part time employment

[smithj97]

I am not sure if anyone will be able to help with this, but it never hurts to ask. My husband was working two jobs when he was injured - a full time job and a part time job. He was injured on the full time job and now could not work at either job. He is getting wage replacement for the full time job only. (We are trying to find out if he should have been getting wage replacement for the part time job as well.) As of date he cannot return to work at his full time job, however he can return to work at his part time job. Will the income from his part time job reduce the amount of the wage replacement he is getting for the full time job? I've tried to look online for anything regarding part time and full time jobs but have been unsuccessful. FYI - we are in Alabama.
Thanks for the help!

[AQA]

smithj97, http://dir.alabama.gov/wc/ombudsman.aspx

I am glad to hear your husban can do the part time job. To answere your question. I don't have one. You may want to call and speak with an obudsman at the site above.

[smithj97]

Just an FYI - after talking with the attorney, we found out that w/c will probably stop sending the loss wage replacement completely - even though it is just a part time job and even though he was working the part time job at the time of his injury. What a bunch of @#$%!

[Timothy Belt]

What state are you in? In PA the part time earnings would be included as part of the average weekly wage as concurrent employment. If he was only able to return to the one job and not the other, his wage loss benefits would only be reduced by the part time position.

smithj97 Wrote:Just an FYI - after talking with the attorney, we found out that w/c will probably stop sending the loss wage replacement completely - even though it is just a part time job and even though he was working the part time job at the time of his injury. What a bunch of @#$%!

[smithj97]

We are in Alabama. He has not been getting wage loss replacement for the part time job at all - only for the full time job.......I don't think that the whole thing is very fair - but that's what the attorney said - I just wish I could find something online regarding this situation. I guess not too many people work both full time and part time. Maybe the situation has never come up in my state.

Timothy Belt Wrote:What state are you in? In PA the part time earnings would be included as part of the average weekly wage as concurrent employment. If he was only able to return to the one job and not the other, his wage loss benefits would only be reduced by the part time position.

smithj97 Wrote:Just an FYI - after talking with the attorney, we found out that w/c will probably stop sending the loss wage replacement completely - even though it is just a part time job and even though he was working the part time job at the time of his injury. What a bunch of @#$%!

[Timothy Belt]

It comes up frequently in my practice, so I am sure it must have happened at some point in Alabama. However, I do not know the law in your state, so I will have to differ to your attorney. Other subscribers may know the answer though.

[smithj97]

Timothy,
I was able to find something in the Code of Alabame. Section 25-5-76 states:
Liability of joint employers.
In case any employeee for whose injury or death compensation is payable under this article shall, at the time of the injury, be employed and paid jointly by two or more employers subject to this chapter, such employers shall contribute the payment of such compensation in the porportion of their several earnings liability to such employee. If one or more, but not all of such employers, should be subject to this article, and otherwise subject to liability for compensation hereunder, then the liability of such of them as are so subject shall be to pay the proportion of the entire compensation which their proportionate earnings liability bears to the entire earnings of the employee. Nothing in this section shall prevent any arrangement between such employers for a different distribution, as between themselves, of the ultimate burden of such compensation.

Not sure exactly what this means - but it is the closest thing I could find for my state. Can you interpret?

Timothy Belt Wrote:It comes up frequently in my practice, so I am sure it must have happened at some point in Alabama. However, I do not know the law in your state, so I will have to differ to your attorney. Other subscribers may know the answer though.

[1171]

This above passage refers to a situation when liability for the injury or condition is shared among multiple employers and not where an injury occurrs under a single employer which is the situation here.

I don't have an answer but it seems strange that it works against the employee both ways e.g.
the wages don't count when they pay disability yet they do count when they want to deduct other earnings and reduce the disability -- one or the other but not both.

probably takes some one familiar with Alabama caselaw to have an opinion. The ombudsman recommendation was the best response.

[Timothy Belt]

I would just suggest obtaining a second legal opinion from a local lawyer. It stands to reason that if the legislature considered the possibility of shared liability between more than one employer it would have also considered the possibility of single employer liability with multiemployer disability.