Blog

A Maryland employee who sustains a work-related injury or develops an occupational disease is entitled to Workers’ Compensation. Most people think of Workers’ Compensation as consisting of payments that are a percent of the person’s average wages, as well as medical treatment. Vocational services In addition, vocational rehabilitation services are another important Workers’ Compensation benefit available to an eligible worker who cannot go back to his or her previous work. Vocational rehabilitation services help the claimant return to work, but in a different capacity than that of the job held at the time of disability onset. A specialized vocational counselor is provided to the worker as part of the benefit. Definition and scope Maryland statute defines “vocational rehabilitation services” in Workers’ Compensation as “professional services reasonably necessary during or after or both during and after medical treatment to enable a disabled covered employee, as soon as practical, to secure suitable gainful employment.” The law lists nine different types of vocational services that may be available: Medical service coordination Vocational assessment Evaluation Counseling Vocational rehabilitation planning Plan monitoring Retraining Job development Job placement The counselor will assess whether the worker can return to the same employer in another capacity or with modifications to the old job. Should this be impossible, the counselor will determine whether jobs with other employers are available using work skills the claimant already possesses, including an actual job search. If this is not successful, retraining may be appropriate. Normally, if the counselor recommends retraining, two years is the maximum amount of time retraining may be provided. During rehabilitation services, the covered employee is entitled to payments as if the “employee was temporarily totally disabled.” Legal counsel To request vocational services, the worker should get a current medical statement that he or she cannot return to the former job. If a claimant’s request is denied, he or she may ask for a hearing. It is smart to discuss the need for vocational rehabilitation with a Workers’ Compensation attorney who can explain the services and assess the need for and type of services that will be helpful. A lawyer can help make the request, advocate for eligibility and request a hearing if necessary. At the hearing, legal counsel will present the claimant’s case as to why rehabilitation services are necessary.

Today we continue our discussion of Workers’ Compensation benefits available to surviving dependents of Maryland workers who suffered work-related deaths. In Part 1, we discussed dependency. Death benefits are available to surviving dependents — family or nonfamily — who relied completely or partially on the deceased employee’s wages for support. Death benefits are available in cases of occupational disease no matter how long the disease existed before the death, but when the death resulted from a work-related injury, the death must have been within seven years after the injury. Benefit amounts The amount of death benefit for eligible dependents (except for some who survive certain city or county employees) is determined according to detailed and sometimes complex Maryland statutes. With some specific exceptions, the basic benefit amounts are as follows: Total dependents generally receive weekly benefits equal to two-thirds of the deceased worker’s Average Weekly Wage, called the AWW, capped at the level of the State Average Weekly Wage. Total dependents receive benefits until a cap of $45,000 is reached, but for a totally dependent surviving spouse, payments continue if the total dependency continues. If a totally dependent surviving spouse remarries, death benefits cease even if the cap has not yet been reached. However, if that person remarries with no dependent children at that time, payments continue for two more years. (Rules for surviving spouses who have become partially self-supporting and remarry are different.) If a totally dependent minor child continues to be wholly dependent when the cap is reached, payments continue as long as the total dependence continues until the child turns 18. Exceptions exist for a disabled child, one who goes to college or another accredited program or for “other sufficient reason.” Partial dependents (if there are no total dependents) receive weekly benefits calculated the same way, but reduced proportionately to reflect the portion of the worker’s wages that contributed to the partial support, considering the contributing incomes of partly dependent people. Generally, payments to partial dependents continue as long as partial dependency continues with a cap of $75,000. The collective amount of death benefits payable to eligible dependents other than a dependent spouse or dependent child is limited to a maximum in 2017 of $70,861 (cap increases annually). We will discuss benefit durations and funeral benefits in Part 3 of this post, coming soon.

