this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
162 points (100.0% liked)

News

22595 readers
4160 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

TUCSON, Ariz. (KVOA) - In a groundbreaking development, Arizonans can now apply for worker's compensation if they contract COVID-19 while on the job. This landmark decision stems from a widow's determined fight to secure worker's compensation following her husband's tragic demise due to COVID-19.

Gabrielle Parish has all of the details after an Arizona woman won a lawsuit to receive workers comp benefits after her husband died after getting Covid-19 at work.

Court documents unequivocally state that if someone contracts COVID-19 at their workplace, they are entitled to file for worker's compensation. An essential detail to note is that if a worker succumbs to the virus, their next of kin will receive financial support.

We had the opportunity to speak with Attorney Dennis Kurth, who played a crucial role in this case. He shed light on how it all began: "She filed a work comp complaint with the Industrial Commission of Arizona to secure widow's benefits, and that claim was denied," Kurth explained.

This denial prompted the widow to take legal action against the company, marking the inception of this historic case. Kurth noted, "This is apparently the first case where an insurance company lost and then decided to take it to the court of appeals. They are arguing that COVID-19 should never be covered by workers' comp as a matter of law."

However, there is a catch. If an employee chooses to accept the compensation, they relinquish their right to sue the company, even if they can prove they contracted the virus on the job. Additionally, there's a time frame to keep in mind: workers must file their claims within a year after contracting COVID-19.

Kurth added, "Now that the court of appeals has published an opinion stating that COVID-19 is compensable if you meet the statutory and case law requirements, people may start looking back and thinking, 'Oh, I should have filed a claim.'"

It's essential to emphasize that the person filing for worker's compensation must have contracted the disease at work for this ruling to apply. Otherwise, these provisions do not come into play.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Yeah this is great if you work at an honest company, but it could also cause a lot of side effects in shitty companies. Management will start underreporting on cases or even sweeping them under the rug to save their bottom line, potentially causing more outbreaks by not telling close contacts they might be infected which lets them spread it even more. Plus the whole "must be proven it was contracted at work" sounds like there's a lot of room for fuckery.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes, the rampant spread of covid will make it difficult to make the case it was caught at work, unless the work is somewhere covid is known to be like healthcare or where an outbreak is known. Unless and until we have sufficient infection control measures in most places it will continue to be difficult to know where one was exposed.

Unfortunately it's already the norm in many workplaces to not inform employees of outbreaks. There's little to no requirements for reporting cases so businesses have no responsibility to keep covid out of the workplace and people are getting sick at work. This ruling is a result of that reality, not a precipitator.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Oh wow, didn't know that was the norm in the US. Where I live, it's still common practice to send a memo out to any relevant people, and offer days off no questions asked if you feel any symptoms coming on.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think it would be that hard. My staff work 100% remotely but sometimes need to come into the office. It won’t apply to every situation but if they can prove they were home and then at work and then back home, I think we’d cover it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Unless they ever go anywhere other than work and home.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah… just like I said…

“If they can prove they went from home to work and then back home”

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You also said "I don’t think it would be that hard." Unless they're a shut-in who lives alone it's going to be tough to prove they didn't get it from someone else in the house, or when they picked up dinner, or went out with friends, or ...

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It wouldn’t. They have an app that tracks any travel required for work. If it shows they were only at home or the office the whole time, it would be approved. You don’t have to be a shut-in to stay home for a workday.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And your point? If 2 days afterwards, they report being sick and they can show that they were only at work and at home, they'd be covered. You people act like contact tracing doesn't exist.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Two days isn't the relevant number. The insurance company will say you got exposed two weeks ago when you went to a movie theater.

Nobody's doing contact tracing anymore dude.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago

They are if they need to prove they got COVID from work, "dude".