--------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Vincent J. Quatrini, Jr. Serves as Lead Presenter for UPMC Forum
--------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
Another Way of Thinking About Back Pain?
Interesting view on long-term back pain:
More than 1 in 4 adult Americans say they've recently suffered a bout of low-back pain. It's one of the most common reasons people go to the doctor. And more and more people are being treated for it.
America spends on back pain treatments. But many specialists say less treatment is usually more effective.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/01/13/255457090/pain-in-the-back-exercise-may-help-you-learn-not-to-feel-it?utm_content=socialflow&utm_campaign=nprfacebook&utm_source=npr&utm_medium=facebook
---------------------------------------------------
More than 1 in 4 adult Americans say they've recently suffered a bout of low-back pain. It's one of the most common reasons people go to the doctor. And more and more people are being treated for it.
America spends on back pain treatments. But many specialists say less treatment is usually more effective.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/01/13/255457090/pain-in-the-back-exercise-may-help-you-learn-not-to-feel-it?utm_content=socialflow&utm_campaign=nprfacebook&utm_source=npr&utm_medium=facebook
---------------------------------------------------
Monday, December 30, 2013
Average Weekly Wage for 2014 Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation
The 2014 Statewide Average Weekly Wage Workers’ Compensation Rate Schedule has been approved as follows by the Secretary of Labor and Industry:
Based upon the Statewide Average Weekly Wage, as determined by the Department of Labor and Industry for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013, the maximum compensation payable under the Workers' Compensation Act, under Article 1, subsections 105.1 and 105.2, shall be $932.00 per week for injuries occurring on and after January 1, 2014. For purposes of calculating the update to payments for medical treatment rendered on and after January 1, 2014, the percentage increase in the Statewide Average Weekly Wage is 1.6%.
----------------------------------------------------
Based upon the Statewide Average Weekly Wage, as determined by the Department of Labor and Industry for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013, the maximum compensation payable under the Workers' Compensation Act, under Article 1, subsections 105.1 and 105.2, shall be $932.00 per week for injuries occurring on and after January 1, 2014. For purposes of calculating the update to payments for medical treatment rendered on and after January 1, 2014, the percentage increase in the Statewide Average Weekly Wage is 1.6%.
----------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
New PA Supreme Court Decision: Phoenixville Hospital
by Pete Gough, Esq.
The Labor Market Survey process is routinely used by workers' compensation insurance companies to try and reduce an injured worker's weekly benefit.
The workers' compensation insurance company hires a vocational expert to interview the injured worker to assess their education and job history. From there, the vocational expert comes up with hypothetical "jobs" that the injured worker might be qualified in the area. These include everything from a gas station attendant to a clerk at a Verizon store.
"A Claimant indisputably may show that the employer's labor market surveys were simply based on unsubstantiated, erroneous, conflicting, false or misleading information and evidence regarding the claimant's actual experience with the employers identified in the LMS may lend support for establishing contentions along these lines….Because an employer is required to establish substantial gainful employment that exists….it would be directly relevant for a claimant to show that an employer rejected the job application precisely because the work is incompatible with Claimant's residual productive skill, education, age or work experience."
Holding 2: Jobs Must Remain Open
"… the jobs identified by the employer's expert witness, which are used as the employer's proof of earning power under section 306(b) , (must) remain open, until such time as the claimant is afforded a reasonable opportunity to apply for them….Claimant must be afforded the opportunity to submit evidence that she did not obtain employment because the position identified by the expert was already filled by the time the claimant had hada reasonable opportunity to apply for it.
Holding 3: If The job Is Already Filled, It Does Not Exist.
Holding 4: Kachinski Is Not Dead
The court specifically would not state that it was abandoning Kachinski in a 306(b) analysis. It points out the burden is different, but seemed unwilling to give up its prior seminal decision.
It especially seems to be a hybrid Kachinski model in that the employer's good faith is directly at issue.
Holding 5: Workers' Compensation Judge has Significant Discretion
As they should, the Workers' Compensation Judge has a great deal of discretion. This decision protects that discretion with respect to weighing evidence to see if jobs "exist" and were actually available.
Phoenixville Hospital v. WCAB (Shoap)
The Labor Market Survey process is routinely used by workers' compensation insurance companies to try and reduce an injured worker's weekly benefit.
The workers' compensation insurance company hires a vocational expert to interview the injured worker to assess their education and job history. From there, the vocational expert comes up with hypothetical "jobs" that the injured worker might be qualified in the area. These include everything from a gas station attendant to a clerk at a Verizon store.
Following the job match, the workers' compensation insurance company then files a petition with a workers' compensation judge to reduce the injured worker's benefit based on jobs that are "available" in the local area.
Our office routinely litigates these types of cases, arguing that the "available" jobs don't really exist, are not really open and availabe, or, that the injured worker is unable to actually perform the designated occupation.
We feel the Phoenixville case provides more support for our arguments and, more importantly, puts the power back into the hands of the Workers' Compensation Judge to actually decide the case.
