Workers Comp Matters

Let’s go way down south to Alabama. As we know, Workers’ Compensation systems can vary from state to state. In this episode, we’ll explore the Alabama system with Birmingham-based Workers’ Comp attorney David Nomberg, a partner in the Nomberg Law Firm.

In Alabama, the system operates uniquely as the only state without an administrative Workers’ Comp system to settle differences. If there is a dispute or denied claim, the case goes directly to the Circuit Court, the same judges that would hear other civil cases. This means attorneys may have the extra duty of explaining the issue to judges who may not be familiar with Workers’ Comp.

Nomberg shares insights into the importance of communication. Not only with judges, but also with clients who may be surfing the internet and finding information from law offices in other states, where different laws apply.

But as Americans, we all share some similarities, too. We all want to help workers injured on the job become whole and live their best lives. Nomberg sees some nationwide areas where we can all do better, including caring for an aging workforce, mental health and PTSD, heat-related claims, and changes in technology. Jump in for this fascinating dive into the complicated web of Workers’ Compensation in an ever-changing environment.

If you have thoughts on Workers’ Comp law or an idea for a topic or guest you’d like to hear, contact us at JPierce@ppnlaw.com or APierce@ppnlaw.com.

Mentioned in This Episode:

Workers’ Injury Law and Advocacy Group

Previously on Workers’ Comp Matters, “’A Patriotic Obligation’: Kenneth Feinberg and the 9/11 Fund,” with guest Kenneth Feinberg

“Worth,” trailer YouTube

“The Looming Tower,” trailer YouTube

Workers’ Compensation Research Institute (WCRI)

Let’s talk about work-related joint injuries and replacements. Sebastian Negrusa, Ph.D., joins Judson and Alan to share the Workers’ Compensation Research Institute’s (WCRI) new report, “Recent Trends in Joint Replacement Among Workers’ Compensation Claims.”

While back injuries usually come to mind for workplace injuries, joint injuries, and subsequent replacements, are becoming more common. Are you up to speed on this trend? Shoulder, hip, and knee replacements are important parts of making workers whole and getting them back to their jobs and their lives.

How do you prove a workplace-related joint injury when someone has worked at the same job for decades? What’s work-related, what’s just a function of natural aging? What if the workplace only aggravated a naturally occurring degeneration? It’s complicated, but all workers deserve to be treated fairly, and all workplaces should be safe.

If you have thoughts on Workers’ Comp law or an idea for a topic or guest you’d like to hear, contact us at JPierce@ppnlaw.com or APierce@ppnlaw.com.

Mentioned in This Episode:

“Recent Trends in Joint Replacement Among Workers’ Compensation Claims,” WCRI, By Dongchun Wang, Vennela Thumula, Randall Lea, M.D.

“CJR-X (Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Expanded) Model,” CMS.gov

In this fascinating episode, explore how the Exclusive Remedy Rule works in the real and evolving world of Workers’ Compensation law. A recent case in Washington State, the Teela Bauer case, challenges the traditional exchange of employer civil protections for worker compensation in the case of workplace harm.

This is an interesting case as it involves an employee’s exposure to chemicals which may have led to the employee’s child’s birth defects. So, was there a workplace injury? Or is the company liable for something that went beyond the visible, definable workplace injury? Can the worker sue for something that may have started in the workplace but didn’t occur there? All good questions.

The unborn child didn’t work for the employer. The parent wasn’t physically injured in the traditional sense at the workplace. But the plaintiff asserts the chemicals used on the job led to biological damage that led to the birth defects of the conceived child. Now the question is whether the traditional Exclusive Remedy doctrine precludes the parents from bringing a separate lawsuit against the employer. It gets complicated in a hurry. The worker wasn’t visibly injured, but the non-employee child has suffered some harm. 

Workers’ Compensation law is an ever-evolving thing. Cases occasionally challenge what we thought we knew. Will the Teela Bauer case change the Exclusive Remedy Rule? Will legislation follow? It’s fascinating.

If you have thoughts on Workers’ Comp law or an idea for a topic or guest you’d like to hear, contact us at JPierce@ppnlaw.com or APierce@ppnlaw.com. 

Referenced Links:

Teela Bauer ruling, Justia Law

“Boeing Must Face Negligence Claims Over Birth Defects of Employee's Child,” Courthouse News Service

“Workers’ Compensation: No Longer The Exclusive Remedy,” Pierce, Pierce & Napolitano

Foley v. Polaroid Corp, Justia Law

Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc., “the Woburn case,” Wikipedia

Sometimes the work done by law students can surprise everyone. This episode may shock you. Continuing a tradition, we honor the annual winner of the John F. Burton Jr. College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers Law Student Writing competition. This year, guest Roxanne Mosley is the winner with her findings in “The Uncompensated Risk: Federal Workers’ Compensation and the Human Toll of the Weaponized Shutdown.”

Mosley examined the nexus of government shutdowns and the impact on federal employees protected under FECA, the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act. Government shutdowns aren’t just political showdowns, they have the potential to harm real people: federal workers protected under federal Workers’ Comp programs.

Mosley witnessed the human toll of a federal shutdown, including missed mortgage payments and simply making the ends meet at the end of the month. But she also found the unexpected toll inflicted on those federal workers, the potential Workers’ Comp shortfalls.

During a government shutdown, federal employees deemed essential may be asked to keep working without concurrent compensation, which can be marked as a “zero” on a worker’s pay stub. This is critical if a worker is injured on the job, as benefits are determined by past payment records. A period without pay can be included in that compensation calculation, resulting in reduced benefits. Mosley is calling for federal protections and Congressional action. 

If you have thoughts on Workers’ Comp law or an idea for a topic or guest you’d like to hear, contact us at JPierce@ppnlaw.com or APierce@ppnlaw.com.

It’s never funny when a worker is injured on the job, but some cases do raise eyebrows. In their annual look into some “unusual” Workers’ Comp cases, Jud and Alan uncover some incidents that challenged the system, some by just being so weird.

Where did my ladder go? A worker on a rooftop was stuck when others removed the ladder and left the job. Desperate to get down, he jumped, suffering back and foot injuries. Is the worker to be blamed for intentionally jumping, or was he left with no choice? 

The falling clipboard case. From the Supreme Court of Idaho, a helicopter pilot died in a crash when a passenger dropped a clipboard that struck the tail rotor and damaged it. Who’s liable? What’s an accident, and where does civil liability intersect with Workers’ Comp?

A tryst in France, during a work trip, and the ensuing heart attack? Squeezing an oversized customer into a tiny mermaid-style wedding dress? Messing around with a flammable can of tire glue (at work)? Just as workers do unusual things, the courts also rule in unexpected ways. We can all learn from cases like these.

If you have thoughts on Workers’ Comp law or an idea for a topic or guest you’d like to hear, contact us at JPierce@ppnlaw.com or APierce@ppnlaw.com. 

Mentioned in This Episode:

Thomas A. Robinson, WorkCompWriter.com

“Krinitt v. Dept of Fish and Game,” Justia.com

“The Surprisingly Broad Scope Definition of Workplace Accidents in France,” Proskauer

“Lea v. David Bridal of Greensboro, Inc. (2019)” Findlaw

“Zerofski's Case,” Massachusetts, 1982

“Employee Loses Testicle to Boss's Golf Swing: Court Affirms Boss's Liability,” FindLaw