British Revised guidance on managing and controlling asbestos

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has revised guidance to help businesses understand how to work safely with asbestos. The Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs) L127 (The management of asbestos in non-domestic premises) and L143 (Work with materials containing asbestos) have been consolidated into one single revised ACOP – L143 Managing and working with asbestos. L143 has been revised to make it easier for businesses and employers to understand and meet their legal obligations. It also reflects the changes introduced in The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (CAR 2012) on the notification of non-licensed work with asbestos, and consequent arrangements for employee medical examinations and record keeping. Highlighting the benefits of the change, Kären Clayton, Director of HSE’s Long Latency Health Risks Division, said: “The two ACOPs have been updated and brought together to help employers find the information they need quickly and easily and understand how to protect their workers from dangers of working with asbestos. The revised ACOP also provides better clarity on identifying  dutyholders for non-domestic premises and the things they must do to comply with the ‘duty to manage’ asbestos. ACOPs L127 and L143 were among several identified for: review and revision; consolidation; or withdrawal, following a recommendation made by Professor Ragnar Löfstedt in his report ‘Reclaiming Health and Safety for All’. ...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Found on

Related articles

• High Court in Japan Holds Government Negligent for Asbestos (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Experts Speak Out About The Asbestos Industry (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Asbestos and Cigarettes (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• International Conference on Monitoring and Surveillance of Asbestos-Related Diseases (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• 2014 Asbestos Awareness Conference Honorees (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Justice for asbestos victims (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)

Deviation From Employment

The NJ Appellate Division held that an emergency police dispatcher who was injured in a car accident while returning to work from a lunch break was not entitled to workers' compensation benefits. 

Volunteer's Injury at Community Outreach Event Compensable

The NJ Supreme Court has held that an injury sustained while volunteering at her employer-sponsored event is compensable because the event was not a social or recreational activity. 

NJ Judge Orders Psychotherapy Sessions In Conjunction With Pain Management

A NJ Workers' Compensation Judge Ordered the continuation of medical services to an injured worker who has been struggling for years because of chronic knee pain depression and anxiety despite the objection of the employer who sought to terminate care. The Judge Philip A. Tornetta, Administrative Supervisory  Judge of Compensation, adopted an innovative approach  in attempt to reduce or eliminated prescribed drugs including, "Oxycontin for her knee  pain, Lexapro for depression and Xanax, which helps her sleep."

Illinois Punishes Workers for Employer Deceit

The efforts by employers, insurance carriers and the Chamber of Commerce in Illinois, to take away the rights of injured workers and strip them of benefits may have all been based on Industry fraud. Recently obtained documents, secured under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), reveal that the employer’s own doctor had in-fact validated the causal relationship of the medical claims of the injured workers to work. 

A campaign in Illinois by Industry to dismantle the State’s workers’ compensation system was triggered and flamed by a story appearing in a local newspaper asserting that several correction officers had filed fraudulent claims for repetitive motion trauma to their hands. The local news report insinuated that the claims could not have been credible. 

The story, for some suspicious reason, was disseminated in a viral manner on the Internet. Concurrently, the Illinois Chamber of Commerce went on the attack claiming that the workers’ compensation system in Illinois was loaded with fraudulent activities. The Chamber and employers lobbied for legislation to strip injured workers of what little rights they still had under the law. The statutory changes they sponsored reduced ill workers access for benefits, reduced medical treatment expenditures by 30%, and set up a series of hurtles that left the injured without remedy to cure and relieve conditions caused by work. 

Even that wasn’t enough. Supporters of the Industry’s draconian legislative effort, have now vowed to return to take away the basic promises granted workers a century ago, that injured workers could obtain the limited and capped scheduled benefits, under a no-fault system. The workers’ compensation system was intended to provide a remedial and expeditious benefit to injured workers in a summary and efficient fashion, without the element of fault being considered. 

A hidden report reveals that Anthony E. Sudekum, MD, a Board Certified Hand Surgeon, retained by the employer, State of Illinois Department of Corrections, on March 30, 2011, after and extensive review of the facts, circumstances, inspection of the premises and equipment, and examination of the employees, concluded that, on the job activities contributed to their illness. He wrote, “…I feel that ….work activities at Menard Correctional center served to aggravate…bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and left ulnar neuropathy.” 

Furthermore, some contend that the neurological illnesses that appeared at the Menard Correctional Center may have been the result of a mysterious disease cluster that warrants much further investigation instead of a knee-jerk denial. Similarly, a mysterious outbreak of disease in Philadelphia ultimately resulted in the discovery of Legionnaires Disease. Today the US Centers for Disease Control continues to investigate worldwide clusters of gastro-intestinal conditions to determine their potential causal relationship. It is through continued medical research and investigation that we make the workplace healthier, safer and more productive. 

We should learn from history. In the past, employers and manufacturers were also caught intentionally concealing the hazards of asbestos, tobacco and lead paint. That left a legacy of disease and death, and billions of dollars of economic loss. One would think that everyone learned from those tragic mistakes. For our nation to survive, employers must take an active roll in improving the health of our workers, and build a stronger system, rather than just deny the hazards of the workplace and blame the injured.

Related articles

• Illinois Workers Compensation - It is time for a "Do Not Resuscitate" Order (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Illinois Workers Compensation Maybe Heading for Extinction (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Bilateral Carpal Tunnel Results in Workers' Compensation Total Disability (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• The Illusion of Workers Compensation Reform and Corporate America (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)

Cycling or walking to work 'improves psychological health'

Today's post is shared from medicalnewstoday.com

According to a new study conducted by health economists at the University of East Anglia and the Centre for Diet and Activity Research in the UK, walking or cycling to work is better for people's mental health than driving. The psychological benefits of walking or cycling to work come on top of the well-known physical health benefits. In February of this year, the UK Office of National Statistics published a report that found UK citizens who walked to work had lower life satisfaction than those who drove to work. The report also found that cyclists were less happy and more anxious than other commuters. The new study, however - which is published in the journal Preventive Medicine - contradicts this. The team studied 18 years of data from almost 18,000 commuters in the UK aged 18-65. The data took in various aspects of psychological health including feelings of worthlessness, unhappiness, sleepless nights and capability of dealing with problems. Factors that are known to affect well-being, such as income, having children, moving house or job, and relationship changes were also taken into account by the researchers. The results suggest that people benefited from improved well-being when they stopped driving and started walking or cycling to work. Commuters reported that they felt better able to concentrate and "less under strain" if they used these methods of travel, rather than...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Found on

….

Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author of NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson-Reuters) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson-Reuters). For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L Gelman  1.973.696.7900  jon@gelmans.com  have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.

Related articles

• Poor Diet Of Shift Workers An "Occupational Health Hazard" (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• "Coming and Going" Rule Revisited (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• OSHA finds Metro-North Commuter Railroad retaliated against injured employee (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Accelerated aging found in long-term unemployed men (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• The Degree of Employer Control Determines Compensability in an Off-Premises Parking Lot Case (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Witnesses present divergent settlement figures in Garlock estimation trial (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Starbucks to Revise Policies to End Irregular Schedules for Its 130,000 Baristas (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Patient Access To Physicians Notes: An Experiment of Psychological Importance (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)

California Supreme Court Bars Household Contact Covid Claims

Today, the California Supreme Court decided that the Workers’ Compensation Act [WCA] did not bar a derivative claim. However, using a public policy rationale, it did not extend an employer's duty of care to an employee's household contacts who contracted COVID-19.

When is an off-regular-hours activity not in the course of the employment?

The NJ Supreme Court is deliberating on the issue of whether an an employee should receive workers’ compensation if an injured occurred at an off-regular-hours event. The issue presented to the Court was whether an employee is entitled to benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act, specifically N.J.S.A. 34:15-7, for injuries that occurred while she was volunteering at her employer’s “Family Fun Day” event?