It is tough under any circumstances when a family member or loved one dies accidently in the course of working or from an occupational disease. When the deceased provided financial support from his or her wages for other individuals, the sudden loss of that income can create a financial crisis. Dependency For this reason, Maryland Workers’ Compensation law provides for payment of a weekly death benefit to persons who were totally or partially dependent on the deceased claimant. The definition of dependency for eligibility purposes can be complicated, but in Maryland eligibility looks at whether someone was financially dependent, not at whether he or she was a spouse, child or other relative. For example, in one Maryland case, death benefits were properly paid to the surviving dependant romantic partner who had lived with the deceased worker. However, the law does favor surviving spouses and children in some ways over other dependents. For example, in certain situations, a surviving spouse or dependent child who remains dependent on the lost wages of the deceased worker may continue to receive benefits beyond the $45,000 cap that cuts off benefits to other nonspouse, nonchild totally dependent recipients. Dependency is determined as of the time of injury that resulted in death or if the worker died from an occupational illness, the date that the disease caused compensable disability that eventually led to death. Onset of dependency If the death was from an occupational illness, a person would not be eligible for death benefits if he or she became dependent on the employee after the worker became eligible for workers’ compensation based on that disease, except for a child of the employee born after that time, if the parents were married when that disability started. A surviving spouse may not be eligible for death benefits in certain cases of desertion of the deceased worker, or if the couple married after the injury or disability onset from occupational disease and do not have dependent children. Maryland Workers’ Compensation death and dependent benefits law is extremely complex and we have only touched on some aspects here. We will continue this discussion in Part 2 of this post.

Broadly, an injured or sick worker is eligible for Maryland workers’ compensation benefits if the injury or disease is work related. The legal and factual question is whether an injury or illness arose out of and in the scope of employment. When a claim is denied, whether the injury met this standard is often the issue disputed by the employer or insurer. Work commutes can be tricky Normally, if someone is injured during his or her commute to or from the workplace, that injury will not normally be within the course of employment and therefore not the basis for a successful workers’ compensation claim. For example, someone injured in a bus accident while riding the bus to his or her office in the usual daily routine would usually not be able to collect workers’ compensation benefits for that injury. Recognized exceptions The so-called “going-and-coming rule” does have some exceptions, however. For example, according to Maryland case law: When an employer provides cost-free transportation to the employee to commute each way to work, an injury during that commute would be considered to arise out of employment and qualify the person for workers’ compensation. When an employer’s premises has a public road between two parts of the premises, if a worker is hurt on the road between the premises, it may be compensable. When an employee is injured off of work premises, but it is because of a “peculiar or abnormal degree” of exposure to a danger that is a “risk incident” to the job, the injury may be covered. This is called the proximity exception. If an injury happens during a commute to or from the workplace and the worker was on a “ special mission or errand” for the employer, it may be the basis of a claim. If a trip away from work combines both a personal and business purpose and the employee is injured, the “ dual purpose” doctrine allows a viable claim if the trip would have had to have been taken by someone affiliated with the employer even without the personal purpose. The going-and-coming rule has been the subject of many disputed workers’ compensation claims and is a complicated, fact-specific area of law. Anyone with questions about this type of claim should speak with an attorney as soon as possible, even after a claim has been denied, as review or appeal may be available.

