Work related injury question
- Thread starter paulkish
- Start date
racing promotor
Moderator
That would depend on how good your attorney is !!
paulkish
old fart
hummmm just found this on the web
All workers whose jobs make exposure to COVID-19 possible or likely. The order does not give a presumption of coverage, but >>>defines COVID-19 as an occupational disease<<< making it coverable by workers compensation under the regular process of filing a claim.
and this:
If COVID-19 is contracted through occupational exposure, it could be considered an occupational disease and, if so determined, should be reported and compensated according to the international labour standards and the national schemes for employment injury benefits
All workers whose jobs make exposure to COVID-19 possible or likely. The order does not give a presumption of coverage, but >>>defines COVID-19 as an occupational disease<<< making it coverable by workers compensation under the regular process of filing a claim.
and this:
If COVID-19 is contracted through occupational exposure, it could be considered an occupational disease and, if so determined, should be reported and compensated according to the international labour standards and the national schemes for employment injury benefits
racing promotor
Moderator
Interesting and one would think this is how it should be, BUT unfortunately I bet it wouldn't go that smoothly and you would end up finding out how good your attorney was.
flattop1
Dawg 89
^^^
It would seem work comp would only cover employer or work related injury that they have control of .
Not public health issues .
Now health care workers is a whole differnt set of circumsances .
still if they have protocols in place . you would need to prove they were insuffeicent or they would prove you did not follow.
Still a whole lot of variables .
It would seem work comp would only cover employer or work related injury that they have control of .
Not public health issues .
Now health care workers is a whole differnt set of circumsances .
still if they have protocols in place . you would need to prove they were insuffeicent or they would prove you did not follow.
Still a whole lot of variables .
Yes, and states very greatly in the administration and payment of benefits. In any state I know of private insurance companies provide coverage but disputes are resolved by the state.
Last edited:
paulkish
old fart
Have not read it yet but just found this:
https://www.uslaw.org/files/Compend...endium_COVID19_WorkersCompQuickGuide_2020.pdf
https://www.uslaw.org/files/Compend...endium_COVID19_WorkersCompQuickGuide_2020.pdf
No, "they" don't want you to use it. Like most insurance, Comp rates are heavily influenced by claim experience.
"J'-remy
Member
my parents have owned several businesses and Always wanted their workers to use Workmans comp they payed into monthly. so it's not everyone.
flattop1
Dawg 89
Plenty of room to bail in there .
racing promotor
Moderator
Must have been in a state that is way different than any I know of, employers avoid comp claims like the flu, as there rates were based on risk factors and increased even because of one claim, especially if it was a claim where the employee was paid for time off work unable to work status, that's why most have no time lost for certain number of days policy, and get employee back on light duty status asap, now maybe just using the medical part of it doesn't hurt quite as bad nor as quickly.
flattop1
Dawg 89
Work related injury vs off the clock work comp is too different situations .
I paid my own work comp premium . Which the benefit barely paid my company health insurance premium . Which they didn't pay will on work comp .
They still were worried i was going to file against them because i was on my way home . Traveling from one work location to another .
I paid my own work comp premium . Which the benefit barely paid my company health insurance premium . Which they didn't pay will on work comp .
They still were worried i was going to file against them because i was on my way home . Traveling from one work location to another .
There are situations where it would be preferable for an employer to want a claim processed by comp. Comp is basically the original "no fault". The employee is compensated for his injury, and the employer is protected from tort exposure even in the case of extreme negligence. In fact negligence is irrelevant for either the employer or the employee. This is what is known as "exclusive remedy". Say for instance the owner of a company, while drunk, runs down an employee in his parking severely injuring him. In states where exclusive remedy remains strong, the employees recovery is limited to that as prescribed by workman's comps schedule of payments. Pain and suffering and punitive damages are irrelevant. I used to administer Workman's comp across 4 states for a large company (but not for the last 25 years). The strength of exclusive remedy varies from state to state.
Last edited: