No matter what you do, that is what you are, and, depending on what you do, and how you do it, defines whether you are normal or not, with insincere apologies to Young Frankenstein and Igor. Not to worry, this is not an indictment of your work ethic, nor is it about your political, religious, social, or other opinions, as this is simply a testament to the seemingly absolute truism in workers’ compensation claims, that it is nearly impossible to prove the compensability of mental/mental injuries, predicated upon a claim of “abnormal working conditions.”
Recently, the Commonwealth Court issued an opinion on October 6, 2010, in Payes v. WCAB (PA State Police), underscoring the well-settled compensation theorem, that Claimants employed in highly stressful occupations, like State Troopers, Police Officers, Firefighters, Emergency Room Personnel, and Insurance Claims Adjusters, must prove that the emotional/psychological stimuli allegedly triggering the mental/mental “injury”, typically diagnosed as post traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”), is/are so extraordinary, within the context of what is objectively considered to be normal or ordinary job-specific stimuli, that these claims are routinely defended by employers, as the claims are not dependent upon the diagnosis of an “work injury”, the gravamen of all other physical injury claims, but are instead one of the most difficult claims under the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act for Claimants to prove as being compensable.
