Docked Pay on Workers Comp

2284103

Can we make an employee use vacation and/or sick time while out on a workers' comp claim, or are we required to pay him/her for the days missed? If no vacation or sick time is available can we dock their pay?

Down_the_Middle

You should require employees to use whatever form of accrued pay that you mandate or permit for any other absence due to illness.......FMLA will likely run concurrently with the w/comp absence if your employer is covered by FMLA. Be certain to check with your state statutes to determine if supplementing lost time from w/comp is required. Normally it is not, but w/comp is a state program so that s/b your guide. Normally, if an employee has no accrued time avail (Vac, ETO/PTO, sick pay, etc), then the employee receives w/comp payments (called lost time indemnity ) and that becomes the sole source of their income.

Paige

This isn't a response, but rather another question similar to yours. We just had an employee who fell off a ladder (nothing more serious than cuts and abrasions). The doctor released him to return to work that same day with restrictions. I was surprised the doctor released him that day as he was pretty sore. In any case, he did not return that day, a Friday, or the following Monday and had supervisor approval for this. The supervisor went ahead and paid him regular time, not vacation or personal, for those hours. In addition, on the following Friday, the employee had an appointment in the morning and the supervisor gave him 4 hours of regular pay for it as well.

I told the supervisor that if he wants to do that, he must be willing to do that for all future employees under similar circumstances.

Do you see any other reasons why it probably wasn't a good idea for the supervisor to pay the employee without making him use vacation or personal time? We are in IL.

Down_the_Middle

I'll assume this is a non-exempt employee and I can see no reason why the supervisor would pay the individual for hours worked when the employee was unable to come to work due to a work related injury. I think that's a dangerous precedent-----------I'm guessing this is not a normal practice for anyone else who misses work due to an illness. I can't imagine the state of IL requires this. This sounds to me like a supervisory error.

Paige

No, IL does not require this. Yes, it does seem very dangerous to me in regards to precedent-setting. The supervisor insisted on paying him, though.

Paige

I guess that brings up another question. Can we treat people with "regular" illness differently than those with a work-related injury?

Down_the_Middle

Nope. Not w/o some huge discrimination risks. Focus on the illness/injury vs. the cause.

Carol CA

Here in California we always do things differently. We would NOT pay someone sick or vacation if they are out on Worker's Comp., except for the first three days. Worker's Comp payments kick in after three days and they would be the sole source of income (even if an employee had sick or vacation available). The first three days our company would pay for out of our own pocket (not the employee's sick or vacation bank).

For Paige's employee who was released to return to regular work with no restrictions, he should NOT have been paid regular wages. The doctor said he could return to work, but he chose to call himself off -- that would be sick leave or vacation depending on your company's policy.

Once an employee files a worker's comp claim the rules of the game change. They need to see the company doctor and follow his recommendations. If he is off of work, it is paid by worker's comp. If the doctor says he can return to work, he must do so or charge his own leave banks just like any other employee who can go to work but doesn't feel like it.

I would check your state laws regarding worker's comp benefits.