Articles Posted in Workers’ Compensation

The case of a Pennsylvania woman whose workers’ compensation claim petition was reversed is an important reminder of how critical it is to report your work injury immediately to your employer.

A worker claimed that after cleaning 42 tanning beds in one day, she experienced numbness in her right arm and several fingers, and pain in her shoulder. She was awarded temporary total disability benefits after alleging that she suffered a disc herniation with radiculopathy. However, the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board reversed the petition, finding that the claimant failed to provide timely notice of her work injury to her employer.

The injury took place on May 25, and the employee told her employer on May 31 that she had pain and numbness going down her arms. However, she did not specifically relate these problems to her work until she sent a letter to her employer on Oct. 11. Since this date was more than 120 days from the date of the work injury, the board concluded that the claimant failed to provide notice in a timely manner and she was denied compensation.

Continue reading

Our thoughts and prayers go out to the families of the miners who were killed in the tragic accident in West Virginia. As residents of the coal region here in Schuylkill County, we are all too familiar with the risks and dangers associated with working in the mines.

On the heels of this accident, we recently saw an article on the TimesLeader.com about a local coal industry businessman who violated workers’ compensation insurance and income tax laws.

According to the article, Al Roman, owner of the Huber Breaker and No. 1 Contracting, was sentenced on six counts of workers’ compensation insurance payment and one count each of willfully evading earned-income tax and failure to make required payments.

We read an interesting blog this week on ThePopTort.com. It brings to light the effect that judicial elections can have on injured workers, using the example of a law that was recently passed in Ohio. We recommend that you click on the link below to read the full article:

http://www.thepoptort.com/2010/03/judicial-elections-have-consequences.html

The website RiskandInsurance.com recently discussed a ruling by the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board that upheld the denial of a worker’s petition for benefits because he did not establish an employer-employee relationship.

According to the article, the worker was a plumber who injured his arm while on the job. The company’s owner stated that the plumber arrived at a jobsite one day and asked to work. The company’s owner stated that he hired the plumber as a contractor. Although the company’s owner provided large tools, he did not supply the hand tools, a truck, or training. As a result, the plumber’s claim was denied because he was not an employee of the company. When the plumber argued that the company admitted the existence of an employment relationship by referring to him as an employee in the company’s answer to his petition, the board rejected his argument. The board said that a party’s overall characterizations in its pleadings do not constitute admissions of legal matters.

The article summarizes that, in Pennsylvania, an employer’s failure to specifically deny the existence of an employment relationship does not automatically admit an employment relationship existed. To establish an employer-employee relationship, a worker must show that the employer exercised sufficient control over his or her work.

According to a recent ruling by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, a workers’ compensation insurer can suspend benefits when an injured worker refuses to enter a detox program… even if the program will not treat the worker’s medical condition or help him or her return to employment.

The ruling arose from a case involving an employee who had been receiving workers’ compensation benefits for 10 years for a lumbar spine injury when her former employer tried to end her benefits. The workers’ comp judge denied the employer’s request to terminate the benefits, but instead said that the injured employee should enter a detoxification program to help wean her off the prescription pain medication she had been taking for her injury.

When the injured employee refused the detox treatment, the employer filed a petition to suspend her workers’ comp benefits on the grounds that she was refusing reasonable medical treatment.

According to an article on the OCRegister.com, a Murietta, CA roofing contractor pleaded guilty to 16 felony counts, including perjury, filing false documents, and making false statements, for failing to provide workers’ comp insurance for an employee who injured himself.

The article reported that, according to prosecutors, the roofing contractor purchased the minimum workers’ compensation insurance policy for his company, then reported that he had no employees. To hide their employment, he paid his workers in cash and submitted inaccurate payrolls reports.

When an employee filed a workers’ compensation claim as a result of a fall from a roof, the roofing contractor denied that the man worked for him. As a result, the employee was denied benefits.

The maximum sentence for the convictions is 21 years and eight months in prison. According to prosecutors, the roofing contractor is expected to be sentenced to three years in state prison.

Continue reading

A Pennsylvania appeals court ruled that Kraft Foods Inc. could not reduce a workers’ compensation claimant’s partial disability benefits because it did not provide any evidence of actual job openings that were available to the claimant.

In February 2004, the claimant injured his right knee while employed as a utility worker for Kraft. In 2007, Kraft sought to reduce the claimant’s benefits by saying that “work was generally available.” The appeals court did not accept Kraft’s argument that under Pennsylvania law it could use testimony from a rehab counselor that general, entry-level jobs were available to the claimant. Instead, the appeals board ruled that Kraft needed to show that “existing actual jobs are open and available” to the claimant.

Continue reading

Earlier this month, the Pennsylvania Department of Labor & Industry (L & I) announced that the statewide average weekly wage for injuries occurring on and after Jan. 1, 2010 would be $845 per week. The average weekly wage for 2009 was $836.

According to the L & I website, under the Workers’ Compensation Act, injured workers are entitled to wage-loss benefits equal to two-thirds of their weekly wage for a work-related injury.

How much money you will receive while on workers’ compensation depends on:

• Whether you are on total or partial disability
• How long you have been employed by your employer
• Whether you were working for more than one employer at the time of your injury
• How much you regularly earn from your employer

There is a maximum rate of compensation recognized by the PA Department of L & I, which may result in the amount you are eligible to receive being capped.

Continue reading