Workers' comp rules leave amputee tough choice
Four months after William D. "Billy" Parker lost both his arms in a drywall shredder at a Jeffersontown machine manufacturing company, he says the thing he misses most is his sense of touch, the ability to feel his son Cody when he gives him a hug. Parker, 39, has learned to use a prosthetic left arm to feed himself and put on his clothes. He uses his feet to open doors and to change channels on an oversized remote control he keeps on his living room floor. However he must depend on his son Cody, 15, to help him cook his meals. His stoicism hides nagging concerns about how he as a single parent will provide for his son, whom he's had custody of since Cody was 9. Parker also faces a vexing dilemma in deciding what path to pursue for compensation for his catastrophic injuries, money he says he needs to raise Cody and pay for a house adapted to his needs. Should he take the meager benefits available from workers' compensation, as little as $546 a week, or two-thirds of his pay? Those payments would never rise with inflation and would be cut off when he is eligible for Social Security. Or should he risk getting nothing at all by rejecting workers' comp and suing his employer, Six Sigma Inc.? Under Kentucky workers' comp law, an employee can only successfully sue his employer for a workplace injury if he can prove his company deliberately intended for him to be harmed. Experts on workers' compensation say no employee has ever been able to meet that burden, which has been described as harder than proving intentional murder.
Continue reading "Workers' comp rules leave amputee tough choice" »
