it
was a claim from 2014?
Ms. Blanch: Right.
Ms. Richardson: You track the claims also by year.
Ms. Blanch: By year.
Council Member DuBois: Your file.
Ms. Richardson: Yeah. From an accounting perspective, it's different than
from a claims perspective.
Chair DuBois: Why don't we just go to broad questions? Do you want to continue?
Council Member Kniss: That's fine. We'll just kind of keep chiming in, I think.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Are you happy with the City Manager's response?
Ms. Richardson: Yes. There were two that they indicated that they partially
agreed.
Vice Mayor Scharff: We're back on page ...
Ms. Richardson: It's Packet Page 51, which is going to be your Page 42. They
said they partially agreed with Recommendation 3.1 and, on the next page,
with 4.2. When I read those, they actually sounded like they agreed. I wasn't
sure why they said partially agree on those.
Vice Mayor Scharff: What Suzanne said sounded slightly different, which was
you were going to recreate their form in DocuSign. Have you decided now to
use the York form directly?
Ms. Mason: I think we are going to use the York form. They've just improved
their system, and it sounds like it's going to work for us.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Are you going to update that partially one.
Attachment B
Ms. Mason: No, we just met recently.
Ms. Blanch: Yes. I think the auditor had recommended for HR to do all of the
entry. We would disagree with that mandate. The department would do part
of the entry, and HR would finish the entry.
Ms. Mason: The idea is you're in a department, and someone comes in
injured. You go right into the system and enter, which is a best practice. It
immediately goes to HR and York, so we're all in a more timely basis.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Sounds good. You're good with that? It sounds good to
me.
Ms. Richardson: Yes.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Were there any other partially agrees?
Ms. Richardson: Just those two.
Vice Mayor Scharff: That's the first one. The second one was ...
Ms. Richardson: 4.2. It's on the quarterly reporting. Monthly, quarterly and annual reporting.
Ms. Mason: Basically what we wanted to say is that we think that we need
to—we are getting reports, but we need to work on tailoring those. For the
most part, some of the reports that were originally in the contract are not as
useful. We need to work together—we do get information, and they do report
to us. We do have a good working relationship; there's regular telephonic
meetings, but we do need to make sure we're looking at the right data.
Council Member Kniss: Is anyone from York here?
Ms. Mason: Yes.
Council Member Kniss: I missed the introduction.
Sherri Adams, York Risk Services Group: I'm Sherri Adams. I'm the Senior
Account Manager.
Council Member Kniss: Thank you.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Sherri, since we've mentioned you, do you have any
comments on any of this, of how we could streamline it better, or do you agree
with the auditor's recommendation?
Attachment B
Ms. Adams: I do.
Council Member Kniss: Why don't you come join us?
Vice Mayor Scharff: Come sit down at the mike.
Ms. Adams: I do agree with the findings. We worked really closely with Lisa
and Yuki, providing the information, the Claims Examiner, the Unit Manager.
When we talk about the reports and some of the items that were in the
contract, the original contract is from 2006. We've updated processes. Things
have changed here at the City. I think it's just revising those, seeing what we
can use. Loss of the Safety Officer, I think some of those reports got lost in
the that shuffle as well. I've been on the account for 1 1/2 years and have
been here multiple times to meet and try and come up with new and creative
ways to help. It truly is a partnership. I think there's a lot of things that we
can help the City with as we move forward. Like I said, we're here as a
partner.
Vice Mayor Scharff: We're going to be making changes to the York contract,
is that part of it or not? I was confused about that.
Ms. Mason: Really the primary amendment would be what reports they're
providing to us and what frequency.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Will there be a cost associated with that or not?
Ms. Adams: No.
Chair DuBois: It sounded like some departments were already dual reporting
to York and HR at the same time.
Ms. Richardson: Only Utilities.
Chair DuBois: You're saying now everybody's going to do that?
Ms. Mason: Basically it would streamline this. Their new addition to the
system streamlines it, so that Utilities puts in and it goes directly to
(inaudible).
Chair DuBois: I think Utilities was already doing that, but other departments
weren't.
Ms. Blanch: We would work with ...
Chair DuBois: Are all departments going to be?
Attachment B
Ms. Blanch: Correct. We would work with all departments to get them to
enter the report into the system.
Chair DuBois: Then York would automatically get it?
Ms. Blanch: Right.
Council Member DuBois: I have a few questions here.
Ms. Mason: It would shorten the timeframe.
