FLORIDA HEART BILL

The letter below was printed in the last edition of the “Roll Call” (state PBA newsletter). I spoke with attorney Bichler and he has agreed to attend our picnic (see picnic post) on May 27th, at which time he will answer questions our members have concerning the Heart Bill. For those that can not attend the PBA will set up a seminar on the subject at a later date.

Mike Rouleau




Urgent Message for Law Enforcement
On the Heart Bill

By Geoff Bichler, Attorney for Bichler & Kelly

The Heart Bill (F.S. 112.1 was passed in 2002 by the Florida Legislature due to the lobbying efforts of the Florida Police Benevolent Association. (PBA). This bill is intended to insure that cases of Hypertension and heart disease are recognized as work related conditions for all law enforcement professionals. Unfortunately, many cases that should rightfully be paid are being denied when they are made. Countless other officers are not making claims because they do not understand their rights. It is imperative that all officers recognize that the Heart Bill creates a vested legal right that must be perused. Here are some basic things that all officers should know:

All heart conditions and cases of hypertension are covered, whether they occur while at work or not. Many times officers think they must be working when an incident or condition manifests itself in order to be covered. This is not the case.

All medication required to treat a heart condition or hypertension is the responsibility of the employing agency at no cost to the officer. The prescription issue is one of the most important benefits under the act because it is a lifetime benefit and usually worth tens of thousands of dollars.

The law is that all heart conditions and cases of hypertension are work related. Don’t let your employing agency tell you otherwise. Many of these claims are being denied without valid legal grounds. It is a mistake not to pursue these claims simply because your employer tells you that you are not covered.

All medical care required to treat either hypertension or heart disease is the responsibility of your employing agency for life. All lost wages resulting from either hypertension or heart disease is the responsibility of your employing agency for life.

The PBA fought long and hard to pass this legislation, but the bill is useless if officers don’t demand that their rights be recognized. You must do your part if you have a claim or know someone who does. Insist that your rights and those of your fellow officers be recognized and pursue legal action if necessary. PBA attorneys and Bichler and Kelly have handled thousands of these claims around the State and they are working in conjunction with the Central Florida Chapter to pursue these matters locally for all officers. The will litigate these claims through trial and appeal if necessary and no fees are paid unless there is a recovery. Questions can be directed to the firm at (407) 599-3777; or toll free 1-866-245-8977.

Just curious, what do we need to qualify for this? Just a doctor saying "you have high blood pressure and you cannot work any more," or what? And, if this means retiring early, does that also mean significant cuts to our pension since we couldnt finish our 25 years?

Just curious, what do we need to qualify for this? Just a doctor saying "you have high blood pressure and you cannot work any more," or what? And, if this means retiring early, does that also mean significant cuts to our pension since we couldnt finish our 25 years?

Like Mike said in his post, attend the picnic. It is a very important issue that may save your life. Now that is worth taking the day off. If you can not, Mike also said that their would be a seminar set up for questions and answers.

Do not think that our Office has not provided this coverage, as they have......with some retired upper brass. You just have to request it. If denied that PBA has an attorny that will help.

This is landmark legislation. Firefighters in Florida have had this "presumption of work related" heart disease coverage for decades, but police were excluded.

About the only way that police got appropriate attention for heart attacks, etc. was if it occurred while actually working ON DUTY.

That is no longer the case. Learn about this coverage and if, God forbid, you ever experience heart problems (including hypertension) get the benefits that you are entitled to.

I wish this had come along before I retired.

-------------------

And, if I were you I would ignore the poster who said that the office had already provided "retired upper brass" with this coverage. Every case is individualized and the poster has no access to the medical records of "retired upper brass" to know what the cases involved.

The benefits provided to "brass" and to "troops" are identical and are governed by law. Saying that if you are denied the benfits of this law you should consult the PBA attorney simply sounds like a PBA recruitment ploy. Why would you be denied? It doesn't come out of the office budget.

If you feel you are entitled to coverage under this law, start by consulting the Human Resources office. You can also get an actualy copy of the law and read it for yourself.

