After an investment scandal rocked the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation in 2007, the Ohio General Assembly took action to provide greater oversight of the state's workers' compensation system. It created a "Workers' Compensation Council" primarily to review legislation proposed to the General Assembly that would affect Ohio workers' compensation laws.

The Council was tasked with "reviewing the soundness of the workers' compensation system and legislation involving or affecting the workers' compensation system." The council is expected to review "all changes to the Worker's Compensation Law proposed to the General Assembly" and report on the "probable costs, actuarial implications, and desirability as a matter of public policy."
 
Unfortunately, major changes are currently being reviewed, and the Council has not been asked to consider any of them.
 
Specifically, the Council did not review Senate Resolution 118, which created the Competitive Workers' Compensation Task Force last November. The Task Force was formed to study the feasibility of privatizing workers' compensation insurance in Ohio. This proposed shift is a dramatic departure from the current system.

State Senator Karen Gillmor recently characterized the mission of the Task Force as completing "a comprehensive review of the Bureau of Workers' Compensation" and looking "at possible ways to improve the long-term structure of our state's workers' compensation system."
 
Given the breadth of the Task Force's potential impact on workers' compensation law, it seems that the Workers' Compensation Council should have reviewed the proposal of the Task Force's creation. Although technically the Resolution is not legislation that needs to be reviewed by the Council, the mission of the Task Force seems to fit squarely within the domain of the Council.
  
Unfortunately, the Council itself is now plagued by scandal and accusations of gross inefficiency, and it seems unlikely that the Council will be taking up this task any time soon. First, three Council employees accused the Council's executive director of firing them based on religious discrimination and harassment. Then, in responding to the firing scandal, the chairman of the Ohio House Insurance Committee Rep. Dan Dodd, who is also a member of the Council's board, charged that the Council had cost Ohio employers nearly $1 million since its creation and had only completed a single bill analysis.

Employers who pay workers' compensation premiums fund the Council's $650,000 annual budget. The Council's inefficiency deeply angers both lawmakers and the employers who are ultimately responsible for the cost.

The Council was created in the wake of scandal, primarily to ensure integrity and informed decision-making within the area of workers' compensation law. For a task force with such broad influence to have been created without the review of the Council concerns some citizens who fear the implications of broad changes implemented without appropriate oversight.