Chair DuBois: In the text, it said there were some State laws that we're not
in compliance with. Are those just reporting timeliness or ...
Ms. Richardson: It's primarily reporting timeliness. There's a risk that you
could get fined if an employee doesn't report the injury—if the City doesn't
report the injury within five days of the date of knowledge. In discussion with
Suzanne, she indicated that she's not aware of the State actually having fined
anyone. York may be from their experience. We haven't experienced any
fines, so we did add that to the report, that we haven't experienced a fine but the risk is there.
Ms. Mason: We want to be in compliance. That's one of the reasons for this
change.
Chair DuBois: How long do employees have to report an injury? It sounded
like sometimes that takes a while. Do they have to report within some ...
Ms. Mason: They're supposed to report it immediately. The common story is
"I tripped. I thought I was fine. Two weeks later, I'm not feeling fine. I'm
not getting better the way I thought I would." That's always ...
Chair DuBois: There was also some talk—I guess we had a comprehensive
safety manual, and then it said departments have their own manuals. I guess
the question is are those department manuals comprehensive and do they
include the general information.
Ms. Richardson: I believe the department manuals are pretty comprehensive,
particularly the four departments that Yuki and Lisa looked at. With the
Citywide manual not being completely up-to-date, we've requested as one of
our recommendations that the City update the Citywide manual and then
make sure that the department manuals align with that. We want to make
sure there's some consistency in how the departments are doing things.
Chair DuBois: I see Police Chief Burns here. I actually had a question about Police. It looks like about 40 percent of our costs are in the Police Department.
Attachment B
I was wondering do you guys do anything extra or different about training for
safety in general?
Ms. Mason: Sit here so you have the microphone.
Council Member Kniss: Maybe you can weave firefighters in at the same time.
As I recall, Police and Fire are usually the high numbers.
Dennis Burns, Police Chief: Dennis Burns from the Police Department. We
have a pretty robust kind of wellness program, which includes strengthening,
endurance, diet. We get training on that on a regular basis. That's intended
to be a preventative method. We also have a number of policies in place. The
nature of police work, a lot of it involves safety. Officers are evaluated on
that on an annual basis. We hold safety very serious. I think one of the
reasons that some of the numbers were so high this year is we had two very
unusual cardiac cases, where the officers will ultimately retire. A large chunk
of the City's monies were paid on these two claims. I think Fire is similar. They really have a very strong wellness program. Again, it's focused on
flexibility, strength and endurance. Their folks are evaluated regularly on their
safety procedures. They're taken offline in the event that they show that they
can't comport with these policies.
Chair DuBois: Thanks.
Mr. Burns: You bet.
Chair DuBois: Do you have something?
Vice Mayor Scharff: It seems like everyone's in agreement. There doesn't
seem like there's any ... I guess I had some, I guess, questions. I was
confused. Are we hiring a person in the budget to do this or are we contracting
out for this person?
Ms. Mason: No. We are actually hiring someone in HR to facilitate and monitor
the program and get people back to work, make sure everything's being
processed, to make sure training is taking place. There's many suggestions
in this report. We added back a dedicated position that had been removed.
It's being paid through the Insurance Fund. The reduction should pay for that
position.
Vice Mayor Scharff: When you say it's added to the Insurance Fund, every
department is assessed something for the Insurance Fund. Correct?
Ms. Mason: Right.
Attachment B
Vice Mayor Scharff: Do we expect the Insurance Fund to then not go up
because there's—every department, if you have more people in the Police, are
the Police assessed more? Is that how that works or is it everyone gets
assessed the same?
Ms. Mason: It's based on experience and exposure. It's a combination.
Vice Mayor Scharff: On a department basis, right?
Ms. Blanch: Yes.
Ms. Mason: They get allocated, yes.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Got it.
Council Member Kniss: Just back to the Chief for a minute. As we look at
these, I'm just looking at the numbers on Packet Page 12. Maybe there's a
better one for us to look at. Looking at this, if we take it as 100 percent, what
would you guess, Dennis, is the number of Police and Fire in that and ...
Chair DuBois: Police were 40 percent of the total in terms of money.
Council Member Kniss: It doesn't give it in terms of people.
Chair DuBois: In terms of claims.
Ms. Richardson: In terms of people ...
Council Member Kniss: Yeah, claims. Are we going to figure claims equals
people?
Ms. Richardson: You might want to look at Exhibit 8, Packet Page 20. That
might be more helpful to what you're asking.
