KlS is only saying that this ruling sets a precedence, therefore booze it up every night before going to work and throw all your cares away to your own detriment. Idiots!? All of you who think you’re not accountable. This nation needs more accountability!
Stand up! Take your medicine! Nobody owes you anything!
This case has major implications in Oregon where business leaders are working hard to make it legal to discriminate against medical marijuana patients.
Need a little anger management phsych class.
If you think for one minute that people aren;t responsible for their actions today.I’d like to move to your state.
What happened to empowerment that all the big dogs push. If the managers would do their jobs and train people themselves then workers could do their job and not run into situations like this.
As usual it’s a blatant throws this way out of proportion.
Most of prescription medication for pain has been proven to alter your alertness more than marijhuana.
ad……have to agree with you again. Its sad that our legal system is so flawed that it defies its own rulings. Employees can enter “evidence”. What evidence aside from two idiots opinions? As an experienced worker, the clmt. can’t blame the new hire for this snafu. Normally, people are extra careful when training somebody, particularly when it’s your own body that’s at risk. I’ve handled WC in NYC and this abuse in TN pales in comparison.
Looks like employers should hire more potheads, they won’t have to pay as much work comp if they contest all the claims. That’s one reason employers hire illegals, because illegals are too scared to file a work comp claim.
Is this case making the news because the substance involved was marijuana or because the testimony of the new employee was considered above the toxicologists report?
What if the injured person had been hungover from taking legal prescription meds or drinking alcohol the night before?
What is the matter with you people. The new employee turned on the machine and hit took his fingers. This was an accident and should have been covered. It has nothing to do with “being responsible for oneself” The problem with our industry is that when a claim should be paid….idiot adjusters try to find a way not to pay…
C’mon, Fred, Your comment that “idiot adjusters try to get out of paying the claim” is totally offbase. Everyone is always trying to “shoot the messenger”. The claims adjusters collect the “facts” and report (messages) to the companies. Company management and their defense attorneys then make the decisions to pay or deny. Adjuster’s are not attorneys….they cannot go into courts and file petitions in suits to deny claims.
In this particular court case, the experienced worker training the new hire was probably NOT under the influence of marijuana smoked the night before, or several days before, therefore properly received his benefits due him by order of the court. As a 40 year claims adjuster, I’m glad to see the court put this apparent overzealous workers comp carrier in its place, knowing that marijuana stays in your bloodstream (or urine) for up to 4 weeks, more or less.
My previous post’s intent is to show how setting a precedence, without knowing ALL the facts in the case, could cause many workers around the country to misinterpret the courts findings, therefore taking a cavalier attitude about their own accountability and show up at work with .8 or more alcohol in their blood and cause their own injuries at their jobs. They are accountable for their own actions when they are around machinery which carries manufacturer’s warning labels: “don’t operate this machinery if you are under the influence of medications”, or similar words to that effect. These warnings implicitly apply to illegal drugs, as well.
Claims adjusters are also accountable to state insurance regulators and national industry associations, by requiring them to adhere to strict rules of ethics in handling claims. As in all professions, there are a few bad apples out there that gives a black-eye to the insurance profession. But, I’ll bet that they are fewer in number than the number of policyholders who try to rip off their own insurance company.
When uninformed people post their non-sensical comments about legal issues without knowing all the facts, they have a very infuential way of misleading the public who reads these posts. If you want to know what the court’s thinking wss in arriving at their conclusion, go to the Tennessee Supreme Courts cases on their internet web-site and READ for yourselves.
You amuse me with your post. Why would you say that he was probably NOT under the influence, when the toxicologist appears to have found otherwise.
And then, you say that the courts properly awarded the injured worker. Sympathy for the “poor employee” vs. the “big bad companies” seem to come into play way too often.
I can tell you some stories about my husband’s employees and what they have been caught doing at the job. They DO NOT perform well under the influence. If they are going to risk their safety and even more importantly, the safety of other employees, they don’t deserve anything but a kick in the pants.
I was young once too. Guess what I learned when I did stupid things, I paid the consequences. That’s what an employee under the influence should do.
Well, ad, the issue of the worker violating his employment rules is separate from the issue the court apparently ruled on. Go back and re-read my previous post. I never meant that the employee can avoid being “fired” which is probably what ultimately happened. As I said, before, one cannot reasonably conclude what the court’s intent was in arriving at their conclusion.
And, I do agree with your comments about employees showing up at work….to drunk from drinking the night before resulting in a dangerous condition for other employees.
I am not sure exactly what you are trying to say, perhaps because I am rushing back to work.