There's always someone who is trying to drive a wedge between groups. To the poster: name names of these "retired upper brass" who were given favored treatment denied to others or quit making such allegations.

I posted that and since you are now retired I will let you know what I meant, as if you still were working you would know that the Office was asked about this legislation by several deputies and where told a whole slue of things they had to do and hoops they had to jump through. They also acted like they knew nothing about this law even though some brass applied, and were approved to receive the benefit of the this law prior to them retiring. This is why the PBA has an attorney to take on this type of attitude. Why can not the Office look out for those that qualify and stream line the process and help the employee file the paperwork?

Do you have to be a PBA member prior to being diagnosed.....or will the PBA attorneys help you with this if you become a PBA member AFTER being diagnosed and AFTER being denied this retirement by HCSO?

to retired and content, you will see very soon that someone of staff rank (maybe past or present) is already receiving the bennies. i find it amazing that you think you are so smart (DA) on the subject. Stay Retired. i question why the troops had to learn about the heart bill from the PBA and not from our leaders through legal bulletins???? please stay in your hole of retirement and stop talking s---t about the PBA, at least they care about us.............

also, retired and content i did call human resorce and they requested me fax them a copy of the pba letter which i did because they did not know what to do... please stay retired

Do you have to be a PBA member prior to being diagnosed.....or will the PBA attorneys help you with this if you become a PBA member AFTER being diagnosed and AFTER being denied this retirement by HCSO?

I'm not suprised this question wasn't answered

to retired and content, you will see very soon that someone of staff rank (maybe past or present) is already receiving the bennies. i find it amazing that you think you are so smart (DA) on the subject. Stay Retired. i question why the troops had to learn about the heart bill from the PBA and not from our leaders through legal bulletins???? please stay in your hole of retirement and stop talking s---t about the PBA, at least they care about us.............

also, retired and content i did call human resorce and they requested me fax them a copy of the pba letter which i did because they did not know what to do... please stay retired

Quite a leap in logic in your postings. You say that Human Resources did not know what to do about the new law, but according to you "someone of staff rank" is already receiving the benefits. Well, if they are getting the benefits it is obvious that Human Resources DID know what to do.

In an earlier post you said that "the Office was asked about this legislation by several deputies and where told a whole slue of things they had to do and hoops they had to jump through." Again it is obvious that someone at HR knew what needed to be done and what the hoops were. The fact is that the deputies asked for information regarding the law and were given answers. If they were told "things they had to do" its because these "things" are in the law. I repeat, they got answers.

You can't have it both ways: if someone in HR knew the rules AND if "someone of staff rank" is receiving the benefits, THEN HR did know what to do.

Also - there was no need to "put out a legal bulletin" about the coverage. If you have a heart attack the HR people will know what to do for you just as they do presently for workers' compensation injuries. It may come as a great shock to you, but the new coverage is part of the workers' compensation law. (You can continue to be amazed that I think I "am so smart on the subject.")

As to the PBA - I didn't say a word against the PBA. I said YOUR POST, talking about using the PBA attorney if you are "dened the benefits of this law" sounds like a recruitment ploy - because it does. There is no reason to believe that "the troops" would be denied benefits provided to "the brass." I have no problem with encouraging deputies to attend the PBA picnic or the proposed seminar at which the provisions of the new law will be explained. Anyone with even a little bit of computer skill could also simply look up the text of the law, F.S. 112.1, on the Internet.

By the way, are you under the impression that "the PBA attorney" will litigate your case for free because you are a PBA member? If so, I suggest you re-read the first post in this thread, which says: PBA attorneys and Bichler and Kelly have handled thousands of these claims around the State and they are working in conjunction with the Central Florida Chapter to pursue these matters locally for all officers. The will litigate these claims through trial and appeal if necessary and no fees are paid unless there is a recovery.

In your May 8th post you say benefits have been provided to "SOME (more than one) retired upper brass." In your May 12th post you say that "SOMEONE (one person) of staff rank (maybe past or present) is already receiving the bennies." Well, which is it: some or someone; retired or present?

I repeat my earlier challenge: name names of these "retired upper brass" who were given favored treatment denied to others or quit making such allegations.