Over eight years ago, my colleague Julie Ferguson blogged on the issue of workplace heart attacks: compensable or not? (Workers Comp Insider just passed its ninth birthday, but we’ve been too busy to celebrate.) Heart attacks present a unique challenge to the courts overseeing workers comp. The general standard requires that something unusually stressful happened at work in the moments leading up to the incident; if people are doing their usual work in the usual manner, the heart attack does not arise “out of” employment. If, on the other hand, the demands of work are unusually stressful and beyond the ordinary, the incident might well be compensable.
Today’s case raises the isse of whether anything that happens on Super Bowl Sunday can be ordinary. Colleen Robert’s husband (no first name given in the court documents) normally worked as a receiver for Waldbaum’s Supermarkets in New York. While the 2010 superbowl did not involve any New York teams – the contest featured the Indianapolis Colts versus the New Orleans Saints – Super Bowl Sundays are always busy for super markets. Roberts was asked to manage the store during the unusually busy day. At one point, he engaged in a verbal altercation with a customer (which in itself may not be unusual for those working in New York). Later that same day, while still at work, Roberts suffered a myocardial infarction and died.
The case was first deemed compensable, then denied by an administrative law judge, and then finally adjudicated by the Appelate Division of the New York Supreme Court. The judges noted that any death at work is presumed to be work related, but they also looked for a causal connection between the fatal attack and the work being performed. The autopsy revealed that Roberts suffered from extensive cardiovascular disease and thus was a good candidate for a myocardial infarction. In arguing against compensability, the defense pointed to the lapse of time between the verbal altercation with a customer and the attack itself. However, the judges noted that the entire day was full of stress and excitement for Roberts, who was not performing his usual job in the usual manner. They determined that the fatal heart attack was compensable.
Best Practices
In a similar case involving a supermarket in Massachusetts, a 70 year-old man with a pacemaker collapsed and died on his break. Because he had a known heart condition, and because of his age, the market assumed the fatality was not work related and failed to report it to their insurer. Months later, the widow filed for comp benefits. Due to the absence of timely interviews with co-workers and supervisors, and due to the “death at work” presumption, the case was deemed compensable.
The lesson for employers is both simple and straight-forward: report any and all incidents of heart problems immediately. Regardless of the state jurisdiction, the courts are likely to apply the same standards as in New York. And if a heart attack occurs on Super Bowl Sunday, defense may have a tough time proving it was just another working day.
Posts Tagged ‘heart attacks’
Annals of Compensability: Heart Attacks at Work
Monday, October 1st, 2012Annals of Compensability: Sedentary Worker in the Garden
Wednesday, July 11th, 2012Barton Rodr was a computer programmer for Yzer Inc, DBA Funnel Design Group in Oklahoma. When the yard crew taking care of Yzer’s property quit, the company asked for volunteers and Rodr stepped forward. He and his son mowed the lawn and manicured the yard on successive Saturdays, in preparation for the festivities at Automobile Alley, the historic district of downtown Oklahoma City. Barton, a salaried employee, was not paid for the work; his son received $40.
On July 18, 2009, Rodr was putting away the lawn mower when he suffered a heart attack. He was 36 at the time. A workers comp judge awarded him benefits, determining that the injury occurred in the course and scope of employment. A three-judge panel affirmed, but the OK Court of Civil Appeals reversed, opining that Rodr’s lawn work bore no relation to his primary job as a programmer.
The OK Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Rodr. Despite his performing volunteer work out of class and on the weekend, he was still an employee of Yzer, as the yard work met the primary test of employment: it furthered the interests of his employer.
In its defense, the company pointed out that the heart attack was caused by a pre-existing conditon: Rodr was overweight, a smoker, with a family history of heart problems. From the perspective of (very distant) consultants, we are tempted to ask: why did the company allow this employee to volunteer? Despite his relatively young age, he worked at a sedentary job and displayed risk factors that precluded his doing physical work. Speaking as a weekend mower, I can certify that the task is strenuous and noisy (less so for my neighbor who sits calmly on his riding mower, listening to music through noise-canceling headphones).
Volunteer vs. Employee
The court has ruled that an employee who volunteers is not a “volunteer.” OK law defines a volunteer as “any other person providing or performing voluntary service who receives no wages for the services other than meals, …therapy…or reimbursement for incidental expenses.” An employee is not “any other person.”
