Worker ruptures tendon climbing into truck and applies for comp
September 11, 2009 by Fred HosierPosted in: Bizarre Accident of the Week, Injuries, Special Report, Transportation safety, What do you think?, Workers' comp, new court decision
Workers’ comp boards and courts draw a fine line between what is and what isn’t a work-related injury that qualifies for benefits. See if you can guess how the court ruled in this case:
Michael Haley worked in a shipping yard which handled arriving and departing tractor trailers and the loading and unloading of the trucks. Part of his regular duties included climbing into and out of truck cabs.
One day at work, when he stepped into the cab of a truck, he felt a spasm in his left leg.
Haley didn’t climb the step in an unusual or awkward way, and there wasn’t anything strenuous about stepping up a total of 16 inches.
After the spasm, Haley had no strength in his leg and had trouble moving it.
Doctors diagnosed a ruptured quadriceps tendon and performed surgery quickly thereafter. Complications soon developed, causing Haley to walk with a cane for some time after the injury.
He applied for workers’ comp. The state comp commission found that he hadn’t proven his injury “arose out of” his employment and denied his claim for benefits. Haley appealed.
A state appeals court upheld the comp commission’s decision, so Haley didn’t get benefits.
Haley had argued that the 16-inch step was higher than a normal step that most people would encounter outside of work, and for that reason, he should get comp.
However, the court noted that doctors weren’t able to explain any link between Haley’s work duties and the rupture. All they were able to say is that the injury occurred at work.
“At work” isn’t necessarily good enough to qualify for workers’ comp. Case closed: The company won.
Do you think the court made the right decision? Let us know in the Comments Box below.
Cite: Haley v. Springs Global U.S., Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Co., Court of Appeals of Virginia, No. 2841-08-3, 8/18/09.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: climbing into truck, ruptured tendon, shipping yard, tractor trailer, Workers' comp
Loading ...
September 11th, 2009 at 7:51 am
Sounds great! Score one for capitalism. Where is this? Can’t be California, New Jersey, New York…
September 11th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
I agree with John. It definitely is not California…..
September 11th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
The man suffered an injury while performing his job. He deserves to be compensated.
September 11th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
This is an odd one. I’ve seen WC paid for all kinds of stupid injuries occuring “at work” but not involving actual work. At least this guy was involved in actual work when the injury occured. In my humble opinion, WC should have paid since he was performing work when the injury occured, but since the injury may not have been the direct result of a mishap, it shouldn’t be OSHA recordable or reportable.
September 14th, 2009 at 9:28 am
So, people do stupid things which lead to an accident and get comp but someone gets hurt in the routine activities at work and they don’t. Score one for capitalism? Sounds like just another stupid decision to me. I don’t like hearing about people getting comp who don’t deserve it and I don’t feel better when a worker gets the shaft instead of the employer.
September 14th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Actually, my guys would like it if it meant they would get their AFLAC supplemental insurance instead of worker’s comp. But since it happened at work I don’t know if the disability insurance would cover him.
September 14th, 2009 at 10:10 am
You’ve got a link a work injury to the work that was performed. Did this guy play any sports or workout outside of work? You just can’t say because it happened at work, that it automatically holds the employer accountable for the injury. If that was the case, every guy that helped someone move on the weekend would apply for WC when they had a back ache on Monday morning.
September 14th, 2009 at 10:12 am
In my opinion, the employer should not be required to pay the injury unless there was a tramatic incident that directly caused the rupture. In this case there is obviously not. It seems as if the employee had a degenerative condition. Unless that condition can be attributed to repetitive day to day job tasks, the company should not be on the hook.
September 14th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Not really odd at all. My question would be what time of day his issue occurred. Very suspect if first thing in the morning especially if this fellow is on a sports league of some kind. Unfortunately, companies pay for many “off-hours” injuries that just ‘happen’ to manifest first thing in the AM. Many times, these injuries are first presented to personal health insurance plan by the injured worker who is then directed to report the injury as work-related to their employer, especially in the case of Union Health and Welfare plans. Best approach in most cases – employers do not certify claim pending ‘further investigation’.
September 14th, 2009 at 10:24 am
There are too many outside factors that simply are not published here to make a reasonable call on this. For instance, what outside activities could this person be involved in that could have brought this on, as many injuries manifest themselves after the fact.
Was he overweight?
Was he being honest in his play back of what actually happened?
Should any complications that arose from surgery be the responsibility of others?
I think in this case that the WC board initially ruled correctly.
