WCAB panel decisions are more frequently approving total disability awards based upon vocational rehabilitation experts. The trend seems to be an erosion of reliance upon the AMA Guides as was the intent of SB 899 when it passed in 2004.

In this new illustrative panel decision, Craig Hanus sustained injuries to his left shoulder, neck, low back and neurological system on November 15, 2014 while employed as a heavy equipment mechanic by URS / AECOM Corporation

Subsequently, in 2015, Hanus obtained a job at Northrup Grumman as a painter. He only lasted six hours before his “body shut down” as it had done when he tried to return to work for his prior employer.

Hanus testified at trial that when he stopped working for Northrup Grumman, he had pain in his hands, arms, shoulders, back, legs, headaches, and “shooting pain in his ears” that would sometimes go to his eyes and affect his eyesight. He currently has pain “everywhere,” has balance problems, and uses a cane to prevent falling. Following left shoulder surgery, he cannot raise his left arm above shoulder level (the court observed his left hand shaking when he lifted it that far) and cannot grip or grasp things in his left hand.

Applicant was seen by a vocational evaluator, Roderick Stoneburner, in October 2017. Mr. Stoneburner’s evaluation and found that he was untrainable and I 00% disabled

After trial WCJ found that Hanus sustained 100% permanent disability, without apportionment, as a result of his admitted November 15, 2014 industrial injury to his left shoulder, neck, low back and neurological system while employed as a heavy equipment mechanic by URS/ AECOM Corporation. The petition for reconsideration by the employer was denied in the panel decision of Hanus v URS/AECOM Corporation.

Defendant contested the WCJ’s finding that applicant is permanently totally disabled, an contended that applicant cannot rebut the 2013 permanent disability rating schedule using methods approved for rebutting the 2005 rating schedule. Defendant further argues that the vocational evidence does not rebut the rating schedule, since the vocational expert used impermissible factors, failed to consider the apportionment determination of the orthopedic Qualified Medical Evaluator and made unsubstantiated assertions that applicant was incapable of sedentary work.

In response the WCAB concluded that “To the extent the WCJ’s finding that applicant is permanently totally disabled is based upon applicant’s work restrictions, as the WCJ discusses in the last paragraph of page 5 of his Report, we note that the rating of permanent disability is not determined by measuring work restrictions, but rather, by reference to the rating of the whole person impairment under the appropriate sections of the AMA Guides.”

“Here, we find the descriptions of the extent of applicant’s impairments which are caused by his industrial injury in the medical reports of Dr. Doty, Dr. Patrick and Dr. Germanovich, as referenced and considered by the vocational expert, Mr. Stoneburner, support the WCJ’s finding that·applicant is permanently totally disabled.”