This is no small matter, for Rodr or for Yzer’s workers comp insurer. The unfortunate Rodr is permanently and totally disabled. He is unlikely to work again. He is currently surviving on a mechanical heart and will need a transplant soon. Given Rodr’s age and medical expenses of significant magnitude, this claim is likely to reach seven figures.
The lesson for employers is clear: saving a few bucks on physically demanding jobs is not worth the risk. An overweight smoker with a family history of heart problems does not belong within ten feet of a lawnmower. When your lawn crew quits, just go find another one.
Thanks to WorkCompCentral (subscription required) for the heads up on this case.
Heart attacks, vehicle accidents leading cause of firefighter deaths in 2007
Wednesday, August 13th, 2008In a recently issued study entitled On-Duty Firefighter Fatalities in the United States in 2007 (3.0 mb PDF), the United States Fire Administration (USFA) reported that there were 115 on-duty firefighter fatalities in the United States in 2007. This was an 11% increase from the 106 fatalities in 2006. As in prior years, heart attacks were the most frequent cause of death, accounting for about 45% of the fatalities. Vehicle-related incidents were the second highest cause of death, accounting for 27 fatalities. Firefighters lives were lost in 33 states and Washington, DC. South Carolina experienced the highest number of fatalities (11) while Pennsylvania, New York, North Carolina, and California each suffered more than 5 on-duty losses. Some other key statistics in the report include:
- 68 volunteer firefighters and 50 career firefighters died while on duty
- There were 7 firefighter fatality incidents where 2 or more firefighters were killed, claiming a total of 21 firefighters’ lives
- 11 firefighters were killed during activities involving brush, grass, or wildland firefighting, the lowest in over a decade
- Activities related to emergency incidents resulted in the deaths of 76 firefighters
- 38 firefighters died while engaging in activities at the scene of a fire
- 26 firefighters died while responding to or returning from emergency incidents
- 11 firefighters died while they were engaged in training activities
- 15 firefighters died after the conclusion of their on-duty activity
- Heart attacks were the most frequent cause of death for 2007, with 52 firefighter deaths
- 27 firefighters were killed as a result of vehicle crashes
One of the objectives of the report is to analyze the circumstances surrounding the fatalities. This is intended to help identify approaches that could reduce the number of firefighter deaths in future years.
Additional resources
An abbreviated summary of the 2007 fatality report is also available.
Recognizing the need to do more to prevent line-of-duty deaths and injuries, the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation launched a national initiative to bring prevention to the forefront. Everyone Goes Home offers online resources, tool boxes, a learning center, and a calendar of various life-safety initiatives and activities.
Firefighter Fatality Retrospective Study 1990-2000 (PDF)
Annual Firefighter Fatality Reports
Heart attacks on the job: are they covered by workers compensation?
Tuesday, June 1st, 2004Lately, we’ve had several visitors to the site searching for information about heart attacks. We take that to mean that people are trying to determine whether a heart attack that occurs in the workplace is a compensable event. Not everything that occurs in the workplace is deemed compensable and that is particularly true of illnesses. Generally, a heart attack in and of itself would not be a compensable event. The acid test for compensability would revolve around whether it can be determined that the heart attack is an event that has arisen out of and in the course of employment.
First, as with anything related to workers comp, your state law will prevail. Because workers comp legislation varies by state, there is no universal dictate that would apply nationally so we are speaking in generalities here. Heart attacks and strokes can be complex issues and may require legal consultation.
“Arising out of employment” means that a heart attack would have to be job related, or in other words, did the heart attack happen because of the work? Was there a causal connection? “In the course and scope of employment” generally would have to do with the time, place, and surrounding events.
Illnesses and conditions are often progressive in nature, and they may be due to other or unknown causes, such as family history, obesity, smoking, etc. It would be up to the worker to prove that the heart attack was related to or caused – at least in part – by the work. Were there precipitating work factors, such as unusual physical exertion or mental stress? Also, in any discussion of heart attacks, the issue of pre-existing conditions often comes into play. While pre-existing conditions would generally not be compensable, they would also not necessarily be a bar to compensability. If it can be shown that the work aggravated or accelerated a pre-existing condition, compensability may be granted.