Council Member Kniss: If we look at—there are all kind of figures here,
though. I don't think there's just one that I can pull everything from. Overall
from looking at this, because I can remember from the County that Fire was
often a big issue. I'm guessing it probably is here as well. That's the kinds
of physical types of things that happen if you're in a fire or even in a paramedic
job. You're more likely to get claims that cost. What this doesn't tell me here,
unless I go through and analyze it, is what the overall price is. This is saying
to me that you're about 1 1/2 times what Fire is. Is that right?
Mr. Burns: I think for the use ...
Attachment B
Council Member Kniss: Because these are all stats, I know they're misleading.
That's why I'm asking. Say more about this.
Ms. Richardson: I think I can answer what she's asking. If you're referring
to Exhibit 8, if you look at the $4.7 million, is that what you're referring to as
the one?
Council Member Kniss: Yeah.
Ms. Richardson: As Chief Burns mentioned a little bit ago, there's two injuries
that comprise a good portion of that. That's in the footnote. If you subtract
those out, then it's $2 million for them. When you have an individual case
that is really expensive, it's going to ...
Council Member Kniss: You mean unusually high severity, is that what you're
talking about?
Ms. Richardson: Yes. You're going to have a higher cost that's
disproportionate to the rest of your injuries.
Council Member Kniss: I understand that. Maybe Dennis wants to just expand
on that a little. Police and Fire are almost always where the cost lies or lays.
Which one is it?
Mr. Burns: Fire typically is ahead of Police or is more expensive than Police,
because it's much more a—it's kind of labor intensive, almost like a blue collar
job where there's a lot of lifting and twisting and pulling. There's just more
opportunities with all the equipment that they're pulling and grabbing from
their engines and their truck. There's just more opportunity ...
Council Member Kniss: And lifting heavy people.
Mr. Burns: Lifting people on the gurneys, exactly. Police officers tend to have
a lot of repetitive motion injuries from getting in and out of cars or bending
over and lifting different types of things. Some involving wrestling with
people. Typically we see knees, backs and shoulders are going to be the most
common injuries that you'll see from both Police and Fire. Again, we have two
outlier cases that are very unique. Unique that they're similar and unique that
they happened at the same time and that they were so expensive and so
severe. Other than that, I think we're somewhat stable. I'd love to get them
lower, but the reality of it is, as you know, flesh and blood and we break every
now and then.
Council Member Kniss: The other thing, Harriet, you talked about just briefly
was how we compared with other jurisdictions that are similar.
Attachment B
Ms. Richardson: We didn't specifically put that in here, but we were pretty
comparable. We did look at it, but we didn't put it in the report. Maybe we
should have.
Council Member Kniss: Just always this ...
Ms. Richardson: We do have a chart that we could send to you, if you want
to see that.
Council Member Kniss: The reason I'm asking is sometimes there's something
to be learned from other police and fire departments, not that our Police or
Fire need to learn anything from anybody else, Dennis. Just because there
are those times. Sunnyvale has the combination safety. It would be
interesting to know how those are, but they have interchangeable roles, which
is kind of fascinating.
Chair DuBois: I think under Finding 1 you mention that we have outdated
information that's posted. I didn't really see any of the recommendations address that. Is that included?
Ms. Richardson: We tried to keep the recommendations somewhat high level.
It's part of updating the whole manual and making sure that everything is the
way it's supposed to be. When you update the manual, you look at the ...
Chair DuBois: That was included.
Ms. Richardson: It's meant to be included. The audit team actually went
around to different facilities and looked at what was posted. There is quite a
bit of outdated information posted. For example, in this building, it's on the
A level, and not everyone goes down to that level and sees those posters.
There should be something in each of the work areas that's visible to where
people (crosstalk).
Chair DuBois: Does anyone read the posters?
Ms. Richardson: I don't know, but you are required to make sure that
(crosstalk) ...
Chair DuBois: If you're going to post it, it might as well be read.
Vice Mayor Scharff: I'm not saying that. I just (crosstalk).
Ms. Richardson: If you get injured, it helps you know what you're supposed
to do.
Attachment B
Ms. Mason: I think it's also reflective of needing an update, because it really
needs to be right on our computers, intranet site, so wherever you're at, you
could access it, even if you're not at a bulletin board.
Council Member Kniss: Since we have York here, I wonder if as we go along,
whether there are things that you want to add to what our discussion is. You
have the expertise in this.