September 14th, 2009 at 10:27 am
In Wisconsin, this is WC, no doubt.
September 14th, 2009 at 10:28 am
How does it seem like the courts never get it right? An employee gets hurt at a company bowling event or working out at the gym with a company purchased membership and they get comp. But a worker gets injured while performing a task directly related to his job and he is denied benefits? I understand the previous comment was likely said in jest but this is not a victory for capitalism. This is just more evidence of how backwards and inept our courts are.
September 14th, 2009 at 10:42 am
I agree with all of the other respondees. Was there anything in the job requirements for how high he should be able to stretch to climb in to these trucks and is 16″ a standard stretch to get in to the trucks? Since they could say “the accident did occur at work” how is it they couldn’t make the stretch work related. Without a pre-exist it seems he should have been granted compensation. Was it a state written plan? I ask because I work for a company that has their own plan and they own the plan. There is a third party administrator. I’d be interested in knowing if they engineered out any changes after his incident to shorten the step height.
September 14th, 2009 at 11:10 am
The man suffered an injury while performing his job. He deserves to be compensated
September 14th, 2009 at 11:22 am
I am very surprised at the boards decision to deny the mans claim for benifits. It seems to me that “But For” the man performing his assigned task he would not have injured himself.i
September 14th, 2009 at 11:28 am
He should have been paid. If he did nothing stupid and it was caused by normal work functions it should have been WC. If foul play was suspected an investigation should have been performed and if he did not properly climb the step or horseplay was involved it should have been denied.
September 14th, 2009 at 11:30 am
I agree this is an odd one. I too have seen other WC claims paid that were questionable.
But unless the Truck is custom made, the parts are standard issued and the step space will be the same as other trucks. But I do agree it is definitely not California.
September 14th, 2009 at 11:40 am
The only thing that matters is what does the law say? One of the great things about workers’ comp is that unlike general liability cases before a jury, emotion and what one person thinks is fair vs what someone else thinks is fair doesn’t come into play. The requirements under the law are what counts. This keeps the claim fair for both sides and both sides know what to expect.
September 14th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Wait a minute… wasn’t there a story on THIS website earlier about workers getting injured playing basketball getting paid WC because it was at work? Or am not remembering that story correctly…?
As the good general said: “Bovine Scatology!”
If it happened while performing his job, he deserves WC. Period.
September 14th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Wow, this is refreshing.
I have seen so many frivolous claims get paid out to people who don’t deserve it is nice to see someone in the WC field actually thinking about the claim instead of blindly saying “it happend at work”.
September 14th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Probably not PA either. Any idea what case this was? Usually they list it at the bottom.
September 14th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Def not California, otherwise there is no question that is would have been compensable.
September 14th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
WC is getting to easy to receive. Just because I started hurting at work does not mean that I got hurt at work. What does the man do away from the work area? The burden falls back on the employer to prove that the injury did not occur at the work place. Most employers train, write policies, and try to protect employees the best they can. When an employee does not follow procedures and policy are we supposed to just pay because an employee states that I started hurting at work? And we wonder why the large corporation are taking their product to other countries to be made!
September 14th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
So why, in your other case, is a worker paid for injuring his knee playing basketball during a break (paid) that is not related to his job and this man is not? The rupture could have been caused by repetitive motions (day after day doing the same thing) or a small not noticed twist previously that finally ruptured.
I concur with Steve and Jed.
September 14th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
This guy got RIPPED off, he was performing his duties, not as if he were jumping off the dock during horseplay (which by the way I have seen employees compensated for). Does this guy have any recourse?
September 14th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
This is stupid. Just the other day there were two cases where people that were over weight got WC for lapban surgery because they were injured and couldn’t have the surgery necessary for the actual injury at their current weight. Now WC doesn’t cover someone who actually got hurt doing the job they were supposed to be doing and got hurt doing it? Does this make sense to anyone??? Yes, I believe whole-heatedly that WC should pay on this one. Not only is it fair, its ethical (which seems to be greatly lacking lately).
September 14th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Last week I read where Worker’s Comp made a company pay for weight loss surgery which was not related to the work place injury. Now they won’t pay for an actual injury. That makes no sense at all.
September 14th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
It is recordable under the OSH recordkeeping requirements although not compensable.
September 14th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
They give comp for going bowling, but not doing your job. Go figure
September 14th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
His job called for stepping up those 16 inches on a regular basis. But if the rupture is caused by a genetic defect, then no workers comp, only disability. The complications that resulted, sound like poor care on the part of the physician or the individual. Seeing how the doctors couldn’t determine the cause, then no WC.
