How Would You Decide: The Case of the False Social Security Card
Tom Robinson, J.D., writer for Lexis Nexis Workers Comp Law Center reports:
Here’s What Happened
Following a work-related injury, an undocumented worker used a fake social security number on several occasions in connection with his medical treatment — at the hospital where he was taken by ambulance following his injury, at a pharmacy when obtaining prescription medication, and on the telephone in an interview between the worker and a claims investigator.
The employer/carrier (E/C) argued the worker’s actions were knowingly and intentionally committed in order to obtain workers’ compensation benefits. The Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) agreed and denied all claims under §440.09, Florida Statutes. The worker appealed, contending he presented the Social Security number solely as a means of identification and that he lacked the requisite intent to obtain benefits.
Here’s How the Court Ruled
In Arreola v. Administrative Concepts, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 11323 (August 14, 2009), the Court of Appeal of Florida (First District) determined that substantial evidence supported the JCC’s findings. Observing § 440.105(4)(b) prohibited any person to “make, or cause to be made,” any false, fraudulent, or misleading statements for the purpose of obtaining workers’ compensation benefits and that an employee found to have knowingly or intentionally committed one of these prohibited acts is not entitled to compensation or benefits under the workers’ compensation statute [§ 440.09(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006)], the appellate court concluded that whether a worker had violated the relevant statute was a question of fact to be determined by the JCC.
Here the JCC had determined the false social security number was used by the worker on at least three separate occasions. The JCC, who is charged with evaluating the credibility of the witnesses, found the worker provided the false social security number in order to obtain workers’ compensation benefits. According to the appellate court, such a finding was within the JCC’s province.
As to the worker’s contention that the primary reason he had been denied workers’ compensation benefits was because of his undocumented status, the appellate court disagreed. Citing Safeharbor Employer Servs. I, Inc. v. Cinto Velazquez, 860 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), the court stressed that Illegal aliens are covered by the Florida Workers’ Compensation Law [see § 440.02(15)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006)]. No special rules applied, however, to undocumented workers. Like any other employee, they had to comply with the statute in order to obtain the statute’s benefits. In order to be self-executing, the statute required everyone to be truthful, responsive, and complete.
Note: Florida has several recent cases running against undocumented workers. The others deal with a particular Florida statute for computing average weekly wage. That statute speaks of “wages” that are reported to the IRS or other taxing authorities. An undocumented worker didn’t report wages on a tax return and the Florida court held his AWW was zero.
There is a policy argument that the Arreola holding penalizes those employers who abide by the law, as their workers’ injuries are compensable, while the employer who is less exacting in requiring employment documentation (and, therefore, hires illegals) can then stand behind the worker’s “fraud” and fail to pay for the injury.
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 39.01 – 39.03.
Tom Robinson, J.D. is the primary upkeep writer for Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis) and Larson’s Workers’ Compensation, Desk Edition (LexisNexis). He is a contributing writer for California Compensation Cases (LexisNexis) and Benefits Review Board – Longshore Reporter(LexisNexis), and is a contributing author to New York Workers’ Compensation Handbook(LexisNexis). Robinson is an authority in the area of workers’ compensation and we are happy to have him as a Guest Contributor to Workers’ Comp Kit Blog. Tom can be reached at: [email protected].
http://law.lexisnexis.com/practiceareas/Workers-Compensation
We are accepting short articles* (200-300 words) on WC cost containment. Non-salesy, written from employer’s viewpoint. To: [email protected]. Subject Line: “Blog Submission.” Name/Title, Company, Phone/Cell, Short Bio. See http://www.reduceyourworkerscomp.com/. We will contact you. *Non-compensable.
WC IQ Test: http://www.workerscompkit.com/intro/
Books: http://www.reduceyourworkerscomp.com/workers-comp-books-manuals.php
WC Calculator: www.reduceyourworkerscomp.com/calculator.php
New Article: Return to Work in Unionized Companies
http://reduceyourworkerscomp.com//Return-to-Work-Programs-Unionized-Companies.php
Do not use this information without independent verification. All state laws vary. You should consult with your insurance broker about workers’ comp issues.
©2008 Amaxx Risk Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved under International Copyright Law. If you would like permission to reprint this material, contact [email protected]