Holding 1: Employee May Attack the Foundation of the Labor Market Survey
"A Claimant indisputably may show that the employer's labor market surveys were simply based on unsubstantiated, erroneous, conflicting, false or misleading information and evidence regarding the claimant's actual experience with the employers identified in the LMS may lend support for establishing contentions along these lines….Because an employer is required to establish substantial gainful employment that exists….it would be directly relevant for a claimant to show that an employer rejected the job application precisely because the work is incompatible with Claimant's residual productive skill, education, age or work experience."
Holding 2: Jobs Must Remain Open
"… the jobs identified by the employer's expert witness, which are used as the employer's proof of earning power under section 306(b) , (must) remain open, until such time as the claimant is afforded a reasonable opportunity to apply for them….Claimant must be afforded the opportunity to submit evidence that she did not obtain employment because the position identified by the expert was already filled by the time the claimant had hada reasonable opportunity to apply for it.
Holding 3: If The job Is Already Filled, It Does Not Exist.
Holding 4: Kachinski Is Not Dead
The court specifically would not state that it was abandoning Kachinski in a 306(b) analysis. It points out the burden is different, but seemed unwilling to give up its prior seminal decision.
It especially seems to be a hybrid Kachinski model in that the employer's good faith is directly at issue.
Holding 5: Workers' Compensation Judge has Significant Discretion
As they should, the Workers' Compensation Judge has a great deal of discretion. This decision protects that discretion with respect to weighing evidence to see if jobs "exist" and were actually available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Gough is an associate at QuatriniRafferty and concentrates his practice in the area of workers’ compensation, exclusively representing injured workers.
Born in Brooklyn New York and a graduate of The University of Buffalo, Peter J. Gough came to the Pittsburgh area to achieve his J.D. from Duquesne Law School. He fell in love with Western Pennsylvania and has been practicing law, primarily civil litigation and workers’ compensation law here since 1990. Monday, November 25, 2013
NOVA Comes to Pittsburgh!!!
The National Organization of Veterans Advocates (NOVA) will gather in the Steel City for its Spring 2014 conference!
QR attorney Michael V. Quatrini has been added to the conference planning team.
To learn more about NOVA, follow the following link: http://www.vetadvocates.org/
---------------------------------------------------
QR attorney Michael V. Quatrini has been added to the conference planning team.
To learn more about NOVA, follow the following link: http://www.vetadvocates.org/
---------------------------------------------------
Thursday, November 21, 2013
QuatrinRafferty Hosts WCAIS Meeting
QuatriniRafferty was proud to host, along with the Westmoreland Bar Association, a WCAIS (Workers' Compensation Automation and Integration System) demonstration and problem solving seminar in Greensburg, PA.
Pictured are Workers' Compensation Judge David Cicola, Liz Crum (Director of the Workers' Compensation Office of Adjudication), and QuatriniRafferty's very own Rhonda Chappell
Friday, November 1, 2013
Act 632 Benefits and Retirement: Do they stop if you retire?
by Vincent J. Quatrini, Jr.
Recently, I was asked whether Act 632 benefits would cease upon a worker's retirement.
My answer was that the benefits should continue. And I believe that case law supports my answer.
Unlike section 1(a) of the Heart and Lung Act, section 1 of Act 534
makes no distinction between temporary and permanent disability and provides
no time limitation on receipt of benefits. As long as the employee cannot return
to work with the department, Act 632 (and Act 534) benefits continue.
McWreath v. Department of Pub. Welfare, 26 A.3d 1251 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2011).
All situations are different so the answer above may or may not apply to your situation. If your Employer or insurance carrier is threatening to take away your Act 632 benefits due to retirement, please call our office at 1-888-534-6016 or visit our website to make an appointment for a free consultation.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Workers' Compensation Group at Quatrini Rafferty
Proudly serving injured workers in Western Pennsylvania for the last 25 years from our offices in Greensburg, Pittsburgh and Latrobe.
Recently, I was asked whether Act 632 benefits would cease upon a worker's retirement.
My answer was that the benefits should continue. And I believe that case law supports my answer.
Unlike section 1(a) of the Heart and Lung Act, section 1 of Act 534
makes no distinction between temporary and permanent disability and provides
no time limitation on receipt of benefits. As long as the employee cannot return
to work with the department, Act 632 (and Act 534) benefits continue.
McWreath v. Department of Pub. Welfare, 26 A.3d 1251 (Pa.Cmwlth. 2011).
All situations are different so the answer above may or may not apply to your situation. If your Employer or insurance carrier is threatening to take away your Act 632 benefits due to retirement, please call our office at 1-888-534-6016 or visit our website to make an appointment for a free consultation.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Workers' Compensation Group at Quatrini Rafferty
Proudly serving injured workers in Western Pennsylvania for the last 25 years from our offices in Greensburg, Pittsburgh and Latrobe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)