Trevdan Building Supply v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
9 A.3d 1221
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2010Background
- Claimant sustained a work injury (rupture of left biceps tendon) on Oct 26, 2006 while acting as yardman for Employer.
- Claimant underwent surgery/therapy and returned to work without restrictions; released to return March 19, 2007; later cleared for full duty; accommodations noted as needed if fatigue/pain persisted.
- Claimant returned to pre-injury job on March 20, 2007; benefits suspended at that time based on return to work.
- Overtime availability was reduced due to a downturn in the economy in September 2007, affecting all employees; Claimant earned $700/week due to no overtime.
- WCJ granted reinstatement for March 21, 2007–Sept 30, 2007 with suspension starting Oct 1, 2007; Board reversed the suspension for Oct 1, 2007, leading to this appeal by Employer.
- Court reverses Board, holding that loss of earnings after Oct 1, 2007 was due to economic factors, not the work injury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Board erred in sustaining benefits after Oct. 1, 2007. | Pope; loss of earnings post-Oct 1, 2007 due to economy, not injury. | Employer; earnings loss was due to economic downturn, not disability. | Reversed: loss after Oct 1, 2007 not caused by injury; benefits should not continue. |
| Whether ongoing benefits can be awarded when total wages exceed coworkers’ wages under 306(b)(1). | Employer; benefits should be limited by earnings comparison. | Board analysis improper; benefits may continue per reinstatement framework. | Mooted by reversal; issue not addressed due to outcome on primary issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- McKay v. Workmen's Comp. Appeal Bd. (Osmolinski), 688 A.2d 259 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1997) (suspension of benefits requires causation proof; reduced burden for reinstatement)
- Latta v. Workmen's Comp. Appeal Bd. (Latrobe Die Casting Co.), 642 A.2d 1084 (Pa. 1994) (presumption of continuance of injury-related disability when earnings drop)
- Bufford v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (N. Am.Telecom), 2 A.3d 548 (Pa. 2010) (clarifies permissible rebuttal of reinstatement evidence under 413(a))
- Klarich v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (RAC's Ass'n), 819 A.2d 626 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) (economic factors can negate wage-loss benefits when not due to injury)
- Harper & Collins v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Brown), 672 A.2d 1319 (Pa. 1996) (discussed where overtime loss affects pre-injury wage base)
- Capper v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (ABF Freight Sys., Inc.), 826 A.2d 46 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) (distinguishes Harper & Collins context; overtime availability matters)
- WAWA v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (Seltzer), 951 A.2d 405 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (conducts substantial evidence review; supports affirming WCJ findings)