One basis employers have to seek a suspension of an injured worker’s weekly compensation benefits is the claimant’s voluntary withdrawal from the labor market. In other words, retirement. Last month, the state Supreme Court weighed in on the issue in its decision in City of Pittsburgh v. WCAB (Robinson), speaking to whether taking a pension creates a presumption of retirement. The case had been decided in 2010 by the Commonwealth Court.
It stands to reason that if an individual were to retire, he or she would no longer be earning an income. Consequently, any lost wages realized upon retirement are immediately attributable to the removal of the individual from the workforce. In the case of an injured worker who retires, the work-related disability is no longer viewed as the primary reason for the wage loss. The problem for the insurance company has always been getting an injured worker to admit to a retirement. Most injured workers, regardless of age, will insist that they would have worked at least another 30 years were it not for the work-related disability.
This content has been archived.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]