When I use the term under the influence, I mean drugs too.
I am relatively certain workers’ compensation law allows for coverage to be excluded when you become injured while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. I believe it is fair. Again, not just for the user’s safety, as much as for the unsuspecting people around him/her. And finally, why should an employer’s insurance carrier need to pick up coverage if an employee is willing to put his or her safety on the line?
Okay, ad, let’s go at it again. Afer re-reading the news article, this appears to be similar to the “Man Bites Dog” issue.
It appears (not confirmed) that the trial court AND the Supreme Court ruled on the same issue, i.e., the injury was “caused” by the inexperience worker, and the marijuana chemical being in the claimant’s urine had NOTHING to do with the injured party’s alertness. Apparently he exhibited a condition of being sober as testified by the fellow workers. The discovery of marijuana chemical was a result of the hospital’s testings required for any type of surgeries. Now, he still gets WC benefits but still is probably fired for violation of a pre-employee agreement.
“A medical toxicologist testified in a deposition “that the level of THC in McIntosh’s system at the time of the injury would have impaired his reaction time,” the ruling states.”
There are tests to determine how recently someone has smoked pot, so this is a true and dated science.
In my opinion, the guy didn’t deserve his benefits. He had a responsiblity to come in without narcotics in him. His reaction to the accident may have worked to prevent the damage it caused. Even if it did not, he still knew he wasn’t supposed to be coming in to work stoned or getting stoned during his work time. I would guess since it is common knowledge to many employees that he knew workers’ compensation would not extend to him if he were tested and found to be under the influence, regardless of it’s affect on the accident.
Ad did you even read the article? The guy did not get stonded before or during work hours. He got stoned the night before. It’s obvious you have no knowledge about pot or getting high to let me educate you: if you get stoned the night before work, you are not high the next day. Just like people who have a drink or two after work will have alcohol in their system the next day but they are not drunk (legal or otherwise). Try using your brain once in a while.
In this case I would trust the judgment of the people working around this guy rather than some “toxicologist” that speaks in shoulds/woulds and coulds.
KlS is only saying that this ruling sets a precedence, therefore booze it up every night before going to work and throw all your cares away to your own detriment. Idiots!? All of you who think you’re not accountable. This nation needs more accountability!
Stand up! Take your medicine! Nobody owes you anything!
This case has major implications in Oregon where business leaders are working hard to make it legal to discriminate against medical marijuana patients.
Need a little anger management phsych class.
If you think for one minute that people aren;t responsible for their actions today.I’d like to move to your state.
What happened to empowerment that all the big dogs push. If the managers would do their jobs and train people themselves then workers could do their job and not run into situations like this.
As usual it’s a blatant throws this way out of proportion.
Most of prescription medication for pain has been proven to alter your alertness more than marijhuana.
Dude, where’s my compensation?
So the co-workers deposition overrode the medical toxicolotist’s in this decision?
Amazing!
ad……have to agree with you again. Its sad that our legal system is so flawed that it defies its own rulings. Employees can enter “evidence”. What evidence aside from two idiots opinions? As an experienced worker, the clmt. can’t blame the new hire for this snafu. Normally, people are extra careful when training somebody, particularly when it’s your own body that’s at risk. I’ve handled WC in NYC and this abuse in TN pales in comparison.
Looks like employers should hire more potheads, they won’t have to pay as much work comp if they contest all the claims. That’s one reason employers hire illegals, because illegals are too scared to file a work comp claim.
Chico, donde estas mi compensacion?
Is this case making the news because the substance involved was marijuana or because the testimony of the new employee was considered above the toxicologists report?
What if the injured person had been hungover from taking legal prescription meds or drinking alcohol the night before?
Your opionions?
What are you suggesting, that Teddy Kennedy could never press a WC claim successfully?
What is the matter with you people. The new employee turned on the machine and hit took his fingers. This was an accident and should have been covered. It has nothing to do with “being responsible for oneself” The problem with our industry is that when a claim should be paid….idiot adjusters try to find a way not to pay…
C’mon, Fred, Your comment that “idiot adjusters try to get out of paying the claim” is totally offbase. Everyone is always trying to “shoot the messenger”. The claims adjusters collect the “facts” and report (messages) to the companies. Company management and their defense attorneys then make the decisions to pay or deny. Adjuster’s are not attorneys….they cannot go into courts and file petitions in suits to deny claims.
