NFL Tackles Benefits

The National Football League’s team owners and players union are battling at the state Capitol over a measure that could reduce professional athletes’ ability to recover workers’ compensation benefits.

Legislation sponsored by team owners would require athletes who file workers’ compensation claims in this state to be California residents. It also would prevent pro athletes from collecting benefits for so-called cumulative trauma, or injuries associated with years of wear and tear on their bodies.

“Many players file claims in California because the benefits are more lucrative [than in other states],” said Randall Henry, an aide to Sen. Quentin Kopp (I-San Francisco), who introduced SB 541.

Under existing law, any athlete who plays a professional game or signs a contract in California is eligible to file a workers’ comp claim in the state. NFL team owners say the practice is so widespread that it has cost franchises and the state close to $30 million since 1989.

Former San Francisco 49ers and Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Joe Montana and former Los Angeles Raiders defensive lineman Howie Long are among the more than 4,000 professional athletes who have collected the benefits.

“We think [players] should file a claim where they’re injured and not where the benefits are the best,” said Barry Brokaw, the NFL owners’ lobbyist in Sacramento. “If you’re a Green Bay Packer, you should file in Wisconsin.”

The NFL Players Assn.--the players union--claims the bill unfairly targets pro athletes.

“Athletes aren’t the only ones who make lots of money,” said David Meggyesey, West Coast director for the union. “If I’m the president of [Pacific Gas & Electric] and I slip and break my leg at work, I can still file a claim. Why shouldn’t athletes have the same right?”

The bill is scheduled for a May 14 hearing in the Senate’s Industrial Relations Committee. Another bill by Sen. Ross Johnson (R-Irvine) would eliminate workers’ compensation benefits outright for any professional athlete making more than $226,000 a year. That bill is not expected to pass.