Jockey Safety: Mandatory Medical Information Reporting

By: Jennifer Parker, Staff Member

A study of the years 1993 through 1996, reported in The Journal of the American Medical Association, found that 6545 injuries to jockeys occurred during official horse races in those years. Anna E. Waller, et al.,

Jockey Injuries in the United States

, Journal of the Amer. Med. Assoc. 1326, 1327 (2000). To help deal with these injuries more quickly and safely, many racetracks across the nation have requested that jockeys voluntarily submit their medical information to the track before races. Jeffrey McMurray,

Keeneland Mandates Jockey Medical Information

, Bus. Wk., Apr. 15, 2010,

available at

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9F3HJJO1.htm. This information is compiled in the Jockey Health Information System, in operation since 2008.

Id.

In this way, medical personnel at the track are able to quickly determine any pertinent medical conditions, allergies, etc. in order to safely treat jockeys at the track.

Recently, Keeneland Race Track in Lexington, Kentucky announced that submission of jockey medical information is now mandatory at the track prior to entering a race.

Id.

While numerous tracks make such submissions voluntary, Keeneland is the first track to mandate it.

Id.

However, since Keeneland's track physician, Barry Schumer, estimates that prior to the mandate approximately 95% of jockeys submitted their medical information voluntarily, it seems that making this a requirement will create no significant problems with compliance.

Id.

The most significant concern with such a requirement would likely be privacy issues if some jockeys do not wish to provide certain medical information. Such privacy issues are protected by this system, however. The Jockey Health Information System can only be accessed with an identification code by medical professionals.

Id.

With such a high number of injuries being incurred by jockeys on racetracks and significant compliance already, mandating submission of medical information is a move in the right direction regarding jockey safety. With success stories already arising from access to this reporting system, other tracks are likely to follow Keeneland's lead and make submission of jockey medical information a requirement. But jockeys should be aware that this is a new requirement that may be catching on nationwide. They will need to determine whether reporting their medical information is voluntary or mandatory at a particular track prior to racing there and deal with any problems they might have with this beforehand, so as not to be prevented from racing.

Opening the Door: Recognizing the Many Hats of Jockeys for Workers’ Compensation Coverage

This comment written by staff member, Erin. N. Malony, appears in KJEANRL Vol. 1 No. 1 and staff member, Tara Hester, wrote the abstract.

Workers compensation laws are governed almost entirely by state law, and only four states offer coverage to jockeys. In the case of Ochoa v. Department of Washington Labor and Industries, Ochoa, a jockey, was injured while being employed as an exercise rider. Workers’ Compensation Coverage is found in RCW § 51.12.010, which extends coverage to all employees within the jurisdiction of the act, but specifically exempts jockeys from coverage. If covered by the system, jockeys would be entitled to receive coverage of any medical expenses incurred as a result of an injury on the job, as well as compensation for time lost. Employers and Employees share the burden of workers compensation equally. Employers are required to deduct one half of the required contribution from the workers pay and the employer is responsible for the remaining half. Because the high rate of injury among jockeys, they are not eligible for these benefits should they become injured while on the job. However, Washington did not exclude all of those who work in the horse industry from workers’ compensation. Grooms, exercise riders, and pony riders are eligible for workers’ compensation benefits in Washington.

Ochoa v. Department of Washington Labor and Industries involves a licensed jockey, Ochoa, who was acting as an exercise rider. Ochoa was hired by trainer Steven Quionez to exercise a horse for one day. Ochoa was to exercise the horse at Playfair racetrack while races were taking place, although neither Ochoa nor the horse were involved in any races. During the exercise, the horse panicked, crushing Ochoa’s leg against a gate and leaving him unable to work. Ochoa filed a claim for workers’ compensation, and was denied. The case was appealed to the Court of Appeals, and then to the Washington Supreme Court, who granted Ochoa benefits. The Court’s ruling turned upon the nature of the activity that Ochoa was engaged in at the time of his injury. In Washington, jockeys and exercise riders were recognized as two separate occupations. The Court recognized that jockeys often engage in different types of employment depending on whether they are preparing to ride in a race or just keeping a horse in racing condition. Because jockeys also performed the function of exercise riders, they were eligible for workers’ compensation benefits when injured while acting as an exercise rider.

This case may have vast implications for those in the horse racing business. Because exercise riders can obtain workers compensation coverage, jockeys may be able to argue that because their situation is similar, they deserve the same protection. However, because of the high rate of injury for jockeys, implementing a workers’ compensation plan would be expensive for those in the horse racing business. Also, because jockeys may only be responsible for a horse for a period of one hour, developing a premium schedule may prove difficult. However, by allowing workers’ compensation coverage for exercise riders, the Ochoa decision has opened the door for jockeys around the country to eventually obtain workers compensation coverage.