Industrial Cancers in California's Workers' Compensation System: Evidence on Earnings Losses and Disability Benefits

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Dworsky ◽  
Carolyn Rutter
1986 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 273-303
Author(s):  
Jordan Yospe

AbstractUnder most workers' compensation statutes, an injury must “arise out of” and “in the course of” employment in order to qualify as a compensable disability. In U.S. Industries v. Director, the Supreme Court held that the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act must be strictly construed to avoid transforming the compensation system into a form of social insurance. In U.S. Industries, the Court denied a disability claim based on an arthritic condition which was manifested while the worker was at home in bed. This Note contends that the Supreme Court neglected to consider pertinent medical realities when analyzing the causation question. Thus, the decision undermines the overall rationale behind workers' compensation legislation. Nonetheless, the Note argues that the case does not relax the requirement of adequately scrutinizing the causative elements underlying any reasonable claim for disability benefits. An analysis adequately accommodating both medical and legal facts, instead of relying upon the vagaries of statutory interpretation, is necessary to improve the efficiency and fairness of workers' compensation disability determinations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 12-15
Author(s):  
Steven D. Feinberg

Abstract This article describes special aspects of addressing and defining substantial medical evidence, causation, and apportionment in the California Workers' Compensation system. Substantial medical evidence is framed in terms of reasonable medical probability, and the opinion must be based on fact and not be speculative. The issue of whether the injury occurred in the course of employment is left to the Trier of Fact (WCAB judge). The issue of arising out of employment is a medical issue left to the physician. Apportionment applies to both the industrial and nonindustrial cause of the disability.


Author(s):  
Syed S. Islam ◽  
Athmaram M. Nambiar ◽  
Edward J. Doyle ◽  
Angela M. Velilla ◽  
Radha S. Biswas ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jonathan D. Karmel

Chapter Six asks whether we have done everything possible to keep Americans safe at work. The answers to that question are a discussion of common sense reforms that if implemented will make Americans safer at work. But, anticipating the anti-regulatory arguments from self-described free marketers, Chapter Six first rebuts these arguments championed by conservative think tanks like the Cato Institute and the Mercatus Center, and funded by Charles and David Koch, among others.Thereafter, Chapter Six discusses how reforming the workers compensation system, enhancing the penalties and criminal provisions in the OSHAct, criminally prosecuting employers like Don Blankenship, regulatory reform and more local worker safety laws will help keep Americans safer at work.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document