September 14th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
I think that this guy deserves pay more than an overweight individual deserves gastric bypass covered by workers comp to then correct a work related injury. He was hurt while performing job duties, he deserves compensation in my opinion.
September 14th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
I agree that workman’s comp should have been awarded and I think the guy should appeal to a higher court. The issue is not over until you give up.
However, I see the loop hole they used was that the cause of injury was not clearly defined. Maybe that was a discrepancy caused by the supervisor unless the employee filled out the injury report himself. Where I work the supervisors fill out the report and I do an investigation.
Maybe that guy should sue his company for not filling out the report properly.
I wonder if he obtained services from an attorney?
September 14th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
I would also like to know what State this took place in. Should now be case law so would want to follow suit in cases with similar injuries. That would be good to know. I don’t agree with Jed concerning not being OSHA/recordable/reportable. OSHA does not care whether it was a mishap or not. If there are lost work days & medical treatment beyond First-Aid, then it’s reportable/recordable.
September 14th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Strange, we had an almost exact incident and workers’ comp did not question at all. Employee was stepping into a truck and stepped onto step-side and slipped and injured knee. Required two surgeries and off work for 3 months. In addition, the employee had a previous injury on the same knee (not worked related) a few years before, which did not have a bearing on her benefits at all. No not California, New Jersey or New York – TEXAS
September 14th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
I agrre with Jed. I’ve seen WC pay some really ridicules claims and it seems as though this man was actually doing his job when he got hurt and therefore should be compensated.
September 14th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
I can’t believe that workers’ comp. did not side with the employee. Without a Dr. linking the on the job act to the injury it should definately not be compensable. Just because you are at work it does not mean that the injury is related to your work. Many of times personal injuries that are not actually work related are covered due to poor management of claims.
September 14th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
He should have been paid, if the truck fell over on him during lunch that is not work related but he would have been paid. He should get a better lawyer and file again.
September 14th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
I believe this was fair and just. In most cases I believe a worker should be comped when injured at work. At the same time, a company should not be held liable if there was no negligence or other infraction on their part. Many times a company pays for an injury that is simply a matter of a person’s body failing, especially in this day and age with more and more of the workforce suffering from obesity and other weight/diet related health problems. Had this employee been asked to step up to an unreasonable height or if the step had been faulty in some other way, I would disagree with this decision.
September 14th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
I would like to know what state this occurred in. It must be a right-to-work state. I know from experience in Alaska, that even if the employee is doing something that is a ‘direct violation of workplace policy’ and non-work related that we have had to pay. If it occurred “at work” regardless of any other circumstances, then it is covered under work comp.
September 14th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Ha ha ha, I am glad I am in the class of brillliant people who have fligured out this didn’t happen in California. If it had it would have been a multlimilllion dollar settlement with an addlitional legal order that all truck steps be immediately lowered to a 12″ step. with air rlide cross steps, padded handrails and at least a winch to pull the body into the tractor!!!!
On a more serious note, I am happy to see at least some claims pulled in to the realm of reality. W/C awards alone will kill off our free enterprise system!!!!
September 14th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
I would have expected this to be covered by WC. Based on OSHA interpretations of similar cases, this would be OSHA recordable as well.
September 14th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
he deserves the compensation, he was on the job doing his job
September 14th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
I agree with Jed….
September 14th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
I agree with Jed. The worker may have been doing the same thing for a long period of time, climbing in and out of trucks, thus creating the future injured area. The nature of the injury is related to the task that the worker has been doing every day. I think he should get workers comp.
September 14th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
There are many factors that could contribute to this injury, He might have been injured previously while not working, and claiming he was injured at work, but in which case, the step could have agrevated the injury there by cause the rupture, which in that case, is still a recordable, because he went to the doctor who did more than just preventative medicine, but at the same time, would not be a work related injury…there are many things we do not know about this case.
September 14th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
I agree with Jed. Clearly he was performing a “work related” activity. He would not have been there had it not been for work. I will also add that this decision did not come from Minnesota in addition to California, Texas and Colorado. Every once in awhile the courts get it wrong for both parties. More often than not it is the employer that gets the bad ruling.
September 14th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Now this is one I think should have been covered. How do we have workers attacking vending machines getting covered, while guys like this go without coverage?!? Something is messed up in the WC world!
