The company was entirely in their rights to terminate the employee. I’ve been in a couple of these conversations – it’s not fun. If there is no light duty and the employee can not return to their job at time of injury you can let them go. Workers’ Comp has vocational rehabilitation built in and they take over from that point. The ruling is bad – point blank.
The company had the legal right to fire the employee. However, that was not only bad risk management, it was the wrong thing to do. You can always create light duty! Not all states have vocational rehab. Does Massachusetts?
Yes, there are rules about light duty. Usually the carrier pays the difference between what the light duty job pays and their regular salary – up to the state minimum weekly amount.
If he wasn’t depressive prior to the work-related injury, then WC should kick in – it does for so many other work-related mental injuries, I don’t see how this should be any different.
this is different because its self inflicted. The work related injuries were the back problem and the depression. The suicide was self inflicted. Killing yourself is an obvious and undeniable sign of improper reasoning ( ie: crazy !). Here we have a company being held liable for the actions of a person with faulty reasoning.
If you read the law as quoted by Betsy, it specifically states “if it be shown by the weight of the evidence that, DUE TO THE INJURY, the employee was of such unsoundness of mind as to make him irresponsible for his act of suicide.” Killing oneself because the vending machine was out of twinkies wouldn’t be workers’ compensation, because there was no injury invloved that impaired his judgment and then led to the suicide.
I know the twinkie example was extreme….but I was trying to point out that you shouldn’t make a company pay for what is essentially a random event. The guy was “unresponsible for his actions” so his actions were unpredictable. I still say that unless the company denied mental health benefits or with held care for the depression, this ruling is wrong.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
The company was entirely in their rights to terminate the employee. I’ve been in a couple of these conversations – it’s not fun. If there is no light duty and the employee can not return to their job at time of injury you can let them go. Workers’ Comp has vocational rehabilitation built in and they take over from that point. The ruling is bad – point blank.
Can’t wait to read all the comments but I will state right now that this entire case and verdict is a bunch of crap. I hope this can be appealed.
The company had the legal right to fire the employee. However, that was not only bad risk management, it was the wrong thing to do. You can always create light duty! Not all states have vocational rehab. Does Massachusetts?
are there rules about what salary you have to give a guy who is on light duty ? do you have to keep his “full-duty” salary ?
Just curious.
Thanks
Yes, there are rules about light duty. Usually the carrier pays the difference between what the light duty job pays and their regular salary – up to the state minimum weekly amount.
If he wasn’t depressive prior to the work-related injury, then WC should kick in – it does for so many other work-related mental injuries, I don’t see how this should be any different.
this is different because its self inflicted. The work related injuries were the back problem and the depression. The suicide was self inflicted. Killing yourself is an obvious and undeniable sign of improper reasoning ( ie: crazy !). Here we have a company being held liable for the actions of a person with faulty reasoning.
If you read the law as quoted by Betsy, it specifically states “if it be shown by the weight of the evidence that, DUE TO THE INJURY, the employee was of such unsoundness of mind as to make him irresponsible for his act of suicide.” Killing oneself because the vending machine was out of twinkies wouldn’t be workers’ compensation, because there was no injury invloved that impaired his judgment and then led to the suicide.
I know the twinkie example was extreme….but I was trying to point out that you shouldn’t make a company pay for what is essentially a random event. The guy was “unresponsible for his actions” so his actions were unpredictable. I still say that unless the company denied mental health benefits or with held care for the depression, this ruling is wrong.
Please, please remind me to never get Mary B to be my attorney, claims rep or whatever she is. This woman is pure D heartless.