Complete Labor Law Poster for $24.95
from, includes
State, Federal, & OSHA posting requirements


No announcement yet.

California - Worker's comp mess

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Sounds like an ADA violation, if you ask me. But then I'm not an HR rep.
    I don't believe what I write, and neither should you. Information furnished to you is for debate purposes only, be sure to verify with your own research.
    Keep in mind that the information provided may not be worth any more than either a politician's promise or what you paid for it (nothing).
    I also may not have been either sane or sober when I wrote it down.
    Don't worry, be happy. is a good resource!


    • #17
      Get a free consultation

      Alice, workers' comp lawyers all give free, no-obligation consultations. It may benefit you to get one or more from local workers' comp lawyers. Try to choose one who does a great deal of comp work, representing only the workers' side. That lawyer will be more informed on the law and the procedures than someone who handles a case occasionally.

      At least after getting a free consultation you may have a better idea of your rights in this situation, and what can be done to protect your rights. Your employer seems to be jerking you around a bit. And the free consult will help you decide whether you actually need to hire a lawyer or not.

      Good luck.
      Bob Bollinger, Attorney
      Board Certified Specialist in NC Workers' Compensation Law
      Charlotte, NC


      • #18
        Just a thought but since we are talking about CA, vacation/PTO is legally vested but sick pay is not. So the obvious question is what type of leave we are talking about that is being used. It is OK to reduce vacation/PTO balances under CLC if and only if the payment is being made to the employee. It is not legal to reduce vacation/PTO balances under CLC if the payment is already being made by a third party such as WC. And having WC pay 2/3rds and the employer pay 1/3 and reduce the PTO balance for that 1/3 is both legal and common. Having the employer pay 100% up front, thenHOWEVER, talking about CLC only if we are talking sick leave only, there are no such protections for sick leave. This is very black letter law, and if violated, CA-DLSE will entertain a wage claim.

        Now some federal laws such as FMLA do not require the payment by the employer for hours not worked, but do require that employees on FMLA be treated the same as employees not on FMLA. I am not expert on the rules of all federal and state laws effecting leave, but there is at least a chance that one of those could be in play here.
        "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".
        Philip K. **** (1928-1982)


        The forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation.