Delay in Mailing Means Change in Imputed Earning Capacity for Maine Corrections Officer

Case File

Because an ALJ's decision imputing earning capacity based on the state's minimum wage in 2023 didn't get sent to the parties until 2024, the Appellate Division determined that a revision was due to update the amount to the 2024 minimum wage. Simply Research subscribers have access to the full text of the decision.

Case

Soucy v. County of Penobscot, No. 24-0006 (Me. W.C.B. App. Div. 10/28/25)

What Happened?

An 80-year-old Maine county corrections officer sustained a work-related injury to his left hip due to a violent confrontation with an inmate. He continued to work until he underwent a series of surgeries that culminated in a hip replacement.

The county paid lost wage benefits without prejudice.

Later, a conflict arose regarding whether the officer was capable of returning to work, and he filed a Petition of Award. In hearings, the officer testified that he experienced daily pain and had difficulty performing activities of daily living, including walking.

Ultimately, an administrative law judge found that the officer could work full time and earn Maine's minimum wage, which, at the time, was $13.80 per hour.

The county filed a Motion for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, arguing that the officer's imputed earnings should be based on the 2024 state minimum wage of $14.15 per hour because the decision was not mailed to the parties until January of the year (although the decree was written on Sept. 18, 2023).

The ALJ granted the motion and an amended decree but did not alter the outcome of the case.

The county appealed to the Appellate Division, contending that the ALJ should have based the officer's post-injury earning capacity on the 2024 minimum wage instead of the lower 2023 number.

Rule of Law

Caselaw involving an employer's Petition for Award (unlike the situation in the case, which involved an employee's petition) indicated that determining an employee's earning capacity is a case-specific inquiry and that a statutory change in the minimum wage, by itself, does not automatically constitute a change in an individual employee's economic circumstances because it "assumes the availability of theoretical opportunities to earn without evidence of actual ones." See Carver v. Walmart, No. 21-30 (Me. W.C.B. App. Div. 2021).

What the Appellate Division Said

Because this case involved an employee's rather than an employer's petition, the Appellate Division distinguished the officer's case from Carver and concluded that the 2023 minimum wage did not provide a reasonable basis on which to impute earnings, since a higher wage was in effect at the time the decree was issued.

Thus, the Appellate division modified the decision to provide that the officer had the ability to earn the 2024 state minimum wage of $14.15.

Overpayment?

The county also argued that it was entitled to reimbursement for an alleged overpayment of incapacity benefits resulting from the delayed mailing. According to the court, because Maine's Workers' Compensation Act did not provide for recoupment of payments due to an inadvertent delay in issuing a decree, the county had no remedy to seek reimbursement.

Verdict: The Appellate Division modified the ALJ's decision to impute the employee's earning capacity based on the 2024 minimum wage.

Takeaway

A delay in mailing a decree in Maine may support a change in an employee's earning capacity where minimum wage changes from one year to the next.

Share This Article: