Employee authorizes records release
marc
3,126 Posts
Here is a variation on a familiar theme.
We have a couple of claims that have been working for a couple of years. EEs were exposed to mold in a building we were sharing with a state agency. The agency and our EEs ended up moving to another location and lots of mold claims hit the system. Three from our EEs and about a dozen from the state agency.
Two years later, the lawyers for the insurance company has requested copies of all records for the EEs in question and have presented a release signed by the EEs authorizing same.
In Nevada, EEs have a right to review their personnel files and request copies, but do they have the right to release the entire file to a third party?
I want these claims to go away so my interests are in alignment with the insurance company. Our volunteer attorney is a bit wishy-washy about the situation and just wants me to write a letter saying we decline to provide the info on advice of counsel.
Now the EEs have gone to Attorney General, who will provide representation to EEs who cannot afford counsel, and the AG's office is also requesting the records. Declining to them would result in an administrative subpoena, which is basically a firmer request for the docs.
Opinions?
We have a couple of claims that have been working for a couple of years. EEs were exposed to mold in a building we were sharing with a state agency. The agency and our EEs ended up moving to another location and lots of mold claims hit the system. Three from our EEs and about a dozen from the state agency.
Two years later, the lawyers for the insurance company has requested copies of all records for the EEs in question and have presented a release signed by the EEs authorizing same.
In Nevada, EEs have a right to review their personnel files and request copies, but do they have the right to release the entire file to a third party?
I want these claims to go away so my interests are in alignment with the insurance company. Our volunteer attorney is a bit wishy-washy about the situation and just wants me to write a letter saying we decline to provide the info on advice of counsel.
Now the EEs have gone to Attorney General, who will provide representation to EEs who cannot afford counsel, and the AG's office is also requesting the records. Declining to them would result in an administrative subpoena, which is basically a firmer request for the docs.
Opinions?
Comments
The question is are they legitimate or nuisance claims, and how much are you willing to pay. Is this a liability issue or WC issue?
My $0.02 worth!
DJ The Balloonman
We have no liability exposure other than the WC claims, which is part of the good news.
I mostly think that when attorneys get involved, theirs should talk to ours. However, our counsel is mostly volunteer so we have to carry the water whenever we can to not burn the guy out and save him for the big stuff, which this could be, but is not --- so far.
I agree with your perspective.
Part of my question is does the employee have the right to release company files? I don't think so. They do not own the files even though they have a right to copies so I looked at their release of the files as having no effect. Am I wrong?
1) Tell them all you will release records only pursuant to a subpoena.
2) Provide the employee with a copy of his file and tell him he can do with it what he wishes.
I assume you were leasing the space and have no liability for the presence of the mold and I would not naturally assume an insurance company is on anyone's side but their own.
It is your stance on requiring a subpoena that has given me most pause in proceeding with copying the files. I do want these claims moved forward, they are without merit in the opinion of the the experts that have come into the picture so far.
The EEs attorneys dropped out of the case because it will now take a significant investment to bring in experts to counter the testimony of the experts brought in by the insurance company. As long as the ride was free, the employees were represented, but now that some money must be invested to move the case forward, counsel has moved on.