California Worker's Compensation - Help For Injured California Workers

• California Worker's Compensation - Quick facts about worker's compensation law, benefits and lawyer fees.

• California Worker's Compensation Resources - Links and resources for injured workers.

Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    maria Guest

    Default

    From Hanna's 1-8 CA Law of Employee Injuries & Workers' Comp § 8.09

    The statutory requirements for a recovery from the Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund are as follows:
    (1) The combined disability of the preexisting disability and the disability from the subsequent industrial injury must be 70 percent or more;

    (2) The combined disability of the two injuries must be greater than that of the disability from the subsequent injury alone; and

    (3) One of the following conditions must be met:
    (a) The previous disability or impairment must have affected a hand, leg, arm, foot, or eye; the disability from the subsequent injury must affect the opposite and corresponding member; and the disability from the subsequent industrial accident, when considered alone and without regard to or adjustment for the employee's age or occupation, must be equal to 5 percent or more of the total; or

    (b) The permanent disability resulting from the subsequent industrial injury, when considered alone and without regard to or adjustment for the employee's age or occupation must be equal to 35 percent of more of the total.


    There are no requirements as to the origin of the preexisting disability; it may be congenital, developmental, pathological, or due to either an industrial or nonindustrial accident.

  2. #2
    aaron Guest

    Default

    Thank you soo much Maria. This is at least a tool in the bag of comfort tricks for me.

  3. #3
    pt Guest

    Default

    Hi Maria,

    In light of California's current WC legislation, in combination with ACOEM and UR guidelines - I am highly concerned about an otherwise medically, qualified IW being able to realize their potential Rights to the SIF. When pursued, this may well prove itself to become simply one more IW hurdle, weighed down with an ever too predictable, interpretative barrage of WC "garbage."

    I invite any/all opinions or advice, regarding the above.... observation.


    Regards,

    PT

  4. #4
    maria Guest

    Default

    I do not see how Utilization Review or ACOEM guidelines affect the right to benefits under the subsequent injury funds. SIF applies to permanent disability payments only.

  5. #5
    pt Guest

    Default

    Technically speaking, no they do not.

    Pathology vrs. disability issues and how the Courts will interpret "approximate percentage" in the new LC 4663 should; however, be quite interesting.

    It's my understanding that the SIF is understaffed and underfunded, already. Perhaps some of those 5814 penalties will go to towards building it back up. This, of course will be at the sole discretion of the IC's, won't it ?

    Apportionment issues in this new legislation, may eventually reveal itself to be a real bear.

    Thanks for the input.

  6. #6
    hobson Guest

    Default

    They already are. My Attorney has told me that The California Applicant Attorney Association is going to file a major lawsuit, within the next few months.

    It will address Due Process, and very likely the Apportionment issues. How will an IW ever be able to qualify for the SIF, if it's only the insurance company doctors controlling the ratings? They were handed that control on a silver platter with the passage of SB 899. No secret to anyone.

  7. #7
    aaron Guest

    Default

    This new round of laws seems to have completely confused- or at least placed a weariness around the state. I am a IW that has no education in the legal world, I have been trying to educate myself, out of self preservation. I admittingly went to the State web page and read both versions of sb899 that were posted. with no legal backround it was very unhelpfull at best. I am very comforted in the fact that I decided to get a pro involved. My hat is off to the pro's working for the IWs. I can't say enough for this forum either. Even though we will always get a slight conflict of oppinion between people, there is still a great deal of info floating throughout. Thank you for the insight on both sides.

Similar Threads

  1. Subsequent Injuries Fund
    By mike in forum California
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-09-2011, 06:04 PM
  2. Subsequent Injuries Benefit Trust Fund (SIBTF)
    By peevee in forum California
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-28-2010, 07:34 PM
  3. Subsequent Injuries, Not at Work
    By AliBoBali in forum Tennessee
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-25-2009, 07:19 PM
  4. Subsequent Injury Fund Claims
    By kathyb in forum Maryland
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-09-2006, 05:01 PM
  5. Subsequent Injury Trust Fund and Settlement
    By akgner in forum Georgia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-01-2005, 09:02 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 


Find a Lawyer