Here at Cohen, Snyder & Eisenberg, P.A., we fight for the workers’ compensation rights of injured workers. As we say on our website, while you do not need to hire a lawyer to pursue your workers’ compensation claim, it can be of great benefit. Maryland workers’ compensation law is complicated and an injured or sick employee may not understand that a denial of benefits may be wrong or that a complex legal issue may be involved. Willful misconduct and physical altercations Business Insurance recently published an article about workers’ compensation claims involving injuries from physical fights in the workplace. Maryland is one of the states discussed. The author cites a Maryland case involving a school bus driver injured by a physical attack by another employee that occurred after an earlier verbal disagreement in the break room, the details of which were disputed. In the 2005 Court of Special Appeals of Maryland case of Board of Education of Montgomery County v. Spradlin, the court looked at (in addition to several confusing procedural issues) relevant provisions of Maryland law that can apply when a claimant is injured in an altercation with a co-employee: Maryland law provides that a covered accidental personal injury includes an injury “caused by a willful or negligent act of a third person directed against a covered employee in the course of the employment.” The court said that a coworker could be such a third person, potentially in the context of a physical altercation. An issue can arise as to whether an assault or fight occurred “in the course of the employment.” In Spradlin, the court agreed that the claimant was in the course of employment when she was assaulted while boarding the school bus she was going to drive to pick up children. Maryland statute also provides a defense to an employer when an injury was the result of the claimant’s “willful misconduct,” which disallows benefits. The employer normally has the burden to prove this defense. The court agreed with an earlier finding that the employer did not establish that any willful misconduct of the claimant caused the fight that caused the injury, where the details of the earlier verbal exchange were in dispute. Anyone with an injury from a work-related assault should speak with a lawyer as soon as possible. The legal and factual issues are likely to be complex and disputed.

At Cohen, Snyder & Eisenberg, P.A., we represent employees in Workers’ Compensation claims when they are injured or become ill in the course of employment. We advocate for both private employees and public employees, like those who work in law enforcement, for government agencies and departments, as firefighters and others. The offset issue Maryland state, County and Municipal employees face a complex legal issue when they are awarded Workers’ Compensation like permanent partial disability benefits or permanent total disability benefits and simultaneously a second kind of benefit payment related to their government jobs. For example, an employee could get Workers’ Compensation benefits and also public pension or disability benefits based on his or her state employment status. If the two kinds of benefits are “similar,” the employee cannot collect the full amount of both. Rather, the non-Workers’ Compensation benefit is paid first, setting off (eliminating) that part of the Workers’ Compensation payment up to the amount of the other benefit amount. If the Workers’ Compensation payment is higher than the other payment, the employee is still entitled to that part of the Workers’ Comp payment that is in excess of the other payment. The setoff issue is complicated – there are certain exceptions and application of the law in individual situations can be difficult. For this reason, it is smart to consult an attorney about whether the offset is being appropriately applied. The offset provision was passed because the legislature did not want state employees to be compensated twice by public funds for the same injury. A February 2017 case shows that this has been broadly interpreted by Maryland courts. A recent example In Zakwieia v. Baltimore County, Board of Education, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland said that for purposes of the setoff provision, the ordinary disability retirement benefits awarded to a Board of Ed. employee by the State Retirement Agency were “similar benefits” to the permanent partial disability Workers’ Compensation benefits she received. The claimant was awarded Workers’ Compensation for a work-related back injury. She was also approved to receive ordinary disability retirement benefits related in part to a pre-existing back problem. The court found that whether the benefits are “similar” is based on the “nature of the benefit” not the “nature of the underlying injury” or particular “medical condition.” Both benefits were for “physical incapacity” broadly – her “inability to work caused by her disability,” so the setoff applied.

Working in a profession where toxic exposure is a possibility means that you must take extra precaution to protect yourself at all times. You don’t want to suffer toxic exposure when on the job, but sometimes even the most careful employees suffer such an injury. When this happens, you will want to be prepared for the exposure and how to care for it. The first thing you should do following toxic exposure in the workplace is seek medical assistance. Activate the emergency response procedure put in place by your company when toxic exposure occurs. This might include isolating yourself from other coworkers in an effort not to expose them to the same chemicals. This could mean waiting for a hazmat team to arrive that is also trained in first aid. Document exactly what happened that led to the incident and the steps you took immediately following. Never admit fault when documenting the accident. This could come back to hurt you should you pursue compensation for injuries suffered while on the job. Seek outside medical help as well. This can be done by seeing your family doctor after being released from the hospital or having the doctor visit you in the hospital. An independent medical evaluation can only help your case in the end. If there were coworkers with you when the toxic exposure occurred, be sure to have them provide statements to investigators about what happened. Their witness testimony could help your case. Collect records of everything that has happened since the accident. This includes any report issued by your employer, an investigative authority, your medical team and even law enforcement. If a team from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was called for an investigation, acquire their report too. If you or a loved one has been injured in a toxic exposure at work, contact our firm in Baltimore, Maryland, to have all of your questions answered. We can guide you through a workers’ compensation case and advise how you can acquire compensation for your injuries.

