Workers Compensation Case Study

Words: 1538
Pages: 7

Workers Compensation applies to workers and employers differently, depending on the circumstances that surround that particular incident. Sometimes the workers’ compensation benefits are given because clear cut reasoning is given. Other times, some disputes may occur, resulting in legal action taking place. The following situation, resulted in a dispute between employer and employee requiring legal action. Jeff Phillips was a twenty-two year employee at Continental Tires The America, LLC (CTA) in Mount Vernon, Illinois. Continental Tires The America is a tire manufacturing company the employed Mr. Phillips as a passenger general trucker. This particular facility has a health services department located within that provides medical treatment …show more content…
Phillips was refused workers’ compensation because he refused to follow the company’s written substance abuse policy. This policy clearly states that all employees have to submit to a drug test if they fall into certain categories. From the beginning of the process, or as soon as Jeff walked into the health services at his place of employment, he was made aware that he would have to submit to a test or be suspended pending termination. When he decided to refuse the drug test, he knew the consequences associated with doing so. While he makes claims that he feels this discourages employees from reporting, it is clear that others have received benefits without the retaliation that he states. Since Mr. Phillips, has received workers’ compensation in the past, I believe that this confirms that decision, as he was not afraid to report …show more content…
Therefore, they are more likely to exaggerate or falsify claims in order to ensure that they receive the benefits of the workers’ compensation program. This is why many employers choose to have substance abuse policies which require drug testing. “If through a drug-testing program, which includes preemployment testing of applicants, an employer is able to identify and deny employment to individuals who use illicit drugs, potential future incidences of fraud may be simultaneously averted.” (Wertz & Bryant, 2001) If companies prevent these types of employees, they are less likely to encounter some of the issues