Copyright

(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Court Reporter's Brain Aneurysm Held Compensable

A court reporter who suffered and survived, with catastrophic disability, was awarded workers' compensation benefits by the NY SupremeCourt - Appellate Division as a result of stressful employment.

"On August 10, 2007, claimant, a court reporter, was found unconscious at her workplace and rushed to a local hospital, where she was diagnosed with a subarachnoid hemorrhage caused by a ruptured basilar artery aneurysm. Although claimant survived, she apparently remains unable to communicate. A workers' compensation claim subsequently was filed on her behalf, and the employer and its workers' compensation carrier (hereinafter collectively referred to as the employer) controverted the claim, asserting that the ruptured aneurysm was not related to claimant's employment. Following a hearing, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (hereinafter WCLJ) found that the employer did not overcome the presumption of compensability set forth in Workers' Compensation Law § 21(1). "

The Court relied upon the statutory presumption language.

"Pursuant to Workers' Compensation Law § 21(1), a presumption of compensability exists where, as here, an unwitnessed or unexplained injury occurs during the course of the affected worker's employment (see Matter of Brown v. Clifton Recycling, 1 AD3d 735, 735 [2003] ). “The employer may overcome the presumption by presenting substantial evidence to the contrary” (Matter of Steadman v. Albany County, 84 AD3d 1649, 1650 [2011] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted] )."

Read the full decision: In Re: The Claim of Vanessa Richman (Decided January 5, 2012)

.....

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Corporate Empathy: A Race To The Bottom Of The Ladder

As the Republican Presidential primary race heats up, the candidates start to get tied, the debate becomes ever so more heated and raw, and the true colors of reality starts to show. Where the race will lead us and the movement to improve the nation's system of medical benefit delivery to injured workers' is really anyone's best guess. As of now the temperature of the debate and the emotion being generated portends poorly for the benefit of workers as the corporate mentality reflects no empathy for workers and the race to the bottom of the ladder continues.


For more read the NY Times Editorial today"The Corporate Candidates."
"Mr. Romney claims his background as a businessman provides him with an understanding of the economy and the ability to fix it. His opponents — particularly Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul and Rick Perry — say their political experience provides the same advantage. In truth, none have offered anything but tired or extremist economic prescriptions, providing little evidence that they can relate to those at the middle or bottom of the ladder."

Monday, January 9, 2012

On-Star To Predict Type & Extent of injuries

English: Logo of General Motors Corporation. S...Image via WikipediaWorkers' Compensation is all about the results of injuries and new technologies may assist in evaluating claims and expediting treatment and awards. On-Star, the integrated system of General Motors (GM) that provides immediate reporting of accidents has announced that it will taking the next in the future. It will integrate the reporting system with data from the Centers for Disease Control and provide prediction data on the type and extend of injuries. 

Expanding internationally, Shanghai OnStar Telematics Service Co., Ltd will officially provide vehicle safety telematics service for the vehicles manufactured and sold by SGM in China. These services will include the Crash Automatic Resort Service, Emergency Rescue, Remote Door Unlock, Turn-By-Turn Navigation and Vehicle Condition Reports, etc.

Click here to read more:  GM OnStar will initiate the service of “Injury Prediction”
"The president of the OnStar claimed that: “the Injury Prediction service is a good substitution to the injury description by the vehicle owner who is injured seriously. This technology plays a part of virtual witness in the accident site. What is even more surprising is that the traffic accident and injury information acquired by this service is far more accurate than what is dictated by the witness. It is said that OnStar is going to officially provide this service from next year."
.....
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.

Hostess Fined $105,000



The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Interstate Brands, doing business as Hostess Brands, for eight serious and two repeat alleged violations of workplace safety standards at its Biddeford production plant. The company, which manufactures Hostess products, faces a total of $104,700 in proposed fines following a safety inspection by OSHA's Augusta Area Office.

"Our inspection identified mechanical, electrical, fall and exit hazards, including some similar to those cited at other Interstate Brands facilities," said William Coffin, OSHA's area director for Maine. "Left uncorrected, these violations expose workers to the hazards of electrocution, lacerations, amputation, falls, being caught in operating or unexpectedly activated machinery and being unable to exit the workplace swiftly in the event of a fire or other emergency."

