Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workers Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would pay injured Maryland workers for gap between medical recovery and vocational rehab
Summary
Supporters told the Economic Matters Committee HB 346 would require retroactive temporary total disability pay for the gap between maximum medical improvement and the start of vocational rehabilitation services, up to 60 days; defenders warned an expedited dispute process already exists.
Delegate Andrew Pruske urged the panel to back House Bill 346, saying the bill "prevents injured Marylanders from falling into financial hardship while they wait for the system to process their return to work services." He told the committee the measure would require employers or their insurers to provide retroactive pay for the interval from maximum medical improvement (MMI) until vocational rehabilitation services begin, capped at 60 days.
Support witnesses described how that interval plays out in practice. Jim Lanier of the Maryland Association for Justice explained that even when an injured worker is diligent "there's always going to be at least a ... 2 to 8 week period of gap that the injured worker can't get any benefits from any source." Vocational rehabilitation counselors and people with lived experience told the committee the financial strain can be severe; one witness said the lapse forced family members to choose which bills to pay.
Opponents included the Maryland Defense Council and county representatives, who argued the workers' compensation system already provides a rapid vocational-dispute process. Michael Daley and Ashley Smith said the Workers' Compensation Commission operates a VOC dispute procedure and COMAR timelines that can schedule hearings within days, and they warned HB 346 could "reward dilatory conduct" by compensating claimants who fail to pursue existing remedies.
Committee members pressed both sides about how often the gap arises, how long it typically lasts, and whether an administrative fix to improve VOC scheduling would address harms without creating new exposures for employers or higher premiums. Sponsors said the bill's 60‑day cap and targeted scope would limit cost while ensuring a short safety net for workers who otherwise lose income.
The hearing closed after panels of expert and personal testimony; no committee vote or amendment was recorded in the transcript.
The committee will decide later whether to advance the bill.
