Help

BI’s Article search uses Boolean search capabilities. If you are not familiar with these principles, here are some quick tips.

To search specifically for more than one word, put the search term in quotation marks. For example, “workers compensation”. This will limit your search to that combination of words.

To search for a combination of terms, use quotations and the & symbol. For example, “hurricane” & “loss”.

Login Register Subscribe

Court rules injury proof irrelevant to retaliation claim

Reprints

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a worker doesn’t need to prove an injury occurred on the job to establish a claim of retaliation.

Michael P. Onderko was working for Fremont, Ohio-based Sierra Lobo Inc., an engineering and technical service provider for the aerospace and transportation industries, when he claimed that he hurt his knee while moving office furniture with two other employees, Nov. 15, 2010, court records said.

Mr. Onderko filed a report of injury with the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation, alleging that his knee had been injured while lifting and pushing equipment at work. The bureau denied his claim for benefits, but later allowed the claim, which Sierra then appealed to the Industrial Commission, said the court filing.

Mr. Onderko did not appeal the ruling and returned to work, but shortly after that he was terminated in December 2012 for trying to obtain workers comp benefits for a non-work-related injury, court documents said.

According to legal records, he then filed a claim in the Erie County Court of Common Pleas, stating his termination violated an Ohio statute that protects injured workers from retaliation after filing a workers comp claim.

The trial judge ruled against the former employee, who then appealed the decision, and the Court of Appeals for the 6th District in Toledo, Ohio, reversed the ruling, stating that the retaliation statute is “to enable employees to freely exercise their rights without fear of retribution from their employers,” court documents said.

Sierra Lobo appealed the court decision and the Ohio Supreme Court, after considering the case, disagreed with the lower court’s decision, and ruled 5-1 to reverse the judgment, saying that there is no requirement that the employee prove that the injury happened on the job and that Mr. Onderko’s failing to appeal the denial of his workers comp claim does not exclude him from the statute that prohibits employers from a retaliating discharge, because then the worker would have to decide between staying employed or submitting a workers comp claim, according to legal records.

Dissenting Justice Terrence O’Donnell said the court shouldn’t “encourage fraudulent claims for workers compensation benefits” while the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation found there was no workplace injury, court records said.

Read Next

  • OSHA gears up for raft of safety guideline rollouts

    ATLANTA — The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration will have a busy regulatory agenda during the second half of 2016, including the planned publication of anti-retaliation and health and safety program management guidelines, according to the head of OSHA.