Does the Murray decision imperil the fundamental compact of the workers’ compensation system?
The narrow statutory construction on which the case was decided limits its availability as a precedent for future constitutional challenges to the rules of representation and litigation in the workers’ compensation system. It may, however, encourage plaintiffs’ attorneys in states other than Florida to seek similar points of opportunity in their statutes. Does the Murray case raise legitimate policy issues in the structure of workers’ compensation systems? The workers’ compensation system has been remarkably successful in providing serviceable justice in employer/employee relationships, but its strongest supporters would not argue that it always operated flawlessly. In certain circumstances the option of litigation, though frequently abused, has provided a legitimate safety valve for necessary adjustments. That safety valve ceases to operate if attorneys withhold services from claimants on grounds of inadequate compensation, but exposing the workers’ compensation process fully to the b