In this particular court case, the experienced worker training the new hire was probably NOT under the influence of marijuana smoked the night before, or several days before, therefore properly received his benefits due him by order of the court. As a 40 year claims adjuster, I’m glad to see the court put this apparent overzealous workers comp carrier in its place, knowing that marijuana stays in your bloodstream (or urine) for up to 4 weeks, more or less.
My previous post’s intent is to show how setting a precedence, without knowing ALL the facts in the case, could cause many workers around the country to misinterpret the courts findings, therefore taking a cavalier attitude about their own accountability and show up at work with .8 or more alcohol in their blood and cause their own injuries at their jobs. They are accountable for their own actions when they are around machinery which carries manufacturer’s warning labels: “don’t operate this machinery if you are under the influence of medications”, or similar words to that effect. These warnings implicitly apply to illegal drugs, as well.
Claims adjusters are also accountable to state insurance regulators and national industry associations, by requiring them to adhere to strict rules of ethics in handling claims. As in all professions, there are a few bad apples out there that gives a black-eye to the insurance profession. But, I’ll bet that they are fewer in number than the number of policyholders who try to rip off their own insurance company.
When uninformed people post their non-sensical comments about legal issues without knowing all the facts, they have a very infuential way of misleading the public who reads these posts. If you want to know what the court’s thinking wss in arriving at their conclusion, go to the Tennessee Supreme Courts cases on their internet web-site and READ for yourselves.
You amuse me with your post. Why would you say that he was probably NOT under the influence, when the toxicologist appears to have found otherwise.
And then, you say that the courts properly awarded the injured worker. Sympathy for the “poor employee” vs. the “big bad companies” seem to come into play way too often.
I can tell you some stories about my husband’s employees and what they have been caught doing at the job. They DO NOT perform well under the influence. If they are going to risk their safety and even more importantly, the safety of other employees, they don’t deserve anything but a kick in the pants.
I was young once too. Guess what I learned when I did stupid things, I paid the consequences. That’s what an employee under the influence should do.
By the way, last I heard smoking pot was illegal.
Well, ad, the issue of the worker violating his employment rules is separate from the issue the court apparently ruled on. Go back and re-read my previous post. I never meant that the employee can avoid being “fired” which is probably what ultimately happened. As I said, before, one cannot reasonably conclude what the court’s intent was in arriving at their conclusion.
And, I do agree with your comments about employees showing up at work….to drunk from drinking the night before resulting in a dangerous condition for other employees.
I am not sure exactly what you are trying to say, perhaps because I am rushing back to work.
When I use the term under the influence, I mean drugs too.
I am relatively certain workers’ compensation law allows for coverage to be excluded when you become injured while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. I believe it is fair. Again, not just for the user’s safety, as much as for the unsuspecting people around him/her. And finally, why should an employer’s insurance carrier need to pick up coverage if an employee is willing to put his or her safety on the line?
Okay, ad, let’s go at it again. Afer re-reading the news article, this appears to be similar to the “Man Bites Dog” issue.
It appears (not confirmed) that the trial court AND the Supreme Court ruled on the same issue, i.e., the injury was “caused” by the inexperience worker, and the marijuana chemical being in the claimant’s urine had NOTHING to do with the injured party’s alertness. Apparently he exhibited a condition of being sober as testified by the fellow workers. The discovery of marijuana chemical was a result of the hospital’s testings required for any type of surgeries. Now, he still gets WC benefits but still is probably fired for violation of a pre-employee agreement.
This is the statement I base my thoughts:
“A medical toxicologist testified in a deposition “that the level of THC in McIntosh’s system at the time of the injury would have impaired his reaction time,” the ruling states.”
There are tests to determine how recently someone has smoked pot, so this is a true and dated science.
In my opinion, the guy didn’t deserve his benefits. He had a responsiblity to come in without narcotics in him. His reaction to the accident may have worked to prevent the damage it caused. Even if it did not, he still knew he wasn’t supposed to be coming in to work stoned or getting stoned during his work time. I would guess since it is common knowledge to many employees that he knew workers’ compensation would not extend to him if he were tested and found to be under the influence, regardless of it’s affect on the accident.
How many of you have read the ruling?
http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/OPINIONS/tsc/PDF/072/McIntoshbOPN.pdf
Ad did you even read the article? The guy did not get stonded before or during work hours. He got stoned the night before. It’s obvious you have no knowledge about pot or getting high to let me educate you: if you get stoned the night before work, you are not high the next day. Just like people who have a drink or two after work will have alcohol in their system the next day but they are not drunk (legal or otherwise). Try using your brain once in a while.
In this case I would trust the judgment of the people working around this guy rather than some “toxicologist” that speaks in shoulds/woulds and coulds.