I. Waugh v. WCAB (St. Mary Medical Center), I. Waugh v. WCAB (St. Mary Medical Center)

Claimant Inez Waugh, a former CNA for St. Mary’s Medical Center, injured in January 2012 and returned to light duty in April 2012; NTCP issued February 13, 2012 and later denied when she returned to light duty.
In May 2014 Claimant was suspended and then terminated for allegedly acting outside the scope of employment, specifically placing a tourniquet and palpating for a vein during blood draw assistance.
Employer had a Nursing Department Scope of Practice policy; Claimant had prior reprimands for actions outside scope (including administering medication in December 2013).
Claimant filed a reinstatement petition in June 2014 seeking reinstatement of benefits, arguing the loss of earnings was due to the work injury, not her termination.
WCJ found Claimant’s May 28–29, 2014 actions violated policy and caused termination, thus denying reinstatement; Board affirmed.
Claimant challenged on appeal, arguing lack of substantial evidence for (a) tourniquet as phlebotomy and (b) bad faith conduct; the majority affirmed the Board, while a dissent argued lack of conclusive evidence of policy violation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does applying a tourniquet constitute phlebotomy under the policy?	Waugh contends tourniquet use is not phlebotomy and not prohibited.	Employer and witnesses treated tourniquet as part of phlebotomy for policy purposes.	Yes; tourniquet is phlebotomy and barred by policy.
Was Claimant's termination for bad faith conduct supported by substantial evidence?	Waugh acted to help patients; believed actions fell within scope; no bad faith.	Employer showed Claimant knowingly violated policy; bad faith established.	Substantial evidence supports bad faith; reinstatement denied.

Stevens v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Consolidation Coal Co.), 760 A.2d 369 (Pa. 2000) (burden on claimant after loss of earnings to show disability through no fault of own)
Shop Vac Corp. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Thomas), 929 A.2d 1236 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007) (bad faith equivalent to lack of good faith; conclusive evidence required to rebut loss of earnings)
BJ’s Wholesale Club v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Pearson), 43 A.3d 559 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2012) (some bad faith willful misconduct required to deny reinstatement; termination for policy violation must show bad faith)
Virgo v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (County of Lehigh-Cedarbrook), 890 A.2d 13 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005) (willful misconduct burden for unemployment context; some bad faith needed to suspend benefits)
Hoffmaster v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Senco Products Inc.), 721 A.2d 1152 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998) (substantial evidence standard for WCJ findings; credibility determinations.)
General Electric Co. v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeal Bd. (Valsamaki), 593 A.2d 921 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (WCJ findings binding if supported by substantial evidence)