VOL. IX NO.1
JANUARY 2003
COMPENSATION
NEWS
MONTHLY REPORT
Psychiatric injury must be based on
substantial evidence
They also looked at City of Oakland v.
WCAB (2002) 99 Cal. App.4th 261 to
determine that the employer must be
given a degree of freedom "in
making its regular and routine
personnel decisions (such as
discipline, work evaluation, transfer,
demotion, layoff, or termination.) If
the employer's conduct meets the
objective reasonableness standard,
section 3208.3's exemption applies".
The court indicated you must look at
"the totality of the circumstances".
"To be in good faith, the personnel
action must be done in a manner that
is lacking in outrageous conduct, is
honest and with a sincere purpose, is
without intent to mislead, deceive, or
defraud, and is without collusion or
unlawful design."
In this case they indicated the
employer was mandated to
investigate by law, therefore, it was
in good faith.
trial that he did not have any problems
at work until he received his final
warning notice as the result of the
employer level investigation.
The Workers' Compensation Judge
(WCJ) found the psychiatric injury
industrial relying on the applicant's
testimony and the applicant's medical
reports alleging harassment of the
applicant. The defendant filed a
Petition for Reconsideration. The
Workers' Compensation Appeals
Board (WCAB) denied reconsideration
and adopted the WCP's opinion.
The Court of Appeal indicated that
they must review the entire record to
see if board's opinion was based on
substantial evidence. They indicated
that the right to receive benefits for a
psychiatric injury is described in Labor
Code section 3208.3. The relevant
exception to a finding of
compensability is in 3208.3 (h).
This section deals with a lawful,
nondiscriminatory, good faith
personnel action. They looked at the
case of Cotran v. Rolling Hudig Hall
Internat, (1998) 17 Cal.43th 93 to assess
the objective reasonableness of the
employers actions. They looked at the
"objective good faith standard."
The Court Of Appeal in a case
certified for partial publication
has reviewed the good faith
personnel action defense in a
psychiatric case.
Northrop
Grumman v.
WCAB (Graves)
The applicant was to train other
employees for his employer. During
the course of the training it was
alleged that the applicant
discriminated against one of the
employees. The employer initiated an
investigation of the alleged racial
discrimination. After the investigation
the applicant was given a final
warning notice by the employer.
The applicant filed a claim for
workers' compensation benefits for a
psychiatric condition caused by this
allegation of racial discrimination. The
applicant testified at his workers'
compensation
CONTENTS
Northrop Grumman v. WCAB
(Graves)
..............................
1
Firm: Samuelsen, Gonzalez,
Valenzuela, & Brown
Editor: Harvey Brown
Address: 441 Old Newport Blvd 105
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Phone: 949 574-7835
Click here for printable version