Summary of August 2025 Labor Law Updates for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Welcome to the August 2025 roundup of Pennsylvania labor law developments, brought to you by HKM Employment Attorneys. These are important legal shifts for employees, employers, HR professionals, and compliance leaders. August 2025 saw several important legal developments in Pennsylvania affecting workers’ compensation eligibility (particularly around policy compliance and vaccine mandates), stronger county-level enforcement initiatives in Allegheny County, and greater accountability for insurers to pay medical claims on time under workers’ comp law.
K.A. Fee v. Prospect Medical Holdings, Inc. — Court Ruling (Workers’ Compensation)
Date Decided: June 30, 2025, but reported and effective in public discussion in August 2025.
Summary:
A nurse, Kathleen Fee, sustained a work-related injury while working for Prospect Medical Holdings in 2021. She was moved to light-duty work, then ultimately terminated for refusing a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination (despite seeking medical and religious exemptions). She sought ongoing total disability benefits under Pennsylvania’s Workers’ Compensation law. The Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (WCAB) had reversed an earlier decision granting her benefits, holding that her refusal constituted “bad faith” and broke the causation link between her injury and the loss of earnings. The Commonwealth Court reversed the WCAB. It held that her refusal did not automatically amount to bad faith, particularly where she had made good faith requests for exemptions, presented supporting documentation, and the employer’s vaccination policy did not provide reasonable accommodations. Thus, she remains eligible for workers’ compensation benefits even though her employment was terminated for non-compliance with the vaccine mandate.
Implications:
Employers with vaccine/health-policy mandates must ensure exemption procedures are fair and documented; refusal under those circumstances may not shield them from obligations under workers’ compensation. Workers’ compensation benefits may survive terminations for policy violations if the injured worker acted in good faith and if the termination policy didn’t allow reasonable accommodation. Insurers and employers should review the interplay of employer policy, accommodation obligations, and workers’ compensation law to avoid overreach in denying benefits.
Allegheny County Executive Order: “Strengthening Worker Protections in Allegheny County” — Executive Order / Local Policy Development
Date: August 28, 2025
Summary:
The Allegheny County Executive, Sara Innamorato, signed an executive order aimed at expanding worker protections in several areas. Key provisions include:
- Creation of a County Office of Worker Protection to enforce labor, discrimination, safety, workplace benefit rights, particularly focusing on private small and medium-sized businesses.
- Establishment of a County Office of Worker Safety for county employees and contractors.
- Directing exploration of options in case of NLRA (National Labor Relations Act) provisions being invalidated, including a local labor relations board, sectoral organizing, expanding collective bargaining rights.
- Implementation of a “Best Value Procurement” program requiring contractors for county work to show commitments to worker safety and equal opportunity.
Implications:
Employers operating in Allegheny County (especially small/medium private employers) may face new oversight, reporting, or compliance obligations from the county level. Potential for legal challenges regarding preemption by federal labor law (particularly NLRA) or conflict with state laws. The executive order itself anticipates some of that. Longer-term, if the initiatives proceed (e.g. local labor board, enforcement offices), this could shift the landscape of worker protections locally in Allegheny County, possibly serving as a model (or caution) for other counties.
Workers’ Compensation Ruling: Penalties for Nonpayment of Medical Bills After Fee Review Determination — Court Ruling (WC)
Date: August 26, 2025
Summary:
In a case involving Day-Timers, Inc. vs. an insurance carrier, medical providers had submitted bills for work-injury-related treatment and filed for Fee Review when carriers did not timely/pay properly. The Fee Review process decided in favor of the provider, but the insurer failed to pay. A Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) ordered payment of a penalty (50%) on the unpaid and untimely paid bills, plus attorney’s fees for “unreasonable contest.” The Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (WCAB) and the Commonwealth Court upheld the WCJ’s jurisdiction to award such penalties, even though insurers argued that Fee Review is for determining amounts, not for imposing penalties.
Implications:
Insurers in Pennsylvania need to comply promptly with Fee Review determinations to avoid penalties and potential attorneys’ fees. Medical providers have an enforcement mechanism when there is a failure to pay following Fee Review. Employers (or carriers) cannot simply ignore or delay payment even when disputing amount — failure to pay following Fee Review can result in penalties.
Conclusion: Looking Back on Pennsylvania’s Labor Law Updates from August 2025
With Pennsylvania courts continuing to clarify rights around wage-and-hour, discrimination, severance and contract disputes, and hostile work environments, having expert local counsel is vital. At HKM Employment Attorneys in Philadelphia, our dedicated team—including Brian Benestad, Amy Mathieu, and Stephanie Solomon—handles everything from breach of contract, data breach, and wrongful termination to FMLA/ADA accommodations and hostile workplace claims. We provide clear guidance, personalized support, and no‑fee‑unless‑we‑win advocacy. If recent developments in Philadelphia’s courts hit close to home, contact our Philadelphia office to explore how we can help enforce your rights and pursue justice.
