|
The Workers' Compensation system in Michigan is extremely important for all workers, union and nonunion in this state.
Every worker and employer is taxed to ensure the necessary funds are available for anyone injured on the job. The history
of this state and country allows for basic protections when workers are injured on the job.
Workers' Compensation is an insurance system designed to serve two purposes: to provide benefits to employees who have
suffered a work-related injury or illness and to protect employers from costly litigation over claims of work-related
injuries and illnesses. The Workers' Compensation Act was enacted in 1912.
Workers' Compensation is "no fault" in the sense that benefits are paid without regard to who or what caused or
contributed to an injury or illness that "arises out of, or in the course of, employment."
Benefits to the injured employee can include one or more of the following: appropriate medical treatment, partial
replacement of lost income in cases where an employee is unable to work for more than seven days (or death benefits paid
to dependent survivors in the event of a fatal injury or illness), and vocational rehabilitation so the injured worker
can return to gainful employment as quickly as possible.
Unfortunately, a recent Michigan Supreme Court decision on Worker's Compensation benefits now hinders the system that
has been a staple in the labor community for decades and potentially jeopardizes the security of Michigan's workers. The
decision clearly shows the intent of this action is to overturn existing case law and continue to make it more difficult
for injured workers to collect benefits. This activist court has not hesitated to counter the rulings of other courts in
Workers Compensation cases.
The case of Bracket v. Focus: Hope overturned both Court of Appeals and Worker's Compensation Appellate Commission
decisions that entitled the plaintiff, Patricia Brackett, to benefits under the statute. Even though both earlier courts
would have given the worker access to benefits, the Supreme Court ruled Brackett's refusal to attend an employer-mandated
event constitute "intentional and willful misconduct" and subsequently barred her from receiving benefits.
It was ruled prior by the Michigan Court of Appeals and the Worker' Compensation Appellate Commission that Brackett's
misconduct was not the type to bar her from receiving benefits, but that did not detour our Supreme Court's activism.
The court worked hard to find a way to make it more difficult for workers to collect benefits.
Another case in which this cavalier Supreme Court overturned a Court of Appeals decision is Stokes v. Chrysler LLC. In
this case, not only did the conservative Republican majority create new procedures for Workers' Compensation, they also
put at risk the well-being of many union workers. Michigan's Supreme Court has now created many hoops for those workers
to jump through to receive help.
The majority added new requirements in the Stokes case, which are not included in any language or legislation passed by
the Legislature. There is now a heightened evidentiary standard, and the claimant must provide a transferable-skills
analysis to prove a disability. In the transferable-skills analysis, an individual has to disclose any qualifications or
training that could translate to another job. After that is completed, the employer may invalidate the claimant's proof.
The claimant then has the right to move forward with additional evidence to challenge the employer's decision.
The second procedure allows an expert, paid by the employer, to interview the claimant, therefore stripping the
state-appointed magistrate of his or her discretion for discovery under the Worker's Disability Compensation Act.
By writing in these additional tests, this court has made it more difficult for injured workers.
This type of action by this court has occurred all too often. Since the majority of Cliff Taylor, Maura Corrigan, Robert
Young and Stephen Markman was achieved, individuals and workers rarely win in front of this Supreme Court. Corporations
and municipal governments most often do win in this court, and it isn't only worker cases. This court has made decisions
again and again based on protection for companies and nothing for injured workers or disabled consumers. We all have the
risk of being injured at work. We all should be appalled at what appears to be an activist anti-worker attitude by the
majority of the Michigan Supreme Court.
Labor voices Mark Gaffney is president of the Michigan AFL-CIO, a federation of Michigan labor groups.
|
State Supreme Court takes side of employers in Workers' Comp cases.