Have you ever wondered about the compensation professional athletes like baseball players get when they suffer career-limiting injuries? Many will be surprised to learn that pro sports teams must provide workers’ compensation coverage to their players just like other employers. There is one caveat, however. Collective bargaining agreements like the ones in place for Major League Baseball players can override the protections offered under workers’ compensation benefits. The collective bargaining agreement of the MLB requires the pro team to foot the bills under most circumstances for treatment of players injured while training for or playing professional baseball. As such, the players still draw their high salaries while on the injured list, so they don’t need those temporary disability payments provided by workers’ compensation benefits. However, the MLB teams that are picking up the tab for injured players’ short-term disability and medical costs can recover the equivalent amount of WC monies that players would otherwise have received for on-the-job injuries. Prior to 2003, league teams had to secure their WC insurance. In that year, the league set up its own group insurance policy for all teams in the league and its franchises. Doing so nearly halved the collective WC exposure of the MLB. But despite this change and the CBA in place for the MLB, those players suffering from injuries that wind up ending their professional sports careers can still turn to workers’ compensation for long-term disability benefits. Most injured workers will never need to deal with the special agreements that are in place for professional athletes. They must rely on the provisions and coverage of the workers’ compensation system. If you were injured on the job and are getting the runaround from your employer about workers’ compensation benefits, a Baltimore workers’ comp attorney can provide advice and guidance. Source: fangraphs.com, “ Major League Baseball and Workers’ Comp,” Nathaniel Grow, Feb. 08, 2017

When an employee is killed on the job, it is very tragic. It affects not only the family of the deceased worker, but his or her coworkers, friends and community. Workers’ compensation death benefits are in place to help the family financially during this difficult time. However, there are certain requirements that must be met. Because it can be very confusing to know what an eligible family member is entitled to when it comes to a loved one’s death benefits, it is advisable to have the experience and guidance of a workers’ compensation attorney on your side. For example, the total amount of death benefit payments is dependent on many factors. These include: — The deceased worker’s Average Weekly Wage — The State Average Weekly Wage — The deceased worker’s family income — The number of dependents The maximum benefit limit as of January 2016 is $69,177.00. The death benefits from worker’s compensation in Maryland also include reimbursement for funeral expenses. In order to receive reimbursement, a form must be completed and sent to the Workers’ Compensation Commission. The loss of a working family member can cause a financial hardship for the remaining members of the family. This is on top of the devastating grief the family is already dealing with. The death benefit is not meant to replace a life insurance payment; however, it will help with the family’s finances until they can learn how to live without their loved one’s full income. As you can see, workers’ compensation death benefits are very complicated and the advice of an experienced workers’ compensation attorney can be very helpful. Source: wcc.state.md.us, “Maryland Workers’ Compensation Rates,” accessed Dec. 22, 2016

