Search      Advanced Search | Browse By Topic
Magazine Content
Home
Features
Columnists
Industry Risk Reports
In-Depth Series
Special Reports
Point/Counterpoint
R&I One® Content
News & Analysis
Editor's Choice Stories
Resources and Tools
Power Broker® Directory
Risk InnovatorTM
Emerging Risks
Top Employee Benefits Consultant
Executives To Watch
Insights
Industry Events
WorkersComp Forum
Award Nominations
Webinars
RSS
R&I Information
Subscription Center
Advertiser Information
About Us
Contact Us
 

Newsletter Sign-up

Click on the name of the free newsletter below to preview:

R&I One®
WORKERSCOMP Forum TM Update
HTML Text
E-Mail Address:


Click here to unsubscribe
Privacy Policy
Preferences

 

Plumbers' argument for alternative AWW calculation fails to pass muster

In New Hampshire, the calculation of a worker's average weekly wage is determined by dividing pre-tax "gross earnings" over a period of 26 to 52 weeks by that number of weeks.

Print Email Add to Facebook Add to Twitter Add to LinkedIn Write to the Editor Reprints

Case name: Appeal of Gagnon, No. 2008-424 (N.H. 02/20/09).

Ruling: The New Hampshire Supreme Court held that a worker's average weekly wage is calculated using pre-tax pay as opposed to total earning capacity and does not include hourly union benefits.

What it means: In New Hampshire, the calculation of a worker's average weekly wage is determined by dividing pre-tax "gross earnings" over a period of 26 to 52 weeks by that number of weeks.

Summary: Two plumbers who were receiving disability benefits appealed the compensation appeals board's calculation of their average weekly wage. The claimants argued that the average weekly wage should be based upon total earning capacity rather than pre-tax wages, and that the employer's contributions to their union funds should be included in the wages calculation. The claimants argued that because the purpose of the workers' compensation law is to compensate employees who have lost earning capacity, the resulting benefits should encompass all lost earning capacity.

The court determined that "gross earnings" as used in the New Hampshire workers' compensation statute was not the same as earning capacity. It reasoned that in this context, earning capacity only pertains to a claimant's eligibility for benefits, but the calculation of those benefits is based on the claimant's gross earnings. The court further explained the concepts are distinct and separate.

April 2, 2009

Copyright 2009© LRP Publications

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RISK logo
 

Back to top

Entire contents copyright © 2013 Risk and Insurance® All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without written permission.