OSHA's inspection found an absence of guardrails to prevent workers from falling into and through hoppers; a locked emergency exit door and an exit route blocked by product racks; unguarded moving machine parts on a conveyor belt, band saw blade, drill press and other equipment; undocumented procedures to prevent the unintended activation of machinery during maintenance; and individuals working on live electrical equipment who were not familiar with the protective equipment needed for such work. These serious violations resulted in citations carrying $42,200 in fines. A serious violation occurs when there is substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.

The recurring violations involve failing to guard chains and sprockets on a cake alignment conveyor and a packaging machine feeder, and provide personal protective equipment to safeguard employees against electrical shocks, arc flashes and arc blasts while working with live electrical parts. The citations carry $62,500 in fines. A repeat violation exists when an employer previously has been cited for the same or a similar violation of a standard, regulation, rule or order at any other facility in federal enforcement states within the last five years. OSHA cited International Brands in 2010 for similar hazards at plants in Columbus, Ga., and Schiller Park, Ill.

The citations can be viewed at http://www.osha.gov/ooc/citations/InterstateBrands_315672352_1222_11.pdf.*



.....
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.


Novartis Consumer Health Inc. Issues Voluntary Nationwide Recall of Certain Over-The-Counter Products Due to Potential Presence of Foreign Tablets or Chipped or Broken Tablets or Gelcaps

Novartis Consumer Health, Inc. (NCH) announced today that it is voluntarily recalling all lots of select bottle packaging configurations of Excedrin® and NoDoz® products with expiry dates of December 20, 2014 or earlier as well as Bufferin® and Gas-X Prevention® products with expiry dates of December 20, 2013 or earlier, in the United States. NCH is taking this action as a precautionary measure because the products may contain stray tablets, capsules, or caplets from other Novartis products, or contain broken or chipped tablets.
The affected bottle sizes are attached to this release. The Novartis Consumer Health Inc. Lincoln, NE facility has voluntarily suspended operations and shipments to accelerate maintenance and other improvement activities at the site.
This recall is being conducted with the knowledge of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Mixing of different products in the same bottle could result in consumers taking the incorrect product and receiving a higher or lower strength than intended or receiving an unintended ingredient. This could potentially result in overdose, interaction with other medications a consumer may be taking, or an allergic reaction if the consumer is allergic to the unintended ingredient. NCH is not aware of adverse events reported with the issues leading to the recall.
These over-the-counter products were distributed nationwide to wholesalers and retailers.
Novartis Consumer Health Inc. is notifying its distributors and customers and is arranging for return of all recalled products. Wholesalers and retailers should stop distribution and return the affected product using Novartis Product Return information that is being provided to them.
Consumers that have the product(s) being recalled should stop using the product(s) and contact the Novartis Consumer Relationship Center at 1-888-477-2403 (available Monday-Friday 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. Eastern Time) for information on how to return the affected products and receive a full refund. For more detailed information, consumers should visit our website at www.novartisOTC.com as of January 9, 2012. Consumers should contact their physician or healthcare provider if they have experienced any problems that may be related to taking or using these drug products.
Adverse events that may be related to the use of these products may be reported to FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting Program either online, by regular mail or by fax:
These actions announced today, highlight the strong Novartis commitment to a single quality standard for the Novartis Group. The Novartis Group is making the necessary investments and committing the right resources to ensure these are implemented across the entire Novartis Group network. The high quality of Novartis products and operations has been critical to building the Novartis Group reputation over the past 15 years. Novartis Group is committed to ensuring the highest standard for patients who rely on our products and medicines.
Novartis Consumer Health Inc. plans to gradually resume operations at its Lincoln, NE site following implementation of planned improvements and in agreement with the FDA. The Novartis Consumer Health Inc. Lincoln, NE facility produces a variety of products mainly for the US market with annual sales value of less than 2% of Novartis Group sales. At this stage, it is not possible to determine when the plant will resume full operations and the full financial impact of these events. NCH will take a one-time charge currently estimated at USD 120 million in the fourth quarter of 2011, relating to the recalls and improvement work at the Lincoln, NE facility.