Workers’ compensation systems operate at the state level. A partial federal government shutdown certainly provides a suitable occasion for a reminder of this. A state-based system means that Maryland has its own system for distributing compensation to workers injured on the job. Other states have their own systems as well. In this post, let’s look at how budget problems and political dynamics in a given state can influence specific aspects of the state’s workers’ compensation system. More specifically, we will discuss the new law in California this week limiting workers’ compensation claims by out-of-state professional athletes who were injured in California. The bill was the product of an intensive lobbying campaign by major sports leagues, particularly the National Football League (NFL). The NFL recently settled a lawsuit brought by former players who suffered serious head injuries while playing in the league. That suit, however, was in some ways the tip of a head-injury iceberg. Every day, evidence mounts about the serious health consequences of concussions and other serious head injuries.And in the last seven years, more than 3,400 people who were injured playing in the NFL have filed for workers’ comp in California, citing brain injuries or other neurological disorders. Of course, football isn’t the only sport where head injuries can occur. Major league baseball was also a strong supporter of the California workers’ comp limitation. So were other pro sports leagues, as well as insurance companies who provide workers’ compensation insurance to employers. For our purposes, the significance of California’s law is not merely that a Baltimore Ravens player who was injured in California will be prevented from seeking workers’ compensation there. The point is that workers’ comp laws vary by state. And their terms and conditions can sometimes reflect political pressures. Source: Los Angeles Times, “ California limits workers’ comp sports injury claims,” Ken Bensinger and Marc Lifsher, Oct. 8, 2013

Back injuries are one of the most common types of work injury. Indeed, they are one of the most common types of injury – period. Not surprisingly, then, problems with back pain are frequently involved in workers’ compensation claims in Maryland and across the country. Because the problem of chronic back pain affects so many people, researchers continue to seek new ways to treat it. In one recent study, the use of osteopathic stimulation appeared to provide a modest reduction of symptoms for some sufferers from chronic pain the lower back. The study was, as one might expect, led by a doctor of osteopathic medicine. It should be noted that osteopathy is not a traditional form of medicine. Osteopathy is a system that emphasizes the musculoskeletal system as central to health. In that respect, it is in some ways similar to chiropractic medicine. Traditional medicine has tended to disregard both osteopathic and chiropractic approaches. Indeed, for doctors strictly committed to the traditional approach, using the word “medicine” in conjunction with “osteopathic” or “chiropractic” may seem like an oxymoron. But traditional medicine does not have a monopoly on approaches for treating chronic back pain. After all, many people have found osteopathic or chiropractic approaches helpful. In the treatment of back pain, an osteopathic approach involves the manipulation of joints to get them back in place. It also emphasizes relaxing strained muscles and the use of massage on soft tissue injuries. In the recent study, researchers concluded that osteopathic manipulation can achieve modest reduction in symptoms for at least some people with chronic lower back pain. Source: “Back manipulation may help relieve chronic pain,” Fox News / Reuters, 3-26-13

The term “grand bargain” is somewhat disfavored in Washington these days. But it shouldn’t be; after all, a civilized society requires compromise and negotiation to move forward. Without those things, the clash of competing interests can harm everyone. Workers’ compensation law is based on one such grand bargain. Workers give up certain rights to sue employers for work-related injuries. Employers, in turn, get a structured system for resolving injury claims by employees who suffered workplace injuries or illness. To make this system work, each side has had to give a little. Employers cannot require employees to be perfect – and so workers’ comp claims are generally allowed even if the employee may have been careless about his or her own safety. Similarly, employees give up the right to sue their employers directly for most workplace injuries. But they do detain the right to bring what are called “third party” claims, such as against negligent contractors or manufacturers of defective products. Overall, the system works quite well for both sides. Sometimes, however, there are attempts to change the system in a particular state. In New Mexico, for example, there was recently a legislative attempt to restrict workers’ compensation benefits for employees who were impaired by alcohol when their workplace injuries occurred. The proposal for this change came after a city worker with a blood-alcohol content of .12 fell off a garbage truck and was injured. The worker received workers’ compensation benefits that exceeded $100,000 that were eventually upheld on appeal. The appeals said that there was not sufficient evidence to show that drunkenness was the sole cause of the accident. Source: “Democrats block New Mexico bill regarding workers’ compensation,” El Paso Times, Milan Simonich, 2-8-13 Our firm handles situations similar to those discussed in this post in Maryland. To learn more about our practice, please visit our main workers’ compensation page.