132a Petition (California) (California)

Post your questions here, get professional advise. DO NOT post experiences, rants, raves, diatribe or anything other than a direct legal or medical question. Any deviation from this specific forum category WILL be deleted without further warning.

132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby socalinjured on Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:46 am

Once they have been served, how long does the employer have to respond to a 132a petition from the injured workers counsel?
socalinjured
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:38 am

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby rosellavera on Mon Mar 16, 2009 12:16 pm

File an Application for Adjudication of Claim form. Under Other type ...L.C. 132(a). When you are ready to adjudicate all issues, file a DOR, and don't forget to type LC 132(a) under "other".

" An Answer to each Application for Adjudication shall be filed and served ten (10) days after service of the Declaration of Readiness to Proceed required by rule 10414 or 10415."


Play it safe and have the employer personally served with your petition.

Rose
User avatar
rosellavera
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby socalinjured on Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:09 pm

Thanks for the info Rose.
Apparently, counsel for the defense is sending a letter of appeal to my counsel.
Why does it seem the defense has more "pull" than the injured worker?
Is this standard procedure? Or should I be re-evaluating my counsels interest in my case coming to a expedited solution?
socalinjured
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:38 am

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby rosellavera on Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:44 pm

In my experience the DA usually does not get involved with the 132(a) petition because there could be a potential conflict of interest. Some employers are not even aware that there is a 132(a) petition filed against them, even though the IC is obligated to inform it. Ask your AA for a copy of the petition. Then send a copy to your ER. Never mind the letter of appeal. If the Board has not adjudicated the issue the letter of appeal means nothing. It may be that it is an informal answer to your petition.
User avatar
rosellavera
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby socalinjured on Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:25 pm

Once again,
Thank you Rose.
This has been such an arduous process; it seems there is no end in sight...I just want to go back to work. The att for my employer is fighting me at every turn.
I will let you know how it goes.
socalinjured
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:38 am

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby gaiassoul1@yahoo.com on Mon Mar 16, 2009 7:34 pm

If you want a snowball's chance of going back to work for this employer, withdraw the 132(a) petition unless you work for a state,country or other governmental agency or in a stong union shop.

No worker's comp judge is required to order reinstaement and very few 132(a) actions pay any big money....this is a generality with the above noted exceptions.
gaiassoul1@yahoo.com
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 10:06 am

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby rosellavera on Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:43 pm

I'm no expert on LC 132(a), but if you can show that you were singled out for disadvantageous treatment because of your injury you may be entitled to back pay, reinstatement, and a $10,000 penalty. I can't say this is worth it or not, only you can make this decision. If you do prevail, you will return to work with this ER.
User avatar
rosellavera
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby stevepsca on Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:01 am

Regardless of what you might be entitled to IF you prevail, this would probably not get to trial... the ER/DA will no doubt offer a C&R to the 132a action, with the stipulation you resign....including a non-disclosure statement.

The potential litigation costs of a 132a, which are bourne by ER outweigh whatever amount a C&R could cost.
stevepsca
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:50 am

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby socalinjured on Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:04 am

My employers legal counsel keeps saying he's advising his client not to let me back to work for fear I will hurt myself again.
I have three doctors (two of which are AME's) that say I can return to my previous position with restrictions. No one has ever heard of the employer NOT letting someone come back on modified duty. Thus the reason for the 132a.
socalinjured
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:38 am

Re: 132a Petition (California) (California)

Postby stevepsca on Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:52 am

Your basis for the 132a...'discrimination', is due to your ER not providing employment per your restrictions.?

I don't believe that would fly... the ER is under no mandate to provide 'light duty', or any other kind of job. There are requirements under the labor code regarding a valid job offer within 60 days of your becoming MMI...IF the ER can make the 'reasonable acommodation'... that does not include making or creating a job for you that did not previously exsist.
And, depending on your restrictions, it may be very easy to determine the ER was not able to offer the acommodation...in which case you could be eligible for the 15% increase in your PD indemnity...
(2) If, within 60 days of a disability becoming permanent and
stationary, an employer does not offer the injured employee regular
work, modified work, or alternative work, in the form and manner
prescribed by the administrative director, for a period of at least
12 months, each disability payment remaining to be paid to the
injured employee from the date of the end of the 60-day period shall
be paid in accordance with paragraph (1) and increased by 15 percent.
This paragraph shall not apply to an employer that employs fewer
than 50 employees.
You'll have to determine the eligibility here based on the facts surrounding your claim. If you go here...
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displ ... =4650-4664 and read section 4658.1, there is a description of the qualifying work that can be offered.

Because the ER cannot make the job offer and 'reasonable acommodation' for your RTW... IMHO< is not grounds for a discrimination action under section 132a.

You may have rights under the ADA/EEOC/FEHA rules however IF there can be shown discrimination due to a disability, or perceived disability... you can find information on filing a claim with ADA here...http://www.eeoc.gov/charge/overview_charge_filing.html

And here is information for ER's on Returning Injured Workers to Work, While Complying with ADA/FEHA Rules...http://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/educonf14/ADA ... HA_RTW.pdf

No one has ever heard of the employer NOT letting someone come back on modified duty. Thus the reason for the 132a.
My employers legal counsel keeps saying he's advising his client not to let me back to work for fear I will hurt myself again.
I have three doctors (two of which are AME's) that say I can return to my previous position with restrictions. No one has ever heard of the employer NOT letting someone come back on modified duty. Thus the reason for the 132a.
What happened to, or how others were permitted to RTW after an industrial injury is not relative to your claim...eg their restricions could be completely different than your own...as well as other factors surrounding the claims. Never a good idea to base your actions on a comparision of another claim...there are TOO MANY variables, and/or issues that are not relative you what your actions may be.
stevepsca
 
Posts: 655
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:50 am

Next

Return to Questions and Advice

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron