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

 

Employee wins benefits despite positive drug test

Where a causal relationship between a drug's influence or intoxication and an employee's accident is not readily apparent, the employee can successfully rebut the presumption that the work injury was caused primarily by the influence of the drugs or alcohol.

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

Case name: Smith v. Perfection Architectural, 16 FLWCLB 153 (Fla. JCC, Orlando 2009).

Ruling: The judge of compensation claims found that an employee's accident was compensable even though he tested positive for cocaine after the accident.

What it means: Where an employee does not play a role in his work injury but tests positive for drugs or alcohol after his work accident, and a causal relationship between the drug's influence or intoxication and the accident is not readily apparent, the employee can successfully rebut the presumption that the work injury was occasioned primarily by the influence of the drugs or alcohol.

Summary: An employee was sleeping in a chair with his head on a table during a work break.A coworker approached and hit the table with a hammer. The loud noise disoriented the employee. He testified that the next day he had no hearing in his right ear and his left ear was sensitive. He further testified that the Saturday before the incident, he inhaled cocaine and consumed alcohol. He denied having any side effects at the time of the work incident. A postinjury drug test was positive for a substantial amount of cocaine in his system.

The employee argued that the accident would have occurred with or without his cocaine use. Under Florida's law, if an employer does not have a proper drug-free workplace program, when an employee tests positive for drugs, there is a presumption that the work injury was occasioned by the influence of drugs. However, where the injury was solely the result of a coworker's actions and the lack of a causal relationship between the drug's influence and the accident is readily apparent, the employee can successfully rebut the presumption. The JCC found the employee's claim was compensable and granted his request for medical treatment.

The JCC further found that the employer did not prove it had a drug-free workplace policy in compliance with Florida law. As such, the employer was entitled to a lesser presumption "that the injury was occasioned primarily by the intoxication of, or by the influence of the drug upon, the employee." The court explained an employee may rebut this presumption by clear and convincing evidence that the influence of the drug did not contribute to the injury.

Read more at the WORKERSCOMP ForumTM homepage.

November 9, 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.