RETROACTIVITY OF STATUTORY AMENDMENTS
Aggravation (RCW 51.32.160)
The 1995 amendment to RCW 51.52.060 reduced the time the Department has to place in abeyance the terms of orders involving applications to reopen claims. If an application to reopen is filed before the effective date, the statutory changes do not apply to the application to reopen. Additionally, even if the 1995 amendments could be applied, the failure of the Department to act within the proscribed time period will not result in the application being "deemed granted." ....Elois Short, 95 4522 (1996) [dissent]
The 1988 amendments to RCW 51.32.160 were remedial in nature and apply to any application to reopen a claim filed subsequent to the effective date of the amendments, June 9, 1988. ....Marven Sandven, 89 3338 (1990)
Children's benefits (RCW 51.08.030)
The statute extending benefits to a worker's children beyond the age of 18 while enrolled in school does not apply to children whose parent was injured prior to the effective date of the statute. The law in effect at the time of injury applies. ....Harry Wren, Dec'd., 57,099 (1981) [dissent] [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under King County Cause No. 81-2-14630-9.]
Interest rate increases (RCW 51.32.080(4))
Where the statutory amendment increasing the rate of interest payable on the monthly installments of a permanent partial disability award became law after the date of the worker's injury, but before the permanent partial disability award was made, the rate of interest in effect on the date of injury applies. ....Teenamarie Callahan, 70,745 (1987)
Occupational disease statute of limitations (RCW 51.28.055)
The 1984 amendment to RCW 51.28.055, extending the time for filing claims for occupational disease, was intended to operate prospectively only. Where the time for filing a claim under the former statute had started to run prior to the effective date of the amendment (June 7, 1984), the amendment cannot extend the time for filing a claim. ....Herbert Lovell, 69,823 (1986)
Schedule of benefits applicable in occupational disease claim (RCW 51.32.180)
The 1988 amendment to RCW 51.32.180 did not explicitly overrule the Board's prior decisions applying the date of manifestation rule. Thus, even for claims filed before July 1, 1988, the Board continues to apply the date of manifestation rule to determine the schedule of benefits. ....Kenneth Alseth, 87 2937 (1989) [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under Snohomish County Cause No. 89-2-03290-1]; Charles Jones, (II) 87 2790 (1989) ; Milton May, 87 4016 (1989) [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under Snohomish County Cause No. 89-2-03033-9.] [Rule upheld by Department of Labor & Indus. v. Landon, 117 Wn.2d 122 (1991)]
Social security retirement offset (RCW 51.32.225)
The social security retirement offset of RCW 51.32.225 applies to persons injured before its effective date. Ashenbrenner rule, that the law in effect on the date of injury will control the rights of the worker, is simply a presumption which the courts will apply in the absence of legislative intent to the contrary. Retirement offset exemption contained in RCW 51.32.225(1) only excludes from application of the offset those persons "receiving permanent total disability benefits prior to July 1, 1986." ....Frank Hansen, 87 1408 (1989) [dissent] ; Lois Oakley, 87 3830 (1989) [dissent] [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under Kitsap County Cause No. 89-2-00991-7.]
Underinsured motorist insurance recovery (RCW 51.24.030)
The 1986 amendments to RCW 51.24.030 were clarifying amendments, at least insofar as they explicitly stated that the Department or self-insured employer has a lien against a worker's recovery under the employer's underinsured motorist coverage. Thus, the 1986 amendments are retroactive, as a legislative interpretation of the original Act, and the Department or self-insurer has a lien against the worker's recovery under the employer's underinsured motorist policy. ....Dale Goers, 88 0661 (1989) [Editor's Note: The Board's decision was appealed to superior court under Snohomish County Cause No. 89-2-02137-2.]; Lowell Taylor, 87 3817 (1989) [Contra Department of Labor & Indus. v. Cobb, 59 Wn. App. 360 (1990) rev. denied, 116 Wn.2d 1031 (1991). Cf. O'Rourke v. Department of Labor & Indus., 57 Wn. App. 374 (1990) rev. denied 115 Wn.2d 1002 (1990)]
Wages (RCW 51.08.178)
The 1988 amendments to RCW 51.08.178, which permit the averaging of wages to determine a worker's time loss rate, do not apply to a claim for an injury which occurred prior to the time the amendments took effect. ....Diana Stephens, 89 0717 (1990)