A report from the Center for Justice & Democracy, a private consumer rights advocacy group, suggests that Georgia offers less that adequate protection for injured workers with its workers’ compensation laws. Among the findings:
- lost wage benefits for injured workers are among the lowest in the nation. In Georgia, an injured workers is paid 66% of his average weekly wage with a maximum payment of $450 per week. Most states pay 75% to 100% of the average weekly wage with no cap at all.
- except in certain catastrophic cases, injured workers in Georgia may only collect lost wage benefits for 400 week (7 1/2 years). Most State have no benefit term cap. From the perspective of a workers’ compensation lawyer, this limitation on the total amount of lost wage benefits is reduces the insurer’s exposure and therefore reduces an injured workers’ negotiation power for settlement purposes.
- lobbyists for business and insurance interests are actively lobbying to get rid of the “catastrophic” designation and therefore apply a 400 week cap on wage benefits in all cases. A worker who ends up in a wheelchair unable to move, therefore, would only be entitled to less than 8 years of wage benefits with no chance of recovering a monetary settlement sufficient to care for his lifetime needs
- the Georgia legislature has been eroding the “no fault” nature of Georgia’s workers’ compensation laws. Insurers can deny benefits by claiming that an employee did not follow procedures or if an employment application was not filled out completely. Insurers can deny benefits if a worker is hurt on a break or by claiming that he is not performing work within the scope of his employment. These eligibility issues are similar to the issues that arise in negligence civil litigation such as car accidents or malpractice, except that in a workers compensation setting the injured worker cannot recover pain and suffering damages. Typical workers’ compensation settlements, therefore, are significantly lower than a negligence settlement would have been for the same type of injury.
Filed under Georgia Workers' Compensation, Understanding the Law by 
One of the hurdles we face in our practice is a strategy used by defense lawyers called the “Rycroft defense.” The Rycroft defense takes its name from the case of Georgia Electric Company vs. Rycroft and involved a situation where John Rycroft injured his back on the on the job in 1984. He underwent two lumbar surgeries, a diskectomy and a bilateral fusion at L4/5 and L5/S1. Mr. Rycroft injured his back a second time in 1986 but did not pursue a workers’ compensation claim.
John Rycroft began working for Georgia Electric Company in July, 1986. According to the Georgia Supreme Court decision, Rycroft failed to reveal his prior employment and he checked a box stating that he had never had back problems. He answered a question about prior hospitalizations by stating that he had broken a finger – no mention was made of the prior back surgeries. He denied any back problem during an interview. When he first reported for work, his supervisor asked him about his prior employment and any prior injuries and Rycroft did not reveal his prior injuries.
On August 19, 1986, Rycroft fell at work and fractured his lower spine at the spot where he had previously underwent surgery for a fusion. During the course of processing the workers’ compensation claim, Rycroft admitted that he had lied on his job application and verbally, but stated that he felt he could do the work and that he was afraid that he would not have been hired if he had been truthful.
The owner of Georgia Electric testified that Rycroft would not have been hired if Georgia Electric had known about his prior back problems.
The State Board of Workers’ Compensation granted his claim for benefits. Georgia Electric appealed, but was turned down by both the full Board and the Superior Court.
The Georgia Supreme Court, however, reversed and held that Rycroft was not eligible for benefits. The factors identified by the Supreme Court are as follows:
- was there a false statement in an employment application?
- did the employee knowingly and willingly make the false statement about his physical condition?
- did the employer rely on the false statement and was such reliance a substantial factor in the hiring?
- is there a causal connection between the false representation and the current injury?
You can be sure that if you are injured on the job, your employer will carefully review your job application and your pre-employment physical report, if one was taken.
Note that nothing in the law requires you to volunteer information that was not asked. Similarly, the Americans With Disabilities Act limits what employers can ask. However, if you leave out as much relevant information as Rycroft, you are going to have problems with a workers’ compensation claim.
[tags] Rycroft defense, Georgia Electric Co. v. Rycroft, Georgia workers’ compensation, defense to Georgia workers’ comp claim [/tags]
Filed under Georgia Workers' Compensation by