NJ Supreme Court Defines The Authorized Vehicle Rule

The NJ Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, held that an employee’s car accident occurred “in the course of employment” under N.J.S.A. 34:15-36’s “authorized vehicle rule” and is therefore compensable under the Workers’ Compensation Act (the Act).

A Deviation Off-Premises Bars Claim

The “Coming and Going Rule” has always been a grey area in determining compensability in the workers’ compensation arena. A bucket full of cases and statutory modifications have tried to establish clarity.

IRS prepping for Obamacare employer mandate in 2015

What will happen with the employer mandate? Will the consequences be that the workers' compensation carriers expand coverage to employer based policies that are cheaper than traditional workers' compenaation policies. Today's post is shared from Politico.com The Obama administration signaled Thursday it’s not backing down from the controversial health law employer mandate that has been delayed twice and is the centerpiece of the House’s lawsuit against the president. The IRS posted drafts of the forms that employers will have to fill out to comply with the Obamacare requirement that employers provide health insurance to workers. Some business groups said the information was still too tentative and too incomplete to let them prepare for new obligations under the health law. “Our immense frustrations with the IRS continue,” Christine Pollack, vice president of Government Affairs at the Retail Industry Leaders Association, said in a statement. An administration official said the White House is sticking to the timeline announced earlier this year. Companies with 50 to 99 employees will have another year — until 2016 — to start the coverage. Companies with 100 or more employees do have to comply next year, although they have two years to phase up so that they are covering 95 percent of their workers. Smaller businesses are exempt. The House Republicans are planning to sue President Barack Obama, saying he overstepped his authority in...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Found on

Related articles

• OSHA cites willful safety violation after workers expected to 'free climb' 195-foot tower without adequate fall protection
• OSHA issues new directive to keep communication tower workers safe
• The Unanticipated Consequences of Postponing the Employer Mandate
• WellPoint Sees Small Employers Dropping Health Coverage
• The Degree of Employer Control Determines Compensability in an Off-Premises Parking Lot Case

NJ Tightens COVID-19 Pandemic Restrictions

 NJ coronavirus cases continue to soar to a new daily number of 3,877 and a Rate of Transmission 1.25% and the state has now issued further restrictions to curb the spread of the potentially fatal virus. These new restrictions will impact business in the entertainment and hospitality field as well as indoor sports. 

Parking Constitutes Arrival at Work

 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A NJ Court of Appeals in a definitive statement about off-premises injuries, strongly affirmed the rule that when an employee arrives at am employer designated parking lot, the employee arrives at work. Even though the employee had exited the vehicle, and was injured while on a public street, the employer was held liable for the injuries under the workers' compensation act.

"Hence, we agree with the judge that when petitioner parked her car in the assigned garage, she was not coming to work, she had arrived there."

CHERYL HERSH, Petitioner–Respondent, 

v. 

COUNTY OF MORRIS, Respondent–Appellant,  

DOCKET NO. A–1442–10T4 

2012 WL 3000329 (N.J.Super.A.D. 2012) Decided 7/24/12.

More on Parking Lot Cases

Workers' Compensation: Parking Lot Injuries Are Compensable

Jan 09, 2012

The situation becomes more complicated when the employee is involved in an accident in a parking lot not owned or controlled by the employer. In those instances the courts traditionally look to whether the employer directed ...

http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/

Exclusivity Rule Adopted in MDL Aviation Law Case

Jul 11, 2012

Court Rules Site of Accident Invokes Exclusivity Rule. English: Motor vehicle accident following a ve... A NJ appeals court ruled that a motor vehicle accident cause by a co-worker in the emplyers' parking lot, before work had.

http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/

Court Rules Site of Accident Invokes Exclusivity Rule

Jun 13, 2012

A NJ appeals court ruled that a motor vehicle accident cause by a co-worker in the emplyers' parking lot, before work had commenced for the day, limited the injured workers' recovery to workers' compensation benefits.

http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/

Workers' Compensation: Workers Compensation Act Does Not Bar A ...

