Fraud as a Ticket Out
News stories and press releases from insurance departments nationwide regularly disclose the prosecution of prison guards for workers’ compensation fraud.
I often wondered why guards, obviously familiar with prison horrors, would risk incarceration.
The answer recently came during a conversation with a prosecutor regarding the conviction of Mark Navarrete, whose workers’ comp fraud case offers an extreme example of how work environments impact behavior.
Navarrete, a 12-year Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office veteran, worked as a correctional deputy. The California county’s beleaguered jail system suffers horrendous problems.
Three of its guards, for example, currently face murder charges for beating a mentally ill inmate to death.
The day after I spoke with Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney David Soares, video surfaced showing about 20 inmates pummeling each other inside the county’s main jail. The brawl erupted when one inmate brushed against another. The video shows what jail deputies face daily, the county sheriff said at a news conference.
Guards are responsible for policing inmates who grow increasingly volatile every day they are incarcerated. Fifty of them may share a single toilet, Soares said. It’s an awful work environment, leaving jailers desperate for an escape route and time away from the job.
Navarrete’s escape plan had several problems. A co-worker reported seeing a text with Navarrete bragging that a softball injury would become a work accident. A softball field security camera captured video of Navarrete injuring his arm while swinging for an inside pitch, and hospital documents revealed a timeline that refuted his workplace claim.
“I wanted to send a message that if individuals were encouraging the fraud they were going to go down too.” — David Soares, deputy district attorney, Santa Clara County
With widespread problems at the county jail, Soares dug deeper into Navarrete’s case to determine whether other deputies encouraged him in a conspiracy to defraud their employer.
“I saw this as a potentially endemic problem because of the issues within the jails and because we had recently had this homicidal death in the jail,” Soares said. “I wanted to send a message that if individuals were encouraging the fraud they were going to go down too.”
In the end, only Navarrete was prosecuted. He pled no contest, receiving a 120-day jail sentence, but was allowed to serve it at home with electronic monitoring. He must also pay nearly $23,000 in restitution.
Inhospitable work environments don’t encourage claimants to hurry and return to work. As Navarrete showed, they even encourage some workers to rationalize committing insurance fraud.
Navarrete’s work environment, awful as it is, doesn’t justify defrauding his employer. But it does offer an example, albeit an extreme one, of the workplace environment’s potential impact on workers’ comp costs. &