Ms. Adams: My only comment on the Police and Fire is they do have
presumptions. When they do have certain injuries, there's a perception that
they're accepted. That drives costs as well. Sometimes they're not rebutted,
which means they're given that benefit. That can drive ...
Vice Mayor Scharff: I saw that. It seemed like a lot of police officers and
firefighters make claims that are denied. It's hard to deny police and
firefighters, which means they must have been completely specious.
Ms. Adams: We work through that with the City. We don't just flat deny a claim. The examiners work with the City. Sometimes there has to be an
investigation, and there's some things that we need to find out. Sometimes
they will deny a claim.
Mr. Burns: On the Police side, every workers' comp claim or injury is
investigated by the supervisor that day or ideally within the next couple of
days.
Vice Mayor Scharff: If you make an egregious claim—obviously there are
things that are on the line. If you make one that's totally not true and
fabricated, you look at it and say are there repercussions for doing such a
thing?
Mr. Burns: Sure. The District Attorney's Office has got a special unit that is
funded by insurance companies that will go after, quite frankly, folks that are
abusing the workers' comp process.
Ms. Adams: We work with Probe Investigations. They are a highly respected,
highly motivated group of folks who have prosecuted many, many cases.
They've (crosstalk).
Council Member Kniss: Highly motivated must be the ...
Ms. Adams: They truly believe in what they do. We have a mini conference
once a year. They come and present and let us know what they've collected during the year and returned to counties, cities and other public entities. Yes,
there is a fraud unit that will investigate. There are specific things that they
Attachment B
look at when it's sent to them to determine whether it's being prosecuted or
not.
Ms. Blanch: These denials—I don't want you to get the wrong impression.
Vice Mayor Scharff: No, I'm not (crosstalk).
Ms. Blanch: These denials essentially were not found to be work-related; they
weren't industrial injuries or illnesses.
Ms. Adams: We also delay claims which allows 90 days for investigation to
happen to see if it's truly a workers' comp injury.
Council Member Kniss: That brings up a worse discussion. You can answer it
or not, Dennis. If you find that somebody is making a claim that it's work-
related, and yet it's discovered that it isn't, do we have a process that we go
through?
Mr. Burns: Sure. I don't think that we've had one of these cases. There's
doing nothing, and then there's taking the case to the District Attorney's Office. In between it would be a policy violation or an internal affairs
investigation where we would go ahead and see if we could prove, beyond a
preponderance in an internal affairs investigation, did this person falsify some
documentation or commit a fraud. Even though we don't think it's going to
be provable at the "beyond a reasonable doubt" level, we could pursue that.
Council Member Kniss: Thanks. I don't want to keep pushing on that, but I
know that has to be an issue.
Vice Mayor Scharff: That's the standard, a preponderance of evidence, for
internal affairs and then beyond a reasonable doubt for the ...
Mr. Burns: For a criminal. Typically and in most internal affairs investigations,
you're going to want more clear and convincing before you're going to be
taking somebody's property rights.
Ms. Blanch: We would work with York to do an investigation. We wouldn't
have our own Police Department doing the investigation. We have done those
type of presentations to the District Attorney; it's been some time. They have
the resources to take cases to the District Attorney.
Mr. Burns: They're rather difficult cases, I think, for the District Attorney (DA)
to prove. You could have somebody on video doing some sort of activity, and
they could have a claim that they injured their back or their knee or something like that. Their response would be, "I was having a good day that day. I felt
good," or "I felt good for the last few days." This is not my area of expertise,
Attachment B
but soft tissue injuries are difficult. You're going to get conflicting opinions
from doctors in a court of law.
Chair DuBois: Switching gears. I just wondered if we could make a note.
One of the recommendations was to update SAP. It sounds like we're going
to do that, but I wonder if we could capture a note that we also, when we
move to the new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) process, design this
process. Just to capture that, since it's coming up pretty soon.
Ms. Richardson: IT is getting started. August 4th starts the first kickoff
meeting on discussing requirements for the new ERP.
Chair DuBois: On Packet Page 42, it talks about the performance reporting
and not getting accurate data. It sounded like the SAP data (inaudible) were
more accurate. I wondered if we could use the more accurate data in that
report.
Ms. Richardson: The difference there is that the State has a limit on the number of days that have to be reported. That's what's been going into the
Performance Report. It doesn't truly capture when someone's been off longer
than 180 days, because we stop counting based on (crosstalk).
Chair DuBois: I'm asking can we switch that, use the better data. Don't you
put together the Performance Report?
Ms. Richardson: Right now we do. That's our next topic.
