I don’t know know what the disparity for lost wages is between Ohio and Indiana, but I find it hard to believe it could be that much. Does Indiana not cover lost wages? I was injured on the job in 1993 and at the time was making about $7.00/hour. I only received lost wages while I recovered from surgery which was about $300.00. The only other reason I could think of a large disparity is if Buckeyes get paid more than Hoosiers. I really don’t think that is the case based on the economy in Ohio for the last 8 years.

From what I have seen over the last 15 years in Ohio is that the system was based mainly on insurance rates. If penalty rated (based on a few claims in a year) you would not be grouped for reasonable rates. The reserves that were created by the BWC were outrageous and the total payouts never even approached 10% of the reserves.

Ohio created a system to reduce rates that involve “safety training” and “drug free workplace” programs. I suspect that the money is going into this huge bureaucracy and its investment strategies.

Going by the insurance premium rates alone is not a fair measurement. Insurance rates also are tied to a benefit received.

Indiana, when compared to Ohio, costs about one third for the coverage. However, the injured worker in Indiana will receive considerably less than his Buckeye counterpart for lost wages.

So if we are going to compare rates, lets try to keep things in perspective. What kind of burger do you get from the McDonald’s dollar menu versus one from a Max & Erma’s restaurant? Its pretty much the same with insurance.

Industry has been leaving Ohio and I find it hard to believe that with all the attention on drug free workplaces and safety councils, that an employee in Ohio is more likely to result in injury that will be costly to an employer.

Of course, there is no indication of fraud rates. It may be that without universal healthcare, employees are using the BWC system to take care of the “aches and pains” of growing older.