Should A Cop Injured In A Fall in the Headquarters Parking Lot Receive Enhanced Disability Benefits?
A controversial ruling by New York's highest court widening the scope of special disability benefits to public protectors for on-the-job injuries opens a 'Pandora's Box' of potential financial and public safety problems for municipalities, says labor/employment expert Craig Benson
NEW YORK, N.Y. (PRWEB) January 26, 2004 -- Municipalities across New York State are pondering the potentially-grave ramifications of a recent ruling by the state's highest court that could saddle them with untold additional expenses for injured fire and law enforcement officers at a time when budgets already are strained to the limit.
The city of Buffalo, for one, estimates the 6-0 ruling by the New York State Court of Appeals could cost the city an additional $2 million to $5 million over the next few years.
In Westchester County, a police chief said the ruling could open the door to all kinds of injury claims unrelated to police work.
Police union officials have praised the decision, saying it clarified the intentions of the existing law.
The ruling, in essence, said police officers and other public protectors hurt on the job do not have to show special circumstances or that they were involved in the "heightened risks" associated with their profession thereunder to qualify for enhanced disability benefits -- benefits that include full pay, tax free, for as long as the injured personnel is out of work, plus full medical coverage for a period that could go beyond retirement.
New York labor and employment expert Craig Benson, who represents a number of municipal police and fire departments, said the ruling is "a potential budget back-breaker that can be interpreted so broadly that someone who falls in the parking lot may be eligible for enhanced benefits."
| | - Benson, managing principal of the New York office of Grotta, Glassman & Hoffman, 650 Fifth Avenue, added:
|
| | - makes absolutely no sense to give these kinds of circumstances the 'on-the-job' imprimatur. Yes, firefighters hurt while battling fires should receive these benefits. Yes, police officers injured while performing law enforcement duties should also receive them. But there is no reasonable or fair-minded basis for personnel injured while performing colateral or non-job-related functions to be provided the same enhanced benefits. It opens a Pandora's Box of potential problems affecting public safety as well as municipal finances.
|
| | - mentioned, these special benefits are provided by the municipalities on a tax-free basis. As a result, any officer who returns to work would, in reality, receive less compensation. It is almost a built-in disincentive to return to work. By expanding the class of eligible individuals, the ruling has the potential to cause havoc in department workforces, particularly those in small communities."
|
Grotta, Glassman & Hoffman, which maintains offices in New York, New Jersey and California, specializes in labor and employment law exclusively for employers. In addition to municipal entities, its client roster includes Fortune 500 companies, medical and educational institutions and not-for-profit organizations.
| | - appeals court ruling came down last month (December, 2003) in connection with three cases involving municipal employees denied coverage under what the court said was a misapplication of a "heightened risk" standard.
|
These cases included four Nassau County corrections officers, a police officer in the town of Greenburgh in Westchester County and a Yates County sheriff's deputy, all of whom suffered injuries such as sprained backs.
Judge Susan Phillips Read, writing for the majority, said a 1999 decision requiring workers to prove they were hurt performing "special work related to the nature of heightened risks and duties" before they qualify for special benefits created confusion. She said there is no "heightened risks" standard.
| | - 1961 state law creating special diability rules for police officers clearly states, she said, that any injury or illness arising out of and in the course of their duties qualifies with or without consideration of any heightened risks.
|
| | - new appeals court ruling affects municipalities with populations of under 1 million persons.
|
| | - Buffalo News quoted city human resources commissioner Leonard A. Matarese as estimating the city could be hit with up to $5 million in additional expenses because of the ruling. Matarese, according to the paper, said 10% of the city's public safety workforce have injured-on-duty status, and officials are hiring an outside consultant to help manage injured-on-duty cases.
|
Police Chief John Kapica in the Westchester County community of Greenburgh was quoted by the WestchesterJournal News as saying that injury claims not directly related to police work should be handled by workers' compensation rules.
| | - Benson is a contributing editor to the New York State Bar Association's treatise entitled "Public Sector Labor and Employment Law."
|
| | - co-authored a chapter on the relationship between the Americans with Disabilities Act and the National Labor Relations Act in a treatise on the Americans with Disabilities Act, which was published by Callahan Press. He most recently authored a chapter on "Terminating Public Employees" for a treatise on New York Employment Law, which was published by Matthew Bender.
- Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Vermont, Mr. Benson graduated from Albany Law School where he was Managing Editor of the Law Review.
|
###
|