May 17, 2011

The injured employee was employed by Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P. and slipped on black ice in the parking lot. The employee filed and claimed benefits from the employer in workers' compensation. Additionally, the ...

http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/

Related articles

• Court Rules Site of Accident Invokes Exclusivity Rule

  ---

• Workers Compensation Rates in New York to Decrease

  ---

• Sign of the Times: Fragrance Free Workplace

  ---

Ciba, Toms RIver NJ and a Cancer Epidemic

Early in my workers' compensation career, during the 1980's, I was asked by a local attorney to participate in the prosecution of 3 brain cancer workers' compensation claims. The cases arose out of an alleged exposure to toxic substances while working at the Ciba-Geigy's chemical plant in Toms River, NJ. 

Being a notoriously zealous attorney, I undertook the claims. They were being defended personally by named partner in a mega-NJ liability firm. After several hearing dates, and my motion being granted for an on-site inspection of the premises with Judge being present, the claims were ended to the satisfaction of my clients.

The story of Ciba-Geigy and the plight of the employees and the community is now the subject of an insightful book, Toms River, A story of Science and Salvation authored by Dan Fagin.

Click here to hear the NPR Story - For Toms River, An Imperfect Salvation

Parking Lot Injuries Are Compensable

      Injuries occurring  in parking lots are in many instances compensable. A lot depends on who controls parking in the lot and/or whether or not the employer directs the employee to park in a specific location.

      The legal theory that is the basis for determining who is responsible is whether the injury occurs in the course of the employment and arises out of the employment. When the employer owns the property and the employee becomes injured while going to and from his or her vehicle, the accident is usually deemed to have occurred at work and is compensable.

       The situation becomes more complicated when the employee is involved in an accident in a parking lot not owned or controlled by the employer. In those instances the courts traditionally look to whether the employer directed where the employee should park or how the employee should park his or her vehicle.

       Because the courts have held that the employer's parking lot is part of the employment premises and an employee entering or using the lot is in the course of employment, an employee injured when struck by an automobile driven by a co-employee was not able to sue the co-employee for negligence; the sole remedy was in the workers' compensation arena.  Konitch v. Hartung, 81 N.J.Super. 376, 195 A.2d 649 (App.Div.1963), certif. denied 41 N.J. 389, 197 A.2d 15 (1964).

       If the employee directs that the employee utilize a specific parking lot or a common area in a commonly owned parking lot, then the injures that occur in the parking are considered arising out of and in the course of employment and are considered compensable.

.....

For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman  1.973.696.7900  jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses. 


Related articles

• Workers Compensation Do It Yourselfers Get Help (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Employee Allowed to Sue Employer for Negligence Resulting From an Occupational Exposure (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Changing the Fundamental Rules of Workers Compensation (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)

NJ Announces Indoor Mask Requirement for Beginning of 2021-2022 School Year

Joined by educators, medical professionals, parents, and school administrators, NJ Governor Phil Murphy today announced that all students, educators, staff, and visitors will be required to wear face masks indoors for the start of the 2021-2022 school year. The Governor signed Executive Order (EO) 251, which will mandate masking in the indoor premises of all public, private, and parochial preschool, elementary, and secondary school buildings, with limited exceptions. The EO is effective on Monday, August 9, 2021. 

