May 12, 2017 Article

Maine WC Board Appellate Division Revisits Refusal of Suitable Work in the Context of Ongoing Employment

Maine Workers' Comp Alert


In Shaw v. Cumberland County Sheriff’s Department, Me. WCB App. Div. 17-14 (March 22, 2017), Shaw appealed from a decision granting her Petition for Award, awarding total incapacity benefits for two closed-end periods, but declining to award ongoing incapacity benefits. The Employee argued that the Judge erred by not awarding ongoing benefits on the grounds that: (1) she unreasonably refused a bona fide offer of reasonable employment pursuant to 39-A MRSA § 214 when she resigned from her position with the County on April 23, 2010; and (2) the period of refusal had not ended.

Section 214(1)(A) provides that if an employee receives a “bona fide offer of reasonable employment” and refuses that employment “without good and reasonable cause, the employee is considered to have voluntarily withdrawn from the work force and is no longer entitled to any wage loss benefits . . . during the period of refusal.” An existing employment relationship implicitly constitutes an ongoing “offer” of employment, thereby obviating the need for an employer to make a formal, affirmative “offer” of employment. Shaw did not dispute that the corrections officer position was a bona fide offer of reasonable employment.

The Judge found no doctor had restricted or limited Shaw in any way as of April 23, 2010; that she did not tell anyone at the County that she could not perform her duties because of her ankle injury; and that her resignation letter did not say she was resigning because she was unable to perform her duties due to an ankle problem. The Appellate Division found competent evidence in the record to support those findings.

Regarding the period of refusal, Shaw argued that it ended as early as May 4, 2010, because her reliance on her treating doctor’s opinions regarding work capacity constituted good and reasonable cause to justify continued refusal. However, in finding that the period of refusal had not ended, the Judge concluded that Shaw did not take some affirmative step to communicate to the employer a willingness to return to employment so that suitable work could be provided. The ALJ also noted that Shaw’s failure to end her refusal deprived her employer of the opportunity to mitigate its obligation to pay benefits by offering her alternative employment. The Appellate Division found this finding not to be erroneous and consistent with section § 214.

Shaw also argued that the Judge erred by not evaluating whether her reliance on her physician’s opinions that she was unable to return to work or her regular job justified “continued” refusal. However, the Appellate Division found that the Judge carefully considered the issue of the actual extent of incapacity and determined that Shaw had a partial ability to return to work at all times, contrary to some medical reports.

Firm Highlights


Maine WC Appellate Division Addresses Refusal of Suitable Work and Notice

The Maine Workers' Compensation Appellate Division recently addressed cases dealing with refusal of suitable work and notice. Both decisions rely heavily on the specific facts of each case. In the context of a refusal...


Maine WC Alert: New Legislation Brings Procedural Changes, Benefit Modifications

LD 756 (“ An Act To Improve the Maine Workers’ Compensation Act of 1992 ”), was signed into law by Governor Mills on June 17, 2019. LD 756 has an effective date of September...


Maine WC Alert: Updated Version of Notice of Controversy (WCB-9) Must Be Used Effective February 1, 2020

Following the recent statutory changes to the Workers’ Compensation Act, the Maine Workers’ Compensation Board has updated the language in Box 22 of the Notice of Controversy. This new version should be used as...


Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Reiterates Requirement to Trigger Retirement Presumption

Maine Workers' Comp Appellate Division Reiterates That Working in Customary Job Until Retirement Constitutes “Termination of Active Employment” Sufficient to Trigger the Retirement Presumption In Capitan v. NewPage Paper (WCB 19-10 [App. Div. April...


Preti Flaherty Ranked Among U.S. News – Best Lawyers 2020 Best Law Firms

Preti Flaherty has been named among the 2020 Best Law Firms by the U.S. News – Best Lawyers rankings. To be eligible for ranking, a law firm must have at least one attorney named...


Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Upholds Ruling on Reinstatement Provisions and Termination of Benefits

Maine WC Appellate Division Holds That Ongoing Noncompliance with Reinstatement Provisions in Section 218 Precludes Termination of Benefits for Expiration of Durational Cap Under 213 Section 218 of the Maine Workers’ Compensation Act provides...


Maine WC Alert: Latest Appellate Division Rulings on Health Insurance Payments, Social Security Benefits

The Maine Workers' Comp Appellate Division recently issued rulings in the cases of Rich v. Maine Turnpike Authority and Butler v. City of Portland. Health Insurance Payments Made by Self-Insured Employer for Health Insurance...


Maine WC Alert: MAE Unit Publishes Guidance on Compliance with Recent Amendments

The Maine Workers’ Compensation Board’s Monitoring, Audit & Enforcement Unit has issued a document to provide guidance on complying with certain recent amendments to the Workers’ Compensation Act in P.L. 2019, c. 344 (LD...


Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Addresses the Issue of Timely Notice in Two Recent Decisions

For claims for which the date of injury is on or after January 1, 2013, unless otherwise provided by the Maine Workers' Compensation Act, proceedings may not be maintained unless notice of an injury...


Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Rules No Consequences Under 218 for Deferment of Receipt of Old-Age Social Security Benefits

In Pratt v. S.D. Warren (No. 19-3 [WCB App. Div. April 30, 2019]), S.D. Warren appealed a decision denying its Petition for Approval of Discontinuance of Incapacity Benefits. An employer may reduce incapacity benefits...