WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 57

SB 57 — Workers’ Comp: Payment for Hearing Aids & Glasses

Status: Passed first reading (filed)
Primary subject areas: Employment; Health services; Insurance; Opticians & optometrists; Workers’ compensation; Medical equipment

Purpose / Intent

SB 57 amends the statutory definition of “injury” in the state Workers’ Compensation Act to explicitly address damage to assistive devices (eyeglasses, hearing aids, dentures, and other prosthetic devices). The bill clarifies that breakage or damage to such devices can be treated as “injury” arising out of and in the course of employment, while setting a limiting condition for replacement/repair of eyeglasses and hearing aids.

Key provisions

  • Amends G.S. 97‑2(6) (definition of “injury and personal injury”) to add:
    • “Injury shall include breakage or damage to eyeglasses, hearing aids, dentures, or other prosthetic devices which function as part of the body.”
    • A proviso stating that eyeglasses and hearing aids “will not be replaced, repaired, or otherwise compensated for unless injury to them is incidental to a compensable injury.”
  • Effective date: the act takes effect when it becomes law and applies to workers’ compensation claims arising before, on, or after that date.

Who and what would be affected

  • Covered employees (workers) whose eyewear, hearing aids, dentures, or prosthetic devices are broken or damaged as a result of a workplace accident.
  • Employers and their workers’ compensation insurers (responsibility for claims adjudication and benefit payments).
  • Health-care providers and suppliers (opticians/optometrists, audiologists, prosthetists/dentists) who supply, repair, or bill for devices.
  • Claims administrators, workplace safety programs, and courts/arbiters handling WC disputes.

Practical effect and likely impacts

  • Clarifies that damage to assistive devices can constitute part of an “injury” under the Act — potentially enabling compensation or replacement in some circumstances.
  • The proviso limits automatic entitlement for eyeglasses and hearing aids: such devices will be compensated only when damage occurred incidental to a compensable injury (i.e., as part of an injury already found compensable). This may constrain standalone claims solely for replacement of eyewear/hearing aids unless linked to a compensable bodily injury.
  • Potential outcomes:
    • Modest increase in claims and administrative work as claimants and adjusters address device-damage incidents.
    • Insurers may see some incremental costs when devices are replaced as part of otherwise compensable injuries.
    • Disputes likely about the meaning of “incidental to a compensable injury” (timing, causal link, and proof requirements), which could generate case law or administrative guidance.
    • Providers may see increased requests for bills or device documentation to support claims.

Implementation / procedural notes

  • Insurers and employers will need to update claims procedures, intake forms, and staff guidance to handle device-damage claims and to apply the “incidental” standard.
  • Because the law applies to existing and future claims once effective, administrators should review open claims where device damage occurred to assess potential coverage under the new language.
  • The bill’s limiting language may require regulatory or judicial interpretation to clarify scope (e.g., whether dentures/prosthetics are treated differently from eyeglasses/hearing aids).

If you’d like, I can:
- Draft suggested claimant/insurer guidance language to implement the “incidental” test;
- Outline evidence types (receipts, device serial numbers, provider statements) likely needed to support device-damage claims; or
- Prepare short talking points for stakeholder meetings (employers, insurers, providers).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.