Bill
S 1298
Raises disfigurement awards by tying the cap to the state average wage (avg wage × 30) and removes the scar-only ban, expanding eligibility and payouts.
Status (as provided)
- Filed in the Massachusetts Senate (Senate Docket No. 1794) — filed 1/16/2025; introduced/read in Senate and referred to committee. A hearing was scheduled for 06/18/2025 (1:00–4:00 PM in B‑1). Current referral status in the materials includes “Referred to Investigations and Government Operations” and referral to Labor and Workforce Development; the bill metadata contains inconsistent sponsor and referral information (see note at end).
Purpose / intent
- To change how the statutory cap on workers’ compensation disfigurement awards is calculated and to broaden eligibility for disfigurement awards by removing a restriction that excluded “purely scar‑based” disfigurement except when located on the face, neck, or hands. The aim is to make benefit amounts responsive to prevailing wages and to make scar‑related disfigurement more frequently compensable.
Key provisions
- Amends subsection (k) of G.L. c.152 §36:
- Replaces the fixed cap “fifteen thousand dollars” with a variable cap: “not to exceed a sum equal to the average wage in the commonwealth on the date of the injury multiplied by thirty, as determined pursuant to subsection (a) of section 29 of chapter 151A.”
- In effect this ties the maximum disfigurement payment to the statewide average wage (using the statutory mechanism for computing the average), multiplied by 30.
- Strikes the sentence: “No amount shall be payable under this section for disfigurement that is purely scar‑based, unless such disfigurement is on the face, neck, or hands.”
- This removes the exclusion that barred payment for purely scar‑based disfigurement located elsewhere on the body.
Who would be affected
- Injured workers in Massachusetts seeking workers’ compensation disfigurement benefits — greater eligibility for scar‑based disfigurement and potentially larger maximum awards.
- Employers and workers’ compensation insurers — potential increase in disfigurement awards and related claims costs, which could affect premiums and reserves.
- Claims examiners, attorneys, and medical evaluators — adjustments to evaluation and valuation practices to reflect the new cap formula and broader compensability.
Practical and fiscal implications
- The cap becomes inflation‑sensitive and will move with the statutory average wage; depending on the average wage figure, the new cap could be higher or lower than the prior $15,000 floor (likely higher over time), producing potentially increased payouts.
- Removing the scar‑location limitation may increase the number of compensable disfigurement claims and associated administrative and adjudicative workload.
- No explicit fiscal estimates are provided in the bill text; exact budgetary impact would require actuarial/claims data.
Procedural/timeline notes and caveats
- The bill text and petition identify Senator Sal N. DiDomenico as the sponsor/petitioner. The provided metadata lists other sponsors (several federal senators and additional names) and multiple committee referrals that appear inconsistent with the Massachusetts General Court filing. Readers should consult the official Massachusetts Senate docket (Senate No. 1298 / Docket No. 1794) or legislative website for authoritative sponsor, referral status, committee reports, hearing records, and any fiscal notes.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