Learn When an Accident in a Parking Lot Is Compensable

Learn When an Accident in a Parking Lot Is Compensable

Hot Topics in Workers’ Compensation Law 2014

New Jersey Institute for Continuing Legal Education

Wednesday, June 18, 2014 4pm-8pm

Law Center, 1 Constitution Square, New Brunswick, NJ 08901

t. 732-249-5100  f. 732-249-1428  www.njicle.com

• Learn about the most important recent case law decisions from a panel of Compensation Judges and leading attorneys. The lead attorneys, John R. Tort, Jr. and Lewis Stein, who tried and participated in the appeal of Hersch v. County of Morris will discuss the recent NJ Supreme Court "Off-Premises" (Coming and Going Rule) decision.
• Understand why state tort law claims for failure to warn of chemical dangers are not preempted by OSHA’s HazCom standard. Attorney Steven H. Wodka, who participated in the appeal  of ATRM v OSHA & DOL, et. al,will provide insight into the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals recent decision and what new claims may be anticipated. 
• Gain an understanding of coverage issues involving Workers’ Compensation insurance policies and the operation of the Uninsured Employers Fund.
• Acquire information of the new rules and procedures for obtaining Medicare conditional payment information, and the new regulations onhow to appeal a Medicare determination involving reimbursement /debt owed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

Click here for Registration and Agenda details

Occupational Exposure to Diacetyl and Acetaldehyde Results in Compensable Colorectal Cancer

An employee exposed at work to flavoring ingredients including Diacetyl and Acetaldehyde, was awarded workers’ compensation benefits as a result of being diagnosed with colorectal cancer. The case is significant because the Court adopted scientific evidence that associated chemical exposure in the workplace to an increased risk of a malignancy based on expert testimony that by DNA testing, the exposed worker’s body could not detoxify from the hazardous chemical.

Home Modifications Denied as to An Elevator

Home modifications can be a very important, yet expensive, benefit available to injured workers. A New Jersey Appellate Court again reviewed the standard of proof for home modifications required to accommodate disabled workers. In doing so The Court  linked the need for medical evidence to be supported medical evidence when the improvement of mental health of the disabled worker is  at issue.

The standard of proof, was enunciated almost 3 decades by the NJ Supreme Court :

“Where the surroundings of the petitioner must be modified in order to accommodate his physical handicap, the court has required that the employer be responsible for making the adaptations. Not only is the physical well-being of the injured worker taken into consideration, but his mental state is considered as well. In the Squeo case, the employer was required to pay for the construction of an accessible apartment as an addition to the premises of the injured worker’s parents’ home.”  Squeo v. Comfort Control Corp., 194 N.J.Super. 366, 476 A.2d 1265 (App.Div.1984), aff’d 99 N.J. 588, 494 A.2d 313 (1985), N.J. Prac., Workers’ Compensation Law § 15.3 (3d ed.)

A partially paralyzed and wheelchair bound disabled worker requested home modifications of his residence to include: expansion of the kitchen, raising the family room floor, installation of a lift platform and an elevator. The employer contested several aspects including the installation of an elevator.

No medical evidence was offered by way of expert testimony to causally related the improvement of the injured workers’ mental health with the installation of an elevator to continue with such hobbies as woodworking. While the Compensation Judge made two on-site visits, and even though the respondent wasn’t diligent in timely requesting expert medical testimony regarding the issue, a lack of findings on the causal relationship between the need for the elevator installation necessitated a reversal of the Compensation Judge’s order as to the elevator.

The Court rationalized that…” While the elevator would appear to be beneficial, there is nothing in the record to demonstrate that it is "necessary" and its cost "reasonable" as those terms are used in Squeo. Ibid. The compensation judge was required to reach a decision consistent with Squeo, which "cautioned" that it is "only the unusual case that may warrant . . . extraordinary relief." Id. at 604. Based on the current state of the law, as set forth in Squeo, and the present record, we cannot agree that Loeber demonstrated that the elevator was "necessary."

The case was remanded to the Division of Workers’ Compensation so that the specific the remodeling could be resolved.

Loeber v. Fair Lawn Board of Education, A-1990-13T1 (NJ App Div 2014) Unreported

NJ Supreme Court to Review An Increase of Partial Disability Award in Total Disability Claim

One of the basic tenants of workers' compensation is that awards maybe reviewed and modified where the medical status has changed.1 The NJ Supreme Court on March 14, 2016 granted Certification to review a favorable Appellate Court ruling that permitted a totally and permanently disabled injured worker to receive an increase of a prior (2006 injury) partial disability award, even though the worker had been declared to be totally and permanently disability from a subsequent (2008 injury) injury.