Ms. Blanch: Based on data that we provide to the Auditor's Office. I think it's
been a footnote in the data that says it's capped at the Federal limit.
Ms. Richardson: Right, but we don't ever say what the total is.
Vice Mayor Scharff: One other question. When did we get rid of the safety
person?
Ms. Richardson: 2013. What happened was he got sick and retired, I believe.
Vice Mayor Scharff: He went on disability and retired.
Ms. Richardson: The position was eliminated in the budget cycle.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Why did we eliminate the position? What was our
thinking? Was our thinking we'd save money? What was our thinking about
that, and why has that thinking changed?
Ms. Mason: I was not here.
Attachment B
Vice Mayor Scharff: It's easier that you weren't here, because you'd be
more—there's no investment. You can say it was a bad decision. What was
the reasoning behind it?
Ms. Blanch: The reasoning was there were other areas that needed focus,
and we changed to a business partner model rather than a functional area
model. The thought was you could spread out the work amongst various Staff.
Workers' compensation is so technical, that the Staff really couldn't focus on
recruitment, employee relations issues and learn workers' comp all at the
same time.
Ms. Mason: This is just one of the things I've been working with Sandra and
Rumi, as Rumi's approaching HR and restructuring. I think the business
partner model, which you see often, has been ...
Vice Mayor Scharff: What is the business ...
Ms. Mason: I will share it.
Vice Mayor Scharff: It'd be great (inaudible).
Ms. Mason: It's the idea that you take specialized positions and you convert
them to generalized positions assigned to departments. They become the
end-all for that assigned department or departments.
Vice Mayor Scharff: What do you mean the end-all?
Chair DuBois: Each department has an HR person.
Ms. Mason: You call me, Suzanne Mason, and I'm going to take care of
everything. You have a one-stop shop. The problem with this—it's something
that HR professionals really have been struggling with. I just have to say the
(inaudible) that I've dealt with, if you expect that person to be your person
dealing with labor, person dealing with workers' compensation (comp),
recruiting all your vacancies, it is very hard, number one, to have an individual
who has specialized knowledge, who has the ability to respond quickly, within
five days of, making sure paperwork is moving. Rumi's coming in and working
with Sandra. We are switching back to a more specialized focus. In dedicating
this position as well, I do think this position will be dedicated, but some of the
Safety Officer functions, the "in the field" functions, we're probably going to
be contracting for. It's going to be a combination. It's really putting a
specialized knowledge base and training around that person. Sometimes you feel like it may be more efficient and more customer-friendly to go with a more
generalized approach. I think it's challenging.
Attachment B
Council Member DuBois: I'm sensitive to Liz here. Do we have a Motion on
this?
Vice Mayor Scharff: I'll move we accept the Audit Report.
Council Member Kniss: Second.
Vice Mayor Scharff: That's what you're looking for, right?
Chair DuBois: Yep. (crosstalk) Council.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to
recommend the City Council accept the Disability Rates and Workers’
Compensation Audit.
Ms. Richardson: Did you want to make the Motion to have them modify those
two recommendations before we forward it to—their response to those two
recommendations before forwarding it to Council?
Vice Mayor Scharff: You're fine with that?
Ms. Richardson: It was the two we talked about, 4. ...
Ms. Mason: You mean the partially?
Ms. Richardson: Yes. There would be new responses.
Ms. Mason: I think there's reasons that we feel it's partially. I think that
some of the reason around some of the report changes was because we
wanted them to change. Yes, I guess if it's technical that they're not providing
the same, exact reports that were in the contract. I think it was done on
purpose. It wasn't a mistake.
Ms. Richardson: What I'm saying is that what you've written here is different
than what you said tonight (crosstalk) ...
Ms. Mason: You mean on the computer system.
Ms. Richardson: ... and after having spoken with York about what you're
actually going to be doing.
Ms. Mason: With the computer system? We can also do that.
Vice Mayor Scharff: There were two things. There were two partially agrees.
The first one, I thought ...
Ms. Richardson: 3.1 and ...
Attachment B
Vice Mayor Scharff: 3.1, I thought you said that your opinion has changed on
that. Was I incorrect?
Ms. Mason: I'm sorry. I meant our action plan, not our opinion. Our action
plan is a little bit different. We have found that York's system with some of
the modifications they recently made, might be a more effective way of doing
this than the DocuSign system.
Chair DuBois: Which was the recommendation from Audit. It sounds like
you've agreed instead of partially agreed.
