A report by Elevate Security and Cyentia found that a small group of employees are often the biggest threat to a company's digital information. The report also found that this group of employees are usually repeat offenders, putting their companies at risk from the main three categories of malware, phishing, and unsecure internet browing.

The report found that 4% of employees clicked on 80% of phishing links, and 3% were responsible for 92% of malware events.

Similar, 71% of all violations of company browing policies came from approximatley 12% of employees, who visited these types of sites at least 750 times in a year.

Luckily, companies have started to implement controls that block malicious emails and risky web browsing. Although the report also noted that different levels of sucess and controls varied between different departments of an an organization.

Researchers suggest companies should focus cybersecurity awarness and training for all employees, and specifically those that engage in risky  behaviors.

More information and a link to the report can be found here: https://www.itpro.com/security/malware/366011/just-3-of-employees-cause-92-of-malware-events

 

News about tort reform and medical malpractice claims, whether in state legislatures or the court system, are important for doctors and medical practices to follow, because they can quickly change the practice of medicine and malpractice insurance rates.

That is why it was big news that New Mexico's Supreme Court ruled unanimously to uphold the $600,000 limit for non-medical and non-punitive damages, even though the limit does not extend to punitive damages and compensation for medical and rehabilitative care. 

The five-member panel confirmed that a cap on some damages will be legal consequences when a jury determines the amount to reward. This ruling reverses a 2018 ruling from the Bernalillo County District Court, when the lower court declared that such caps were unconstitutional in a case where a woman was awarded $2.6M versus an Albuquerque doctor for a gynecological procedure gone bad. 

For more information about the ruling you can visit: https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/west/2021/03/22/606424.htm
 

In the United States, private companies may opt to require employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Depending on the state, employees may also choose not to receive the vaccination in consideration of certain medical conditions, religious and, or personal beliefs. Union contracts could also interfere with employer vaccine mandates. The availability of the vaccine may also raise questions about the applicable equal employment opportunity (EEO) laws, including the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act, GINA, and Title VII, including the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.

If an employee is unable to receive the vaccination due to personal or religious beliefs or a medical condition, the employer may be required to make a reasonable effort to accommodate that employee.  As an example, they may transfer them to a different department, requiring separation and a mask or that they work remotely. The severity of the threat that the employee presents to the other team members should be determined.  In many instances, it may be relatively easy to to reduce or eliminate the risk of exposure to other employees. Employers, in some industries, may find it prudent to exclude non vaccinated employees from the workplace.  However, they may also be prohited from terminating an employee solely based on their willingness to receive the vaccination.

People have many different views regarding the vaccine. For example, almost two-thirds of tech workers say that they will not go back to the office unless the vaccination is required by their employer.  The statistics vary when looking at gender, age, and race. A survey conducted by the Associated Press and the Center for Public Affairs found that 47% of Americans were certain that they would like to receive the vaccine but only 40% of women said yes while 56% of men did. Many employers are offering the vaccine on a volunteer basis, like Ford Motor Co. and Kellog Co., so that employees have the option to receive the vaccination, but are not required to.

Employers who are considering mandating vaccines are strongly encouraged to engage qualified legal counsel before making any final decisions on this complex issue.