1 It is assumed that loss of hand causes decrease of 50 per cent in earning capacity. 2 Includes compensation for partial disability. 3 Additional service in special cases or in discretion of commission. 4 One week in case of permanent total disability. 5 Fatal accidents not covered. 6 10 per cent deducted to cover employee's contributions. 7 Monthly pension; maximum, $50; minimum, $10 to $30. Maximum increased to 60 per cent of wages for first 6 months in case of temporary total disability. 8 Employees must pay one-half of medical cost. • Monthly pension in case of temporary disability; maximum, $60; minimum. $35. Fixed amounts in other cases. 172308°-20-Bull, 275—9 Table 35 shows the most advantageous and the least advantageous compensation provisions, from the viewpoint of the employee, in the various States: TABLE 35.-EXTREMES OF LIBERALITY IN THE COMPENSATION PROVISIONS OF THE VARIOUS STATES. 1 California, Connecticut, Idaho, North Dakota, Porto Rico, and the Federal Government. 2 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Delaware, Iowa, Maryland, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Virginia. It is obvious that no fixed form of analysis or summary presentation can give in complete detail the provisions of the laws under consideration. They relate not only to the compensation of accidents, but to accident reporting, safety provisions, the enforcement of safety laws, the establishment of insurance systems, premium rates, investments, the scale of payments in cases of certain forms of negligence or their increase under certain conditions, procedure in arbitration, forms of appeal, and a great variety of subjects on which it would be impossible to generalize, and which can be discovered only by a reading of the individual statutes, though the use of the index to the laws will aid in this. The adoption by a few States of laws generally similar can be clearly recog nized, but it is obvious that at the present time it can not be said that any one type of law is predominantly approved. Admitting that the question of State insurance is open to discussion, it can not be denied that some form of security of payments is desirable; and while constitutional limitations may appear to stand in the way of compulsory compensation systems, it is none the less certain that the welfare of both employer and employee, as well as the public interest generally, would be served by the general adoption of laws, just and certain in their operations, and not dependent for their acceptance on the personal views or interests of individuals or groups of individuals. |