Ms. Mason: We need to improve the reporting timeliness.
Vice Mayor Scharff: Wait. You went through that too fast. I'm not sure.
They still partially agree.
Ms. Mason: We still partially agree.
Vice Mayor Scharff: The part you partially agree—the part you don't agree
with is which one under 3.1?
Ms. Mason: Let me go through this again.
Vice Mayor Scharff: I thought you were agreeing, so I'm confused.
Ms. Mason: Their specific recommendations are about how we do it. We are
saying we are going to do it differently than the specific recommendations.
Vice Mayor Scharff: How are you going to do it differently?
Ms. Blanch: In the first bullet, at the end of the sentence, it says with HR
Staff being responsible for completing the Form 5020. We're proposing that
the department will initiate the Form 5020.
Ms. Mason: On the computer system.
Ms. Blanch: On the computer system. HR will receive it or at the same time,
complete the salary portion and submit to York.
Ms. Mason: We think there's a computerized solution where this was
suggesting a manual process. I feel partially agree—we agree the process
needs improvement, but we are not agreeing on the way to do it.
Ms. Richardson: I think you actually are, and maybe just the way the
recommendation is worded isn't quite clear. I think the third bullet, I think,
clarifies that we're saying that trained Staff, which could be PSO Staff, enter
Attachment B
the sensitive personnel or payroll information. When you look at it as a whole,
I think you're actually agreeing with it.
Vice Mayor Scharff: I don't think we should wade into that fight. I do think
that what would be really helpful—I don't know if you guys agree. You can
say partially agree, but then in the action plan, if Council's interested, you call
out exactly what you're going to do differently than what it says in 3.1. That
way any Council Member can look at it, who hasn't been on this Committee,
because this goes on Consent. That way it's no confusion. I can't read your
action plan and understand why you're partially agreeing after this discussion
today.
Ms. Mason: It's just a different process we're proposing to use.
Vice Mayor Scharff: That's fine. Just say that. Say what that—just address
the different bullets about what's different.
Ms. Mason: If you want us to put agree—I guess where we're at is ...
Vice Mayor Scharff: No, I don't. No, no. I do not want you to put agree. I
want clarity. Remember I'm a lawyer. I look at the document, and I say, "I
want you to match what's written here and say we are not doing the HR Staff,
we're doing this." I want you to take each bullet and tell me what you're doing
differently. That's what I want. I just want clarity. I actually think it's great
if you don't agree. That's fine. That doesn't bother me one way or the other.
I just want to know what you don't agree on and what you're doing.
Ms. Mason: If you look at each of the bullets, they are not all that—they're
sort of one process that looks to be pretty manual. We are suggesting that
we think using the online claims reporting process is a better process.
Chair DuBois: When I read it, it says ensure the use of York's online forms.
You said you disagree; we're going to use DocuSign. Now it sounds like you've
changed your mind and you're going to use York's online forms. That was my
confusion.
Ms. Mason: We'll redo it.
Council Member Kniss: Could I ask one more subjective question? Do we find
that this is more about saving money or about accurate reporting or about
something else that maybe I can't define?
Vice Mayor Scharff: Safety.
Council Member Kniss: Yes, of course.
Attachment B
Ms. Richardson: I would say it's a mix. I think that by dedicating a resource
you will save money in the long term. If you don't have people who are
implementing an effective illness and injury prevention program, you're going
to have more injuries. By having someone who's focused on that effort, you
can keep your costs down. There's the accurate reporting just to make sure
that we're compliant with State law and don't get fined.
Council Member Kniss: Yes. That, of course ...
Chair DuBois: We need another Motion. You're asking to change 3.1. Is that
it?
Vice Mayor Scharff: Yes, I'm asking her to change 3.1 and 4.2, that you stand
by what you had here. You partially agree with what you wrote in this one.
That's what I understood from the comments previously.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “including changes to Audit Findings 3.1 and 4.2 which will outline the related Action Plans that will be
implemented by Staff.”
MOTION AS AMENDED RESTATED: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded
by Council Member Kniss to recommend the City Council accept the Disability
Rates and Workers’ Compensation Audit, including changes to Audit Findings
3.1 and 4.2 which will outline the related Action Plans that will be implemented
by Staff.
Council Member Kniss: Ready to vote.
Chair DuBois: Yep. All in favor. Thank you, guys.
MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Berman absent
Council Member Kniss: Thanks. Thank you for coming from York.
Ms. Adams: Yes, you're welcome. My pleasure.
Attachment B