It didn’t take long for our new arrival Glenaida Mercado to place a check mark in the win column. At her trial hearing in a recent case, when the claimant resigned for unknown reasons and applied for other jobs, his attorney argued that he quit because of intense back pain and the employer’s unwillingness to accommodate him in a lighter job. Glenaida elicited testimony from the employer witness contradicting this statement, indicating instead, that the employer can accommodate any level of disability. The judge found that the claimant voluntarily withdrew from the labor market.
The claimant then argued he had reattached to the labor market a week after his resignation by submitting applications on the Indeed website. Glenaida pointed out that the jobs he applied for were even more labor intensive than the job he just quit. She noted that he only applied to 10 jobs in a six-month period and did not provide any of the proof required to show a legitimate search. Further, she pointed out that for the last four months, his own doctors said he was totally disabled, but at the same time the claimant was applying for landscaping and janitorial jobs. She pointed out that although medical reports stated that he was in constant excruciating pain and nothing helps and that he struggled with daily activities, he testified on cross-examination that he felt he could go outside and mow someone’s lawn for hire. The judge agreed with Glenaida’s argument the claimant had not legitimately reattached to the labor market and again denied resumption of benefits.
The result in this case proves that judges in the workers compensation system do take the issue of attachment to the labor market seriously and enforce the obligation of injured workers to conduct a diligent search for alternate employment within their restrictions to mitigate loss. Congratulations to Glenaida on her win – – no doubt the first of many.
