 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel Harsch v. Industrial Commission9/30/1998
[Cite as State ex rel. Harsch v. Indus. Comm. (1998), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.]
Workers' compensation - Denial of wage loss compensation by Industrial Commission - Adequate job search is prerequisite to eligibility - Cause returned to commission for further consideration and an amended order when specificity requirements of State ex rel. Noll not complied with.
Submitted June 24, 1998
Appellant, Lorenzo Harsch, seeks a writ of mandamus compelling appellee Industrial Commission of Ohio ("commission") to vacate its order denying his application for R.C. 4123.56(B) wage loss compensation and to grant this relief. The commission denied this compensation after determining that Harsch had not pursued employment within his medical capabilities in good faith and, thus, did not qualify. The Court of Appeals for Franklin County refused the writ, holding that the commission's decision was not an abuse of discretion. The cause is now before this court upon appeal as of right.
Harsch injured his back in 1988 while working for appellee LTV Steel Company ("LTV Steel"). His workers' compensation claim was allowed for " cute right dorsal, lumbar strain; herniated nucleus pulposis L-5-S1, right." On March 16, 1993, he applied for wage loss compensation for a period he would later change to January 4, 1993 through August 2, 1993. Harsch was unemployed during this period. The commission denied Harsch's application based on the findings of its district hearing officer, mainly:
"It is the finding of the District Hearing Officer that wage loss compensation is specifically denied from 1/4/93 through 8/2/93. Claimant has not demonstrated a good faith job search consistent with his physical capabilities. Claimant only averaged five or less job searches per week during this period."
Harsch asserts his eligibility for wage loss compensation under R.C. 4123.56(B), which provides:
"Where an employee in a claim allowed under this chapter suffers a wage loss as a result of returning to employment other than his former position of employment or as a result of being unable to find employment consistent with the claimant's physical capabilities, he shall receive compensation at sixty-six and two-thirds per cent of his weekly wage loss not to exceed the statewide average weekly wage for a period not to exceed two hundred weeks."
Corresponding former Ohio Adm.Code 4121-3-32(D) provided, in part:
" * * * he payment of compensation or wage loss pursuant to division (B) of section 4123.56 of the Revised Code shall commence upon application with a finding of any of the following:
"(1) The employee, as a direct result of the allowed conditions in the claim, returns to employment other than his former position of employment and suffers a wage loss;
"(2) The employee returns to his former position of employment but suffers a wage loss;
"(3) The employee, as a direct result of the allowed conditions of his claim, is unable to find work consistent with the employee's physical capabilities and suffers a wage loss."
In his first arguments for reversal, Harsch maintains that a good-faith search for employment within his medical capabilities is not necessary to qualify for wage loss compensation under these laws. We, however, recently confirmed that an adequate job search is a prerequisite to eligibility for this compensation. In State ex rel. Vanover v. Emery Worldwide (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 367, 369, 686 N.E.2d 518, 520, we held:
"The job search required by Ohio Adm.Code 4121-3-32(D)(3) has an inherent qualitative component - it must be an adequate job search. [State ex re
Page 1 2 3 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|