'My nose is disfigured, give me workers' comp'

‘My nose is disfigured, give me workers’ comp’

May 25, 2012 by Fred Hosier

Posted in: Falls, Injuries, new court decision, Special Report, Workers' comp

A worker fractured her nose. Workers’ comp paid for surgery which repaired the fracture and alleviated her pain. However, she argued for almost a year’s worth of additional benefits for disfigurement. Did a court award her more workers’ comp benefits? Rhonda Walker fell down stairs at work and broke her nose. After one round of nasal surgery, she was released to work without restrictions. On the day she returned to work, she gave one week’s notice. Her resignation letter didn’t say she was leaving because of her injury. It said she was moving.

Two months later she had nasal surgery for the second time.

Walker asked for her workers’ comp to be reinstated for two reasons: permanent disfigurement of her nose, and that she had also suffered neck, back and shoulder injuries.

Medical records from the first doctor to treat Walker didn’t mention any back or neck injuries. A workers’ comp judge denied the request for extra benefits for those injuries, saying Walker’s testimony wasn’t credible.

The matter about her nose proved to be a bit more complicated.

Pennsylvania’s workers’ comp law awards certain amounts for disfigurement. In the case of an injury to the head, neck or face, not every change is compensable. A scar or alteration of the head must also cause “an unsightly appearance,” according to the state’s law, to be eligible for workers’ comp.

The workers’ comp judge (WCJ) who first heard Walker’s case didn’t see an unsightly appearance — at first. The WCJ requested before and after photographs. Walker said she had two scars on her nose and the end of it was crooked following her fall.

Even though the WCJ couldn’t see any scars, based upon the photos, Walker was awarded 45 weeks of disfigurement benefits because her nose was “crooked.”

The company appealed. The Workers’ Comp Board (WCB) saw Walker in person and found that her nose had “a slight crookedness” to the left side and “the crookedness is not noticeably disfiguring” and therefore not compensable.

This time it was Walker who appealed the decision, seeking to get the WCJ’s original opinion reinstated.

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania upheld the WCB’s decision. It noted that in a previous ruling, the state’s Supreme Court had specifically cautioned against gauging unsightliness on the basis of photos because they can be manipulated.

The court’s decision: no disfigurement benefits for Walker. Her slightly crooked nose didn’t rise to the level of “an unsightly appearance.”

What do you think about the court’s decision? Let us know in the comments below.

(Walker v.Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board, Commonwealth Court of PA, No. 492 C.D. 2011, 3/3/12)

The Safety Insights You Need
Get the latest safety news, trends, and insights - delivered weekly.

Join over 334,000 safety pros:

Privacy policy

Tags: crooked nose, disfigurement benefits, fall down stairs, nasal surgery

http://MSN mimidunn

I have been in the business for many years and it never fails, if something happens at home, the person gets over it and moves on. If it happens at work the person tends to jump on and ride it forever. It amazes me how much more lenghty work injuries are compared to home injuries. I believe the right call was made here.
R.J.Scialo

Good call.
GLY

I have dealt with cases in the past that neck, shoulder and back injuries were not apparent at first, but did develop later (including my spouse) that could be directly attributed to the initial injury; I’m not saying it was in this case, but it is very possible that initial injury could be responsible for the problems; thus needs to be investigated very carefully.
Dave B

I think it was the right decision, but given what W/C has accepted in the past, I must say I’m surprised she didn’t win.
pbrown

The right decisions were made.
Tammie

If her nose was slightly crooked & had scarring after the surgery, and it wasn’t prior to the fall, WC should have paid to have her nose set back to how it was prior to the injury. The term “Unsightly” is just like the word “Beautiful” -it is in the eye of the beholder. The neck, back & shoulder injuries just now coming up and giving her problems I don’t buy into at all. I am a licensed insurance adjuster and have worked with a lot of WC Claims. The juducial system and the employer were wrong on the nose issue and I am quite surprised that it flew. Women are judged much more harshly on their appearances and looks – I understand fully her wanting the nose corrected. The neck, back and shoulder injuries just now being mentioned smell foul.