September 14th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
This is bazaar! WC will pay someone who throws his back out playing 8 games of bowling at a company bowling party, but they wont pay for someone who actually was working. Niether could prove thier injusries were caused by what they were doing. I feel sorry for the man in this story.
Workers Comp. need to be more consistan with their decisions.
September 14th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
So if I understand this correctly; you can get gastric bypass surgery covered and paid for under work comp – but injury yourself in a relatively ligitimate work related way and you get nothing! Hmmm, I forsee this one going a bit further.
September 14th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Mr. Haley should’ve Filed the notice of injury at work as a repetitive trauma claim, and got a lawyer then got a IME physician to look into his injury MAYBE then he would have gotten a fighting chance……
September 14th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
I’d love to know what state ruled on this. There’s no way it could be California. To me, it occured while he was performing a normal job function, and appears to have been reported timely (no red flags), I think comp. should’ve paid this.
September 14th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
If this were a accident on a MSHA facility it would have been comped and MSHA would have made sure of it, fined the operator and the operator would be forced to find some kind of engineering control to stop that from happening again, ie. a way to get in the truck that would reduce the 16 inch step.
September 14th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Clearly, this was a work-related injury. I can’t imagine the WC board denying this claim considering some of the absolutely asinine claims that have been paid out for obviously fraudulent incidents. This is a miscarriage of the WC system. Perhaps he should sue in Civil Court.
September 14th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
No vote is required to decide this worker’s fate, but I would guess a vote might be a good idea. Next time at the polls vote labor, vote union, vote as if your job depends on it. I know that is where my next meal comes from. I work for a living and I pay a fair tax to support my government. I do that so my government will generally maintain a good quality of life for me as a worker. That means for the business I work for and the people I work with. Not one or the other.
We must all stand together. It’s better then falling together! Chris Newbury
September 14th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
So, a guy doing his job doesn’t get paid but some ya-hole hurts himself at a company picnic playing softball and he gets workers’ comp.
I will be glad when they figure out what is working and what isn’t.
It’s not Texas either, they don’t have worker’s comp!
September 15th, 2009 at 8:58 am
Editor’s note: This case is from Virginia:
Court of Appeals of Virginia, Haley v. Springs Global U.S. Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Co., No. 2841-08-3, 8/18/09.
September 15th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Re: Larry Ward.
Of course our product manufacturing is being taken off shore and Mexico. No work rules. No safety laws. No child labor laws. Yes, EEOC, OSHA, WC etc. can be a pain in the butt at times but at least we have good protections. My opinion: We have the best court system in the world but sometimes the Jury of Our Peers makes stooopid decisions!
September 15th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
As our work force ages we will see more and more of this type of claim. Eventually physical labor will take its toll on a body and injuries will occur that have more to do with the employees lessened ability to perform physical tasks. Even healthy, fit people have a limit. Since you cannot discriminate against “age” it will be interesting to see what the future brings. It is a sad situation but probably not WC.
September 16th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
In reading the case, this injury occurred during his first month of employment. It would be interesting to see what he used to do, and if this type of work was more physical than prior jobs. As others have stated, it also makes you wonder what extracurricular activities he did outside of his job, and whether his physical conditioning was compromised by those activities.
I agree with the courts though, although this happened while he was at work, I doubt that it happened because of the work he did.
September 17th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Cite: Haley v. Springs Global U.S., Inc. and Zurich American Insurance Co., Court of Appeals of Virginia, No. 2841-08-3, 8/18/09.
The cite notes this was in VA. The case was a 240 lb man, 6′ 4″. He worked there less than 3 weeks.
The case hinged on the fact that the 16″ step was normal and reasonable based on his size, and he did not have any medical evidence to refute that.
The court reasoned:
“An employee must prove his/her injury occured by accident arising out of and in the course of employment. THe commission found that his injury occured “in the course of’ but did not prove it also arose out of his employment. This led to the denial.
Wrong or right, those are the facts in the case.
September 18th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
I agree WC should pay full benefits, to this man. Unless WC can prove he got hurt off the job.But I see it as a no brainer. wish you luck pal.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:15 pm
This is real confusing?
I only say this because previously WC paid for someone’s obesity problem; which was NOT close or resembled a work related injury; but this one maybe ,not either?
It borders the gray area of maybe or maybe not; unlike the obsesity, which does/is/was not even close to work related!
Shows how common sense and individual responsiblity can be distorted!
