Hello There, Guest! Login Register
Index    |     Search    |     Members    |     Help

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
stress claim Hawaii
#1
WELCOME TO CRAZY LAND! I have a stress injury claim in which ins. co. voluntarily accepted compensability after IME evaluation. This injury was caused by harrassment by my direct supervisor. IME put 3 permanent psychological restrictions in place 1. I be returned to my usual and customary position 2. I not be supervised by that supervisor 3. I have no unwitnessed contact with that supervisor. Employer refused to comply with restrictions-tried to put me in clerical postion,(I am trained in specialized medical field) then threatened to terminate. I went to usual position and was forced not only to work DIRECTLY with her but also redo entire department orientation and repeat of skills WITH HER!! Employer refused to acknowledge ANY contact restrictions and basically acted as if there was never any problem. I tolerated this for 3 months and CRACKED!! Went out on own time, not WC as I was exhausted over ordeal. Employer still refusing to abide by IME restrictions, ins co says they have no control over this. Q. What can I do? Did I mention this has been going on 3 years?!!!!! Q. Doesn't employer have to comply with ins co IME? Thank you in advance
 
Reply
#2
Answer to your question is NO....

An IME is a doctor paid by the employer's Insurance as to only give a Medical Opinion not to treat. meaning The insurance carrier can not force employer to do anything. Nor does the Insurance have to agree with the IME, but, you don't need to agree with the IME neither.

Next, employer did comply, by offering you a different job. Since you went back to same position, it will then be said it was you that did not comply.

Restrictions are based on what your treating doctor outlines, not what an IME outlines. You should have your treating doctor outline restrictions aslo, and go from there.

Look at IME report. It is mostly stated right at the start of the report, that such doctor is only offering a Medical Opinion. That is only that an Opinion, nothing more, nothing less. The IME report never states it's facts.
Reply's are intended solely for informational purposes. They are based on personal opinions, experience, or research and are "not to be taken as fact or legal advice", otherwise, always consult an attorney or a doctor.
 
Reply
#3
Bad Boy Bad Boy Wrote:Answer to your question is NO....

An IME is a doctor paid by the employer's Insurance as to only give a Medical Opinion not to treat. meaning The insurance carrier can not force employer to do anything. Nor does the Insurance have to agree with the IME, but, you don't need to agree with the IME neither.

Next, employer did comply, by offering you a different job. Since you went back to same position, it will then be said it was you that did not comply.

Restrictions are based on what your treating doctor outlines, not what an IME outlines. You should have your treating doctor outline restrictions aslo, and go from there.

Look at IME report. It is mostly stated right at the start of the report, that such doctor is only offering a Medical Opinion. That is only that an Opinion, nothing more, nothing less. The IME report never states it's facts.
 
Reply
#4
Lydia Wrote:
Bad Boy Bad Boy Wrote:Answer to your question is NO....

An IME is a doctor paid by the employer's Insurance as to only give a Medical Opinion not to treat. meaning The insurance carrier can not force employer to do anything. Nor does the Insurance have to agree with the IME, but, you don't need to agree with the IME neither.

Next, employer did comply, by offering you a different job. Since you went back to same position, it will then be said it was you that did not comply.

Restrictions are based on what your treating doctor outlines, not what an IME outlines. You should have your treating doctor outline restrictions aslo, and go from there.

Look at IME report. It is mostly stated right at the start of the report, that such doctor is only offering a Medical Opinion. That is only that an Opinion, nothing more, nothing less. The IME report never states it's facts.

THANK YOU Bad Boy!
My treating physician has agreed with IME and stated I should only return to "usual and customary" position (as well as other 2 restrictions listed above). Job offered by employer was not my usual position. Only due to the threat of termination did I go back to regular position, I think I see what it is you are saying....An employer doesn't have to abide by medical restrictions put into place their IME opinion, but, shouldn't they have to abide by my treating physician?! Mine is just agreeing with theirs!!!
 
Reply
#5
What I am saying is the employer offered another position. That means offering you a job, to meet your restrictions. It doesn't have to be your "usual and customary" position. All the employer had to do is offer you work, in an attempt to meet your restrictions. They mostly did, by the job offer.

So why was this job offer not taken?

If you declined the new job offer, and said you go back to your old position, then it's not the employers fault anymore.

Their not going to fire the Supervisor to keep you, as they are showing that to you.
Reply's are intended solely for informational purposes. They are based on personal opinions, experience, or research and are "not to be taken as fact or legal advice", otherwise, always consult an attorney or a doctor.
 
Reply
#6
Bad Boy Bad Boy Wrote:What I am saying is the employer offered another position. That means offering you a job, to meet your restrictions. It doesn't have to be your "usual and customary" position. All the employer had to do is offer you work, in an attempt to meet your restrictions. They mostly did, by the job offer.

So why was this job offer not taken?

If you declined the new job offer, and said you go back to your old position, then it's not the employers fault anymore.

Their not going to fire the Supervisor to keep you, as they are showing that to you.

Thank you again Bad Boy! The reason I did not take the job offer was because of the IME 1st restriction, that I "be returned to usual and customary position". The job they offered me was a no experience required clerical position whereas my job was in a specialized trained medical field (not to mention the substantial pay cut that I would incure). It is my belief that the IME did that intentionally-he told me at the end of the interview that he "did not know what they were going to do with me after they got his report but it was definitely an employer liability". So after IME report and voluntary acceptance of liability both myself and treating MD thought the employer would need to comply and perhaps schedule me a different shift? Bottom line was my MD was sticking to the 1st restriction saying this job offer did not comply with the restriction as it was not my usual and customary position. Anyway all this was new to me as I have never been involved or known anyone to have been involved in a WC case....I figured it was up to employer to abide by restrictions and make it right. I have learned that the world does not work that way....Sad but true. By the way, I work in a VERY small community hospital and this kind of thing where they are moving you to a position which clearly is not what you "do" makes for wildfire gossip, as if I did something wrong and was demoted.....
 
Reply
#7
Okay, once again, the IME doesn't make employer choices.

All the employer has to do is try to make those restrictions work for the employer. They did, offered you work, different position, get you away from the surpervisor. They did their job.

Job type doesn't matter, if co-workers talk, they talk. That is life. Job offered was made to what employer thought is best. I think it was a good employer move. If you make less, then the employer's Insurance has to make up 66 2/3 of lost wages. That's how it works.

You don't have all these rights you think you got when on work comp. It's just not like what we want anymore. We have 2 bosses when injured. An employer, and their Insurance.

If your back to your old position, how did that ever happen? I am surprised the employer allowed that?

EXAMPLE] Employer could have said your working in Laundry counting towels. Experience not required. See experience required isn't what they employer has to go by now. It's restrictions.
Reply's are intended solely for informational purposes. They are based on personal opinions, experience, or research and are "not to be taken as fact or legal advice", otherwise, always consult an attorney or a doctor.
 
Reply
#8
Bad Boy Bad Boy Wrote:Okay, once again, the IME doesn't make employer choices.

All the employer has to do is try to make those restrictions work for the employer. They did, offered you work, different position, get you away from the surpervisor. They did their job.

Job type doesn't matter, if co-workers talk, they talk. That is life. Job offered was made to what employer thought is best. I think it was a good employer move. If you make less, then the employer's Insurance has to make up 66 2/3 of lost wages. That's how it works.

You don't have all these rights you think you got when on work comp. It's just not like what we want anymore. We have 2 bosses when injured. An employer, and their Insurance.

If your back to your old position, how did that ever happen? I am surprised the employer allowed that?

EXAMPLE] Employer could have said your working in Laundry counting towels. Experience not required. See experience required isn't what they employer has to go by now. It's restrictions.

Thanks Bad Boy! Not back to work, employer will not address situation with supervisor. If I go back I have to work with her as if nothing happened. Have tried to negotiate schedule where I would not work with her and they will not comply. My treating physician did let me go back last summer and I lasted about 3 months, supervisor was doing same things, just more on the sly. I cracked and almost suffered a full blown nervous breakdown so I went out on my own time, not WC. I could not handle trying to jump through those hoops again at that time. So here we are, I just filed a NEW claim, with the injury suffered after attempting to go back last summer. We are currently trying to negotiate a complete separation from employer which would include dropping the claim I just filed as well as release them from further liability from original injury. The sum they are offering will at least allow me to recoop part of my savings I have been living off of since out of work....However they want me to agree to NEVER seek re-employment with them or any of their facilities in the state. I say I will not seek re-employment while supervisor is still employeed there. She is very close to retirement and I am young and own a house so it is difficult for me to say NEVER, even though there is no love loss....down the road it may be a financial necessity. Besides, there are not people in my field readily available out here and if there is a need down the road for someone in my field, it would be against public policy not to employee me. FYI I did not seek them out for employment initially, they contacted me at my former employer and recruited me to work for them. This whole thing has stemmed from such immature junior high antics with a co-worker, turned supervisor, with a chip on her shoulder. Unbelievable! I do know that there is worse in life, I was just naive and thought the right thing would be done after compensability was accepted......I appreciate your "smarts"!!
 
Reply
#9
Your welcome. But, please, I was just trying to show you examples of employers rights as to what they can legally do is all. I too am a injured worker. It's hard as we think one way, and we get another. Then we start to learn our rights, but we forget to learn the employers rights. And that is where everthing needs said like here. We need to look at all parties rights. We always as injured workers then find we get what is left over though. work comp isn't something we want to live for life, trust me.
Reply's are intended solely for informational purposes. They are based on personal opinions, experience, or research and are "not to be taken as fact or legal advice", otherwise, always consult an attorney or a doctor.
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Question Workman’s comp laws in Hawaii Me in Hawaii 1 591 10-26-2019, 11:26 AM
Last Post: 1171
  Califoria stress claims CaseyandMarie 28 19,361 01-14-2016, 03:31 PM
Last Post: BB019
  Should I file A Stress Claim? workmanscompquestions 9 9,919 02-25-2015, 01:35 AM
Last Post: California_Help
  Stress Claim - Northern California 052614 1 3,922 06-10-2014, 11:49 AM
Last Post: 1171
  Will I jeopardize my workers compensation claim if I file a personal injury claim for wanttowork 3 17,482 03-27-2011, 02:07 AM
Last Post: 1171
  Everybody Loves Stress...Help in California JCHoyle 7 9,685 10-20-2010, 01:13 PM
Last Post: injuredinil2
  Stress and Health Claim?? Caligirl1276 2 5,391 08-13-2010, 05:14 PM
Last Post: Bad Boy Bad Boy
  stress and anxiety in california meyea 20 35,521 07-21-2010, 05:09 PM
Last Post: Bad Boy Bad Boy
  Does stress leave have to be a workman's comp claim? ConfusedInCalifornia 5 17,453 06-14-2010, 06:29 PM
Last Post: 1171
  stress leavc lynnsimons3 1 3,708 10-30-2009, 12:52 AM
Last Post: 1171

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)