We granted a discretionary application in this workers’ compensation case in order to address the correct method of calculating temporary partial disability benefits under OCGA § 34-9-262 and Rules and Regulations of the State Board of Workers’ Compensation, Rule 262 a. This involves determining an amount which is two-thirds of the difference between the employee’s average weekly wage prior to injury and “the average weekly wage the employee is able to earn thereafter. . .” Id. We must consider whether the statutory phrase “able to earn” refers only to the employee’s gross salary after the injury, or whether the post-injury wage may be adjusted by adding an amount to represent available post-injury work time which the employee missed for reasons unrelated to the employee’s compensable work injury. We conclude that the employer should have been allowed to present evidence of the employee’s refusal of available post-injury work and that the Board erred in declining to consider this evidence. We therefore reverse. Claimant Judy D. Shaw sustained a series of cumulative trauma injuries to her hands and arms. The injuries arose out of and in the course of her employment with an original date of accident of November 5, 1998. She underwent multiple surgeries and was placed on work restrictions following each procedure. During some of the time that Shaw was working a light duty job, she earned less money than her pre-injury average weekly wage. The issue as to the correct method of calculating temporary partial disability benefits arose from these periods of light duty employment. The employer, Shaw Industries, Inc., calculated an amount of benefits due and tendered a payment.1 Claimant Shaw challenged the method of calculation used by the employer and maintained that additional benefits were due.
The parties stipulated before an administrative law judge as to Shaw’s pre-injury average weekly wage. The employer’s claims adjuster explained that the employer’s upward adjustment of Shaw’s post-injury gross pay was to account for time missed from work for reasons unrelated to her compensable injury. In determining temporary partial disability benefits, the employer used the amounts resulting from its upward adjustments to the post-injury wages rather than the actual post-injury wages. Since the employer’s method of computation reduced the gap between the pre-injury and post-injury wages, Shaw’s benefits were reduced. Shaw maintained that this adjustment was improper and contrary to the holding in West Point Pepperell v. Green , 148 Ga. App. 625 252 SE2d 55 1979.