I think this post from a recent pit thread might apply here. Just sub in Legal edition for automotive. 
Gosh, Mister lawyer sir! I’m so impressed that I’ve responded in the pit thread.
See the pit thread, and your wish shall be fulfilled.
Nahh. No debate here. I’m sure that Campion would cheerfully concede that Oak has a …
(Okay, I’ll stop now.)
Unfortunately, that’s probably your best option.
At my husband’s company, they simply keep you completely off duty until you CAN work full-duty. They have virtually no light-duty work there.
Thanks. I think I’ll take you up on that. This company really pisses me off.
Thank you for this. It is, in essence, the same situation. It occurred during work hours, it was "mid- to upper-level employees (i.e., my husband wasn’t invited, but his supervisor was). It was off-premises, but he was specifically invited to attend.
This company is so fucked up, they actually re-hired a guy who was fired for bringing a knife to work and sexually assaulting a woman (I don’t believe it went as far as rape, but so what?).
They paid workman’s comp to my husband years ago, but it was pretty cut-and-dried. A co-worker ran over him with a fork truck.
Illinois retaliatory discharge law re termination for filing workers’ compensation claim: Illinois
By way of clarification, I did a bit of searching this evening. I did not look at the statutes in all 50 states, but I was unable to locate a state that does not have what might be called an anti-retaliation law on the books.
I did run across this article from an organization called Human Rights Watch:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/usa0105/5.htm
Which provides in relevant part:
*Many workers are fearful of losing their job if they press for compensation for a workplace injury. Such retaliation is unlawful in every state (except Alabama, which allows employers to fire workers for filing compensation claims). But workers’ compensation expert Emily Spieler found that:
Factors extrinsic to the workers’ compensation system itself play an important role in influencing workers’ claims filing behavior . . . [A] primary risk is that of actual job loss, or of other retaliation by the employer . . . for seeking benefits. . . . “Good” workers become those employees who do not file claims, even when they meet the eligibility requirements. . . . Prospects for successful reinstatement . . . are notoriously bleak. Retaliatory discharge lawsuits are a useful tool primarily for professionals, managerial, and other upper income worker*
However, a subsequent check of the Alabama Code revealed:
*Section 25-5-11.1 Employee not to be terminated solely for action to recover benefits nor for filing notice of safety rule violation.
No employee shall be terminated by an employer solely because the employee has instituted or maintained any action against the employer to recover workers’ compensation benefits under this chapter or solely because the employee has filed a written notice of violation of a safety rule pursuant to subdivision (c)(4) of Section 25-5-11.
(Acts 1984, 2nd Ex. Sess., No. 85-41, p. 44, §11.)*
However, retaliation for filing a WC claim does occur. Here’s an article from Missouri that discusses the difficulties of wrongful discharge actions for filing WC claims in that state:
http://www.timslaw.com/workers-comp-retaliation.htm
It boils down to Employers sometimes argue that they did not terminate because the employee filed a WC claim, they terminated for some other reason. From the employee’s point of view, the reason for the discharge doesn’t make much difference–bottom line is they no longer have a job.
I also found various reports of substantial plaintiff’s verdicts from successful wrongful discharge actions in a number of jurisdictions.
It appears that my original opinion that there are states without an anti-retaliation statute may have been based on outdated information, or perhaps a misremembered class years ago, since I did not find any in a non-exhaustive search. I did find several links similar to the wiki article that said pretty much the same thing, but without links to states that lack an anti-retaliation statute. Also found a few sites saying every state has such a statute, but no links to each State code were provided.
The conclusion I draw from tonight’s excercise is that a person filing a WC claim may well get fired. That firing may provide grounds for a retaliatory discharge action, which may or may not be a winner.
With all due respect for the … um… firm stance taken above…
I believe it’s fair to say that there is no state in the United States that does NOT provide for such a cause of action.
Given that… I would suggest that the original comment - *It is illegal in some states (although not in others) for an employer to terminate an employee for reporting a workplace injury or for filing a workers’ compensation claim * - is simply not correct, the bolded portion being the problem.
True?
What am I missing here?
Why are companies acting like assholes in these circumstances? I assume they are paying insurance premiums for workman’s comp, so they should be financially covered. Do their premiums skyrocket because a claim has been made? Does it go up that much that they feel they have to terminate someone to make up the cash?
He probably is entitled to recovery. I did one of my legal writing assignments in law school on workman’s comp law, and I read a lot of Indiana and Illinois cases on the topic. (Indiana and Illinois are largely in harmony on workman’s comp law, which is convenient if you’re a practitioner.) Both states, IIRC, will extend workman’s comp to “voluntary” events if the company paid for all or part of the event or if the event was publicized at the company and the event took place at a facility owned or paid for by a corporate executive or manager and most or all of the guests were employees or customers. (I do not recall what bundle of operative facts is decisive, as it’s been too long.)
Caveat: this is based on my recollections of stuff I read seven or eight years ago. I am not a lawyer. For legal advice, see an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
I think the HR person might be confusing OSHA recordability with compensability. While this injury may not be recordable under OSHA, it still may be compensable.
29 CFR 1904.5
(iii) Injuries and illnesses will not be considered work-related if they result solely from voluntary participation in a wellness program or in a medical, fitness, or recreational activity such as blood donation, physical, flu shot, exercise classes, racquetball, or baseball.
This exception allows the employer to exclude certain injury or illness cases that are related to personal medical care, physical fitness activities and voluntary blood donations. The key words here are “solely” and “voluntary.” The work environment cannot have contributed to the injury or illness in any way for this exception to apply, and participation in the wellness, fitness or recreational activities must be voluntary and not a condition of employment.Typically, you can always file a claim, it may be denied, but you can file it.
A couple of other thoughts;
You say he fell “going into”, was the event on company property or at another site? If it was another site, they may be hoping that he files a claim against their liability insurance.
Many companies discourage workers comp filings if they are self insured up to a certain dollar amount before the insurance kicks in. Less cost for them and typically the employee doesn’t raise a stick since it is still covered under their medical insurance plan, and the employee is only out the deductible.
Was he being paid for his time at the event? The carrier may say, “not being paid = not work related = not workers comp”. Much of it depends upon what the workers comp carrier coverage is.
I used to work in Cook Co and we had a company event (off property during non-work hours) where alcohol was served. One employee got drunk and ran his motorcycle into a tree at the event (in the forest preserve) and was injured. On Monday he tried to file a workers comp claim and was refused – and later terminated.
True, but in my experience in the real world, workers who file claims do tend to find themselves terminated for “non-workers’-comp-related” reasons at some point down the road…after the employer has had time to build a trumped-up record of “poor performance.”
Is it illegal? Sure. Try proving your case, though. Or finding a lawyer to take the case, when you are broke and it will have to be a contingent fee claim.
I have even known some lawyers who (unethically, of course) advise their clients to trump up poor performance evaluations on a regular basis, so as to have a pre-existing excuse for termination should the need arise.
Eva Luna forwarded a workmans comp lawyer contact to me. Hubby’s boss contacted them and they said he doesn’t have a case. I’d have bet my eye teeth he did, but nope…SOL, baby.
Thanks all for your interest and interesting input.
Just out of curiosity, did they say that the employer was legally in the wrong, but that because of the relatively small potential recovery (probably a few hundred bucks max, or maybe a couple grand if there’s any permanent damage to the wrist), it wasn’t worthwhile for them to pursue? Or did they say the company was legally in the clear?
In North Carolina a few years ago, a company held a long-lunch celebration for setting a record for time without a lost-time accident. Someone spilled some beans on the floor. A woman slipped on it & went on workman’s comp. (The company covered it.)
I’m not sure about that. I can send Mr. K on a fact-finding mission on Monday. The money lost only amounts to a couple days, so I can see how it might not be worth it. My bigger concern is if there will be permanent damage after the healing is complete. I guess if there’s a record of the accident, the case could be pursued at that time. Not sure, though.
I went thru this a long time back in Chicago. I was working for a company and I had to wait to 6 months for insurance. We had a company trip to the roller rink to skate. I said I would go but would not participate as if I fell and broke my leg (quite likely) I would have no insurance. The General Manager wanted all his managers to participate and told me they’d cover it if that happened.
I said “fine can I get it in writing.” He said “no.” So I went but didn’t skate.
The thing I found out is on company events it they are MANDATORY your husband most likely will be covered in Illinois. By that means everyone was PAID and it was REQUIRED that you show up at the event. If your husband was not paid for his time, then it was volunteered event and he won’t be covered.
Here is another sitituation to considered. If a person is REQUIRED but given a choice. For instance, let’s say you work at a hotel. And that means not everyone can be at a company event, some must stay behind and look after the guests.
You can be required to go to the event or fill in at a position so someone else can go. If you choose to go to the event instead of fill in, then it wasn’t REQUIRED you be at the event. You could’ve chosen to fill in at the company and let that person go. So even if you were paid for being at the event if you CHOSE the event over working a shift, now the event is voluntary.
So the workmen’s comp kicks in only if you are REQUIRED to BE AT THE EVENT with NO alternative and you are PAID for your time. At least in Illinois.