Another workmans comp. question

[gritsar]

My husband has now been home on workmans comp. for 7 months. The whole sorbid story is here:

https://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=404180

About a week ago DH saw the new doctor that workmans comp. wanted him to see. This new doctor said basically the same thing as our internist did - that DH can go back to work, full-time, but in an office situation only. That means no answering calls or otherwises putting himself in danger in his job as a police officer. They won't release him to go back to his old duties as a patrol supervisor until he's off of the blood thinners and his blood clots are resolved.

Whereas before the city bugged the tar outta him about when he could come back to work, now they are dragging their feet about getting him back. The WC nurse called this morning and told us that the mayor has sent a letter to the doctor wanting more info. Knowing this dang city the way I do I'm pretty sure they are just trying to keep DH out of work until the 3 month period on the family leave medical act runs out, forcing him to retire. DH is a good cop and well respected in town, but he won't buy into the good ol' boy system of the current administration; so the powers that be want him gone.

It's my understanding (of WC laws) that if he's been released by the workmans comp. doctor to go back to work, the city must find him a position in the office, even if it means putting one of the useless individuals that hangs around the office all day out on the streets temporarily. Am I right?

DH will not retain a lawyer, except as a last resort, so that's out of the question at this time.

 

[mom'sfolly]

As my understanding goes, yes they do have to find him a desk job. That's one of the whole points of the law. It holds A JOB for you, it doesn't have to be the same job you were doing before. So he should be able to go to a desk job and not lose his retirement.

Rats, is what they are, for what they're trying to do to him!!!!!

 

[gritsar]

mom'sfolly :

As my understanding goes, yes they do have to find him a desk job. That's one of the whole points of the law. It holds A JOB for you, it doesn't have to be the same job you were doing before. So he should be able to go to a desk job and not lose his retirement.

Rats, is what they are, for what they're trying to do to him!!!!!

That's what I thought.​

 

[redhen]

They're being very sneaky ....

 

[gritsar]

Quote:
Aha

 

[redhen]

WHats DH say about it??

 

[Chickie'sMoma]

btw, the FML act also allows you to go back to work for some time and then go out for another 12 weeks and they can't do much about it! so if he still has issues and the Doc says he has to go back out of work they should not be able to let him go from his job!

 

[Equus5O]

mom'sfolly :

As my understanding goes, yes they do have to find him a desk job. That's one of the whole points of the law. It holds A JOB for you, it doesn't have to be the same job you were doing before. So he should be able to go to a desk job and not lose his retirement.

Rats, is what they are, for what they're trying to do to him!!!!!

I don't want to be a downer (I'm all for a brother in blue, after all).

In the city that I work in, desk jobs are referred to as "light duty." The cop that is on light duty (the house mouse) doesn't carry a weapon. Light duty isn't given to cops that are injured off duty, or are out for surgery, or anything off the job, basically. If you're hurt on the job, you can work light duty. It has it's limits, though. June 11, 2000 we had a cop seriously injured, on duty, in a motorcycle crash. Fortunately, he survived. However, he didn't recover to the point of being able to perform his duties as a police officer. He had to retire about a year after the accident. We also had another officer within the past five years who was run down while investigating a motor vehicle accident. Again, he didn't recover enough to be a capable police officer and had to retire. Fortunately for the first cop, he had reached top pay. Unfortunatley for the second, he had only a few years on the job and hadn't yet reached top pay.

My point is, not every employer has to provide its employees with a job.​

 

[gritsar]

Quote:
I don't want to be a downer (I'm all for a brother in blue, after all).

In the city that I work in, desk jobs are referred to as "light duty." The cop that is on light duty (the house mouse) doesn't carry a weapon. Light duty isn't given to cops that are injured off duty, or are out for surgery, or anything off the job, basically. If you're hurt on the job, you can work light duty. It has it's limits, though. June 11, 2000 we had a cop seriously injured, on duty, in a motorcycle crash. Fortunately, he survived. However, he didn't recover to the point of being able to perform his duties as a police officer. He had to retire about a year after the accident. We also had another officer within the past five years who was run down while investigating a motor vehicle accident. Again, he didn't recover enough to be a capable police officer and had to retire. Fortunately for the first cop, he had reached top pay. Unfortunatley for the second, he had only a few years on the job and hadn't yet reached top pay.

My point is, not every employer has to provide its employees with a job.

We're not super worried about it, after all DH's retirement is locked in. If he were to retire tomorrow he'd have his pension. It's just the longer he works the more his pension will be. He's just not ready to retire. Why he wants to go back and be subjected to bull manure on a regular basis I'll never know.
Oh and here, any time they are in uniform, even if it's just their callouts, they carry their weapon. About the only one I've ever seen without his weapon is the chief.
Red, he's being strangely quiet. I've learned from experience that he'll brood on what he's going to do, without saying a word about it, until he decides what he's going to do.

 

[Equus5O]

It's neither here nor there, but you mentioned that anytime they're in uniform that they're carrying. Here, light duty means no uniform, no weapon. You can't have one without the other. Before anyone splits hairs, many detectives aren't in uniform, but they're armed. A detective is still a police officer, and a detective on light duty is without a weapon.