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

Sunday, January 8, 2012

PROTECT America's Injured Worker Medical Rights



Why This Is Important
The goal of this petition is to garner the support and representation of the American Civil Liberties Union in a due process lawsuit against the State of New York and/or other states within the United States under violations of the civil rights law pertaining to “Deliberate Indifference”, against injured worker’s legal rights to timely and qualified medical treatment thereof.
American workers were improperly stripped of their rights to sue their employer or the state for damages sustained in workplace accidents in 1917 before most of us were even born. Workers Compensation laws, in direct conflict with employee due process rights, quickly spread nationally. Only one lawsuit resulted, ironically, on behalf of employer due process rights. Despite the fact that this contract which lives in infamy violates both employer and employee rights, it has survived for 95 years.
Meanwhile, the "contract" has become so inequitable that millions of American workers are defrauded of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, after being thrown into an adversarial court system, where their $5.00 lawyers fight against six figure slingers who represent insurance companies that are raping America.
Injured workers are forced to obtain treatment from an inadequate, unspecialized list of providers, often with disastrous long term results and are barred from both timely and appropriate medical treatment through a complex paper trail of denials for basic medical care.
Further, their lifetime awards are severely limited, and their income reduced to nothing. Paid Independent Medical Examiners with little or no experience with the injury at hand are allowed to pass judgment on degrees of life time injury, literally whisking away damages for the benefit of the insurance providers who pay them. It's only a matter of time until Claimant’s are completely penniless and wind up on welfare, which lets the insurance company off the hook, but leaves the taxpayers holding the tab for social programs such as food stamps and medical coverage or social security disability, as the statutorily promised income protection and medical coverage is non-existent.
Additionally, Injured Workers who are legally entitled to lifetime medical benefits are finding these benefits are unavailable when they relocate from one state to another unless an out of state provider is willing to take on complex paper processes and pathetic reimbursement rates. Once injured in New York, you will never leave New York, or, in essence, you forfeit your right to coverage.
Due to low reimbursement, high medical malpractice risk (due to lack of timely treatment and authorization), and complex paper processes, the list of available providers is shrinking rapidly from year to year. Often, professional review processes are not employed by State government, and substandard physicians are the only ones left on the medical provider list.
Americans are being defrauded and led to believe they will be dealt with fairly, but all fairness has been removed from the system. Ultimately, Corporations are paying the highest insurance rates in history, while the Claimants are getting next to nothing. Meanwhile, the insurance industry makes a killing. The Workers Compensation contract is inequitable.
PROTECT AMERICAN INJURED WORKERS by repealing the 1917 Workers Compensation Act. In varying degrees, this violation of civil rights due process laws is creating a “deliberate indifference” situation, due to unrealistically low provider rates, medical malpractice risk, and shrinking provider lists. Provider fees and attorney fees haven’t been updated for years, and medical guidelines are being employed which haven’t even been ratified by the State, with each new guideline taking another chunk out of what little the injured worker is currently entitled to.
Before long, we’ll have to pay our employers when we’re injured, rather than the other way around.
The failure of Workers Compensation to meet the needs of injured workers is leading to lifetime injuries which were originally treatable and the collapse of American families.
Additionally, America’s social systems are picking up the tab as injured workers flock to obtain early social security, food stamps, and Medicaid due to their lack of coverage under Workers Compensation laws.
Ironically, while American workers are being ignored, American prisoners are getting free medical treatment. In fact, American prisoners are successfully being represented by civil rights lawyers across this country in order to obtain the same quality of care that Americans have come to expect, and that American Injured Workers desire.
If prisoners have rights under “Deliberate Indifference” guidelines to fair treatment, why not the American Worker?
Under current laws, Deliberate Indifference in relation to prisoners medical or safety rights is defined as a “a failure to act where prison officials have knowledge of a substantial risk of serious harm to inmate health or safety.” Crayton v. Quarterman, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103709 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 14, 2009) (Wikipedia, 2011)
Deliberate indifference is defined as requiring (1) an "awareness of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists" and (2) the actual "drawing of the inference." Elliott v. Jones, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91125 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 1, 2009). (Wikipedia, 2011)
In short, failure to provide timely and appropriate medical care resulting in damage is considered a civil rights violation.
Injured American Workers should never have been deprived of their constitutional right to a fair trial, representation, justice, humanity, and freedom. They should not be restricted to substandard medical care, any more than their legal representatives or medical providers should be asked to work for free.
Enough is enough. PROTECT AMERICAN INJURED WORKERS. It is clear based on hundreds of advocacy websites across the country that Workers Compensation does not work. Therefore, the band-aid approach needs to stop. We need real change, and a new system, which is fair and equitable to the American Worker.