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:40 pm
More information from the doctor would be very helpful. If the injury was caused by chronic trauma (or acute) related to climbing in and out of his vehicle, and this can be validated by the physician’s diagnosis then WC should pay. If a previous condition or incident (such as a sports injury from bowling) can be reasonably diagnosed from a physician then the company should win.
I had a case similiar to this in New York and the doctor was unable to accurately determine if the injury was work related trauma or non-work related and the employee stated he felt the pain after doing a work activity. There were no witnesses to the contrary. New York’s WC paid and it was recordable on the OSHA log.
September 22nd, 2009 at 4:22 pm
A further investigation needs to take place. This does not sound like a work related accident, regardless if it took place at work. This person may have been taking an antibiotic which has been known to cause tendon tears (levaquin).
September 23rd, 2009 at 1:24 pm
After reading the decision. I agree. It was proved that it happened AT work (employment), but couldn’t be proved that is was BECAUSE of work (employment).
September 23rd, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Sorry. decision here…
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.courts.state.va.us%2Fopinions%2Fopncavwp%2F2841083.pdf&ei=kVa6SoSBCcHO8Qbews2MCg&rct=j&q=Michael+Haley+shipping+workmens+compensation&usg=AFQjCNHod7H7bx88KygoBTMpjCEKewIxMA
September 24th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
i choked on a doughnut at work. can i get compensated for that? maybe i’m just a retard and have to learn how to do something simple without looking for a handout if i can’t without hurting myself
September 28th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Great call by the court..his personal health insurance can take care of this. Good thing this was not in California where if you are chewing gum while at work and break a tooth, WC will pay for a tooth implant.
September 29th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Funny, my cousin had a simular incident working for me, while delivering packages climbing in and out of a cab over Isuzu Truck he suffered tendon damage. The state WC declared it a work related and even paid him a settlement!!! This is in Montana. What gives? Different judgement for simular injuries in different states? I feel the driver in this case should have gotten compensation plain and simple.
October 12th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
You folks who think he should get paid, obviously know nothing about workers compensation or fair business practices. First of all, WC is not a federal law, but the result of a federal mandate that requires states to have a WC law. There is no big federal government WC Agency. WC varies from state-to-state and is written and passed by each state government. Insurance companies are businesses that can offer to provide WC coverage to businesses, but must operate under strict guidelines outlined in the law. Large businesses can be self-insured, but the financial burden is usually tough, so not an option for most businesses. There are a few states where the state does run the WC program. Don’t judge whether an incident is compensable just because it happened at work. In Virginia, perhaps the most fair system in the USA for both the company and employee, just being at work (In the Course of Employment) is not enough reason for the employer to be held responsible. Just because somebody in another state got their bowling injury covered, does not mean it is right in this or any other case. “Arising out of Employment” means that the employee is performing a job function and the hazard is peculiar to that employment. WC insurance premium rates are set or approved by the Virginia Workers’ Compensation Commission (government agency) and are determined by a process that takes into account the hazards of different types of industries as they relate to the cost of injuries. What you may not understand is that your employers pay tens to hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to insure that injured employees receive treatment and pay. If you are at work and you fall while walking down a hallway with no apparent hazard, should your employer have to pay for that? If so, I would ask if you are willing to leave your job so your employer can afford to pay the increased insurance premiums. The laws are such that the money is available to pay for those people who are hurt from a real job related hazard. Most businesses are not bottomless pits of money. With all that said, get out your ruler and measure up 16 inches. What do you want, an elevator? Get real!
October 20th, 2009 at 11:41 am
We had a similar situation in South Dakota in which our secretary was walking down a flight of stairs and tore the miniscus in her knee. The initial surgery was covered by WC with no questions. A year later, her doctor told her she needed that knee replaced (due to arthritis) and if we hadn’t pushed WC to NOT cover that, they would have with no investigation and just assumed it was related to the previous injury.
December 15th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
well if I did it climbing a ladder to change a light or going up the stairs to the office when I was called up there or when i step up the 16 inch step to get on the operators platform for our coc machine which all would be considered on the job type injuries which part of [climbing up into] dose the doctor not get about how it happened, although the lung thing was on the money.
December 21st, 2009 at 10:55 am
VA may be fair in WC. However, I think that they got this one wrong. Sometimes your body will react differently in a situation even though you do the same thing over and over. He twisted wrong, stepped up wrong etc…. Do to our aging workforce, people can injur themselves easier than they did when they were 20. The man should have been paid. It wasn’t like he was looking for lifetime benifits, he wasn’t playing basketball during break and he wasn’t obese. Give me a break. Someone needs to use common sense.