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

 

Benefits blocked for widow of independent contractor pilot

In Louisiana, the act of piloting a plane is not manual labor and does not bring an independent contractor's injury within the workers' compensation arena.

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

Case name: Reed v. LCS Corrections Services, LLC, No. 10-866 (La. Ct. App. 02/02/11).

Ruling: The Louisiana Court of Appeal held that a widow was not entitled to benefits. Her husband, a pilot, was an independent contractor and the manual labor exception did not apply.

What it means: In Louisiana, the act of piloting a plane is not manual labor and does not bring an independent contractor's injury within the workers' compensation arena.

Summary: An airplane pilot was killed in a plane crash. He was often the pilot of a leased plane for a consulting company. He billed the company a flat hourly rate for his services. The company issued him a 1099 at the end of the year. The pilot's widow filed a workers' compensation death benefit claim against the company. The parties agreed that the pilot was an independent contractor. The widow argued that the manual labor exception applied. The Louisiana Court of Appeal held that the widow was not entitled to benefits.

The widow analogized her husband's position to that of a driver of a vehicle. She argued that the physically engaging aspects of driving a vehicle are present when piloting a plane. She said that pilots are also physically engaged before the engine is turned on because they must perform a pre-flight inspection of the plane.

The company argued that the manual labor exception did not apply because the pilot did not spend a substantial part of his work time performing manual labor. He did not load or unload passengers or luggage, and he did not fuel or maintain the plane. Additionally, the company pointed out that according to a statutory amendment, operating a truck or tractor-trailer is not manual labor.

The court agreed with the company, stating that it did not recognize that the physical act of driving is manual labor. The court found that the pilot was not required to do any manual labor as a part of his job.

Read more at the WorkersComp Forum homepage.

March 21, 2011

Copyright 2011© 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.