 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Industrial Commission of Ohio12/30/1998
[Cite as State ex rel. Stafford v. Indus. Comm. (1998), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.]
Workers' compensation - Application for wage-loss compensation denied by Industrial Commission - Commission ordered to reconsider issue of good-faith job search, vacate those portions of the wage-loss compensation denial predicated on employment abandonment, and enter a new order granting or denying the benefits requested, when.
Submitted October 12, 1998
On September 2, 1992, appellee-claimant, Anita Stafford, alleged that she had contracted an occupational disease in the course of her employment with appellant Evenflo Juvenile Furniture Company ("Evenflo"). A workers' compensation claim was allowed, and she received temporary total disability compensation through October 12, 1992.
After October 12, 1992, the facts become cloudy. A district hearing officer indicated in a November 23, 1992 order that claimant was "released to return to work on 10-13-92." While it is unclear to what work claimant was released to perform, the parties seem to agree that claimant was released with physical restrictions that prevented a return to her former position of employment.
An affidavit from Evenflo's Human Resource Supervisor, Anna Marie Stover, indicates that at the time of claimant's release, Evenflo offered claimant a job within her physical restrictions. According to Stover, claimant refused to take the third shift job and requested a voluntary layoff instead.
Claimant's activities over the next year are not known. On October 8, 1993, claimant's counsel wrote to Evenflo's agent, stating that claimant wished to return to Evenflo. At the same time, however, Evenflo notified claimant that because she had been absent from Evenflo for a year, company policy mandated termination.
On approximately February 7, 1994, claimant began working for Ecofab, Inc. She continued there until approximately April 23, 1994. From that point, she remained unemployed until approximately July 2, 1994, at which time she began working for The Sidney Leader.
Claimant moved appellant Industrial Commission of Ohio for wage- loss compensation pursuant to R.C. 4123.56(B) for various periods commencing October 19, 1993. She claimed complete wage loss for her periods of unemployment, and wage differential for the periods in which she was working but making less than she had at Evenflo.
A district hearing officer, on September 23, 1994, denied claimant's motion because:
" he Self-Insured Employer offered the Claimant a position of employment in August, 1992, in the company within the Claimant's physical restrictions and capabilities which resulted from the industrial injury. The Hearing Officer further finds that on 10/12/92, the Claimant took a voluntary layoff from her employment per the written form submitted at hearing. The Claimant's request for voluntary layoff on 10/12/92 of her former position of employment is considered to be abandonment."
"Therefore, the Hearing Officer finds that the Claimant has forfeited her entitlement to Wage Loss Compensation based upon her abandonment of employment."
A staff hearing officer modified the order slightly, on January 9, 1995, adding:
"It is further found by the Staff Hearing Officer that claimant has not perfomred [sic ] a credible job-search for position within her medical restriction nor does evidence opine [that] claimant's inability to find employment, or return to positions other than her former position of employment is due to medical restrictions arising from the occupational disease contracted in the course of her employment."
"In all
Page 1 2 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|