NY Claimant Fails to Show Reduced Earnings Were Caused by Established Back Injury
A New York appellate court affirmed a split decision of the state’s Workers’ Compensation Board that earlier found a claimant’s reduced earnings were the result of economic conditions, rather than his established back injury, and that accordingly, he was not entitled to a reduced earnings award for a disputed time span [Matter of Marcy v. City of Albany Fire Dept., 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6055 (Aug. 1, 2019)]. The court stressed that claimant bore the burden of demonstrating that his reduced earning capacity was due to his disability and not to unrelated factors such as age or general economic conditions and that the Board’s findings on the issue would not be disturbed when supported by substantial evidence.
Background
Claimant injured his back in 2004, while working for the employer as a master mechanic. After a recuperative period, he returned to full-duty work while continuing with treatment and medication for his back injury up until September 21, 2010, when claimant injured his right knee at work. After the knee injury, claimant returned to light-duty work for a brief period of time, and, on April 2, 2011, he retired at the age of 56.
It was subsequently determined that claimant’s retirement was causally related, in part, to his compensable back injury, and, accordingly, claimant was awarded benefits for lost time up until May 22, 2015. However, as of May 22, 2015, claimant was determined to have voluntarily removed himself from the labor market, and, thus, his benefits were suspended.
Ultimately, claimant sought a hearing to address the issue of labor market attachment and provided a paycheck from an employer. The WCLJ made a tentative reduced earnings award of $300 per week, pending a formal hearing. After the hearing, the judge found that claimant had reattached himself to the labor market and entered a reduced earnings award of $400 per week for three-month period beginning April 11, 2016, and a tentative award for the period after August 1, 2016.
The employer appealed and a majority of the Board panel found that claimant’s reduced earnings for the period after April 11, 2016, were not causally related to his compensable back condition and that claimant was self-limiting his earnings. Accordingly, the WCLJ’s reduced earnings award was rescinded. The Full Board issued a split decision affirming.
Claimant’s Testimony Undermines Claim
The appellate court observed that claimant had testified that he worked from home approximately five hours per week as a salesperson, earning $50 per week doing so. According to claimant, his limited work hours were all the hours that his employer had available. He subsequently asserted that his limited hours were the result of a restriction to part-time employment placed upon him by his physician. The court noted, however, that a review of the record revealed no such limitation by either claimant’s physician or the independent medical examiner. Substantial evidence, therefore, supported the full Board’s determination that claimant’s reduced earnings were dictated by the employer and economic conditions, not claimant’s back injury [see Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 84.04].