 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Thompson v. Claw Island Foods5/8/1998
Reporter of Decisions
Decision: 1998 ME 101
Argued: February 4, 1998
William Thompson appeals from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board denying his petition for review and denying him continuing incapacity benefits based on his refusal of an offer of reinstatement employment by Claw Island Foods, his pre-injury employer. Thompson contends that because he had moved away from the site of his pre-injury employment, the offer of employment at that site was not an offer of reasonable employment. Alternatively, Thompson contends that his refusal of the offer was for good and reasonable cause. Because the Board failed to apply the correct legal standard, we vacate the decision.
Thompson suffered a work-related injury to his back on January 12, 1993, while employed at Claw Island Foods on Vinalhaven Island. He left work due to the injury and began receiving total benefits. His request for light-duty employment was denied because no light-duty work was available, and in April 1993 he was informed that his former position had been eliminated. The Board found that:
After receiving notice that his job had been eliminated [for economic reasons], Employee modified [his pending housing] loan application so that his family could move to the mainland. On November 1, 1993, Employee moved to temporary lodging on the mainland, and then settled into a new home in Searsport. Employee estimated that Searsport is a 45-60 minute drive from the Vinalhaven ferry terminal, and that the ferry ride to the island takes just over one hour.
Within a month of Thompson's move to the mainland, Claw Island mailed him a written offer of seasonal reinstatement work extending from the months of July to January. Claw Island offered to reimburse Thompson for his round-trip ferry travel to and from the island. Thompson refused the offer, and Claw Island unilaterally terminated his benefits based on that refusal. See 39-A M.R.S.A. Section 205(9)(B)(1) (Supp. 1997). Thompson filed a petition for review challenging the termination. Although the Board declined the employer's invitation to apply 39-A M.R.S.A. Section 218(5) (Supp. 1997), it nonetheless denied Thompson's petition, concluding that the termination of benefits was permissible pursuant to 39-A M.R.S.A. Section 214(1)(A) (Supp. 1997). Subsequently, the Board denied Thompson's motion for additional findings of fact, and we granted his petition for appellate review pursuant to 39-A M.R.S.A. Section 322 (Supp. 1997).
I. 39-A M.R.S.A. Section 218
Claw Island contends that, even if it were not entitled to terminate benefits pursuant to subsection 214(1)(A), the termination was permissible pursuant to 39-A M.R.S.A. Section 218(5). We disagree. Section 218 provides, in pertinent part:
Section 218. Worker reinstatement rights
Upon petition of an injured employee, the board may require, after hearing, that the employee be reinstated as required by this section.
5. Failure to comply. The employer's failure to comply with the obligations under this section disqualifies the employer . . . from exercising any right it may otherwise have to reduce or terminate the employee's benefits under this Act. The disqualification continues as long as the employer fails to offer reinstatement or until the employee accepts other employment.
If any injured employee refuses to accept an offer of reinstatement for a position suitable to the employee's physical condition, the employee is considered to have voluntarily withdrawn from the work force and is no longer entitled to any wage loss benefits under this Act during the period of refusal.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Maine Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|