Gov. Jared Polis signed a controversial bill Wednesday that largely will eliminate limitations on doctor choice for injured workers — and then immediately called for creation of a working group to recommend further changes for the policy and pass a cleanup bill in 2026.
The action appeared to be Polis’ attempt to enact a general policy he favors — because, he said, the change is a step toward privatization of state-chartered workers’ compensation insurer Pinnacol Assurance — while seeking to change specific provisions in the law. However, Pinnacol officials immediately expressed disappointment in the signing, and bill supporters’ enthusiasm for relitigating its details is unknown.
Currently, employers who pay the full costs for workers’ compensation care can give employees a list of four provider options for their treatment — a number that doubled following a negotiated change in law in 2014. And workers have just 90 days to change providers if they don’t like the course of their recovery — a rare request made in just 0.5% of the 35,000 claims that Pinnacol officials handle annually.
Under House Bill 1300, however, Coloradans can choose any provider that is certified by the state to handle workers’ compensation care — a list of nearly 1,200 providers — as long as they are located within 75 miles of the patient’s home or workplace. And the timeline for changing providers grows to 120 days if the worker chose the provider, but it extends until the point of maximum medical improvement for employees who don’t choose a doctor within seven days of injury but instead let employers assign a provider.
Widely diverging viewpoints on effect of bill
Sponsoring Rep. Jenny Willford, D-Northglenn, called the bill an attempt to give workers freedom over picking a doctor rather than choosing from a small list of options they may feel are more concerned with getting them back on the job than healing them. She presented a handful of witnesses who described major clashes with their providers that slowed their rehabilitation or left them permanently disabled, and she argued that increased trust of doctors will speed patients’ healing.
Business and Pinnacol leaders, however, argued the opposite, saying that workers in pain benefit from guidance rather than from being forced to choose from 1,200 options, and that providing almost endless time to switch providers could stunt medical improvements. The bill will add cost to the system by delaying care and raising medical expenses, by letting workers choose more expensive out-of-network providers and by eliminating a 2.5% credit on insurance premiums that employers get for preparing a list of four provider options — all of which will increase workers’ comp insurance premiums, they said.
Polis, in his signing statement, said he shared employers’ concerns for adding complexity to the system and reducing the role of medical provider networks that help to control costs. He also acknowledged that while improved doctor-patient relationships can hasten healing and reduce costs, picking one’s own doctor does not always lead to ideal outcomes.
Could HB 1300 hasten Pinnacol privatization?
But the decision to sign HB 1300 boiled down, Polis wrote, to how it factors into potential privatization of Pinnacol. As more businesses hire out-of-state workers, the insurer is losing market share because its charter bars it from writing policies beyond Colorado, and its leaders say privatization would let them recapture business and compete more effectively.
Polis pitched privatization this year as part of his budget plan, as he said the move could net the state hundreds of millions of dollars in exit fees from Pinnacol that could help balance the budget for the next several years. But legislators in his own party pushed back on the idea, noting Pinnacol is the insurer of last resort that must write policies for high-risk businesses that private insurers won’t cover and suggesting privatization may shift its focus away from worker safety and toward profits.
“I have concluded after the discussion with the advocates and sponsors that this bill is a step toward privatization, and therefore I will sign it,” the Democratic governor wrote without explaining exactly how HB 1300 promotes this privatization.
Insurer says bill does nothing to help workers or it
Pinnacol officials, who have lobbied Polis for a veto for the past month, also don’t appear to understand how the bill aids their efforts to change their charter to let them sell policies across state lines. Much of the business Pinnacol has lost is because companies want to cover all their workers under a single policy that can be offered by most competitors rather than having to bifurcate their coverage between Colorado and non-Colorado employees.
“Pinnacol’s concerns on HB 1300 are well-documented and we are disappointed in its outcome,” said Wes Parham, Pinnacol vice president of public affairs, in an email to The Sum & Substance. “This debate distracted from a much more pressing issue in our workers’ comp system — that Colorado workers are losing sustainable access to our state’s provider of last resort and the top-rated insurer by workers, Pinnacol Assurance.”
Polis indicated in his signing statement that a last-minute amendment from Willford — pushing the implementation date back from January 2026 to January 2028 — played a significant part in his decision. The 2028 start date provides “ample opportunity for action,” he wrote. And as such, he said he will create a working group of stakeholders, legislators and agency staff to meet and develop recommendations for the 2026 session about how to address several concerns that he and business leaders have noted.
What the working group will debate
Those concerns revolve, first, around employers’ ability to recommend or even provide doctors to treat injured workers. Polis told the working group to address whether employers can provide a list of recommended physicians to patients and whether they can point them to an in-house clinic that employs accredited workers’ compensation doctors.
Second, Polis directed the working group to look into questions that have been raised about the Division of Workers’ Compensation’s extensive provider directory. The group should clarify which types of providers beyond physicians are appropriate to serve as designated providers, and it should re-examine the accreditation process for providers, including DOWC tracking of licensure and malpractice status, he wrote.
The governor further ordered the group to discuss the applicability of the 2.5% premium credit now offered to employers who provide four provider options, and to identify any mechanisms that may exist for the law to lower costs. Finally, he directed the group to clarify the timelines around designation and potential change of physician to ensure workers receive prompt care — a request that seems to ask for reconsideration of a major change made in the bill.
“Improved care for injured workers”?
To some observers, the signing of a law and subsequent creation of a group to fix that law may sound reminiscent of Polis’ inking of a 2024 bill to regulate artificial intelligence, which preceded his designation of a task force to ease rules before the law goes into effect. Though that task force met for nine months to try to iron out differences between business and consumer advocates, it couldn’t reach a consensus, and its chairman killed his update bill this session, leaving the sector nervous with the law set to be enforced in February.
But Polis clearly believes this process will be different, and he believes as well that re-examining this newly enacted, Pinnacol-opposed law could move the ball on efforts to privatize the state’s largest workers’ compensation insurer. And the next nine months seem even more consequential now to that discussion.
“The long-term impact of doing nothing will be detrimental to both the state and to all injured workers and employers,” Polis wrote. “To that end, I appreciate the commitment by stakeholders to a broader conversation on Pinnacol privatization including measures to improve care for injured workers and reducing costs. I look forward to continuing the conversation on this matter in the coming months.”