The status of the law regarding the various provisions of Section 306(a.2) of the Workers’ Compensation Act dealing with Impairment Rating Evaluations, or IREs, continues to be in flux. The IRE, which is supposed to determine the percentage of “permanent impairment” an injured worker retains upon that individual’s receipt of 104 weeks of total disability benefits, remains the topic of a tremendous amount of litigation.
The latest case with significant implications for injured workers comes from the Commonwealth Court. While most of the broad-reaching case law on IREs has dealt with the timeliness of an employer’s request for an IRE, Johnson v. W.C.A.B. (Sealy Components Group) speaks to the appropriate time for a claimant to challenge an IRE with a review petition.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
