Krajewski v. Atlantic Machine Tool Works, Inc., 4500 CRB-6-02-3 (March 7, 2003).
CRB noted that employer is not obligated to rehire claimant many years after injury and subsequent, legitimate lay-off, long after maximum medical improvement has been reached. See also, Krajewski, § 31-278, § 31-284b, § 31-290a, § 31-301. Appeal Procedure, § 31-301. Factual Findings, § 31-301-9, § 31-312, § 31-315; prior decisions at Krajewski, 15 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 44, 2120 CRB-6-94-8 (Nov. 28, 1995), § 31-308a; Krajewski, 11 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 54, 1387 CRD-6-92-2 (April 1, 1993), § 31-290a.
Belanger v. J & G Belanger Concrete Construction, 4368 CRB-6-01-3 (February 19, 2002).
Factual issue as to whether employer has suitable light duty work available, but fails to provide it to employee. Evidence supported finding that no suitable work was available here. See also, Belanger, § 31-308a.
Phillips v. Siemens Rolm, 3751 CRB-7-97-12 (December 11, 1998).
Trial commissioner’s imposition of a fine for employer’s failure to comply with § 31-313 in the amount of $350.00 for each day of non-compliance modified so as to conform with § 31-313’s $500.00 limit.
Zienka v. New Britain, 11 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 143, 1407 CRB-6-92-4 (August 2, 1993), aff’d, 34 Conn. App. 913 (1994), cert. denied, 230 Conn. 905 (1994).
CRB affirmed trier’s finding employer offered a suitable light duty position which claimant refused for medical reasons unrelated to his compensable injury. See also, Zienka, § 31-290a.
Hill v. Pitney Bowes, 8 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 98, 832 CRD-7-89-3 (May 17, 1990).
Determination of whether employer failed to provide claimant with suitable light duty work is a question of fact. See also, Hill, § 31-290a, § 31-301. Factual findings.
Fabianski v. State, 2 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 58, 235 CRD-5-83 (June 1, 1984).
Decision under § 31-313 must be made after an evidentiary hearing.