Frances Carr v. Amazon.com Services, IAB No. 1540462 (Feb. 25, 2025)
In Delaware workers’ compensation cases, claimants who are unable to return to their previous jobs due to injury may contend they are prima facie displaced or actually displaced. The key issue before the Industrial Accident Board was whether the claimant’s job search was reasonable and whether her inability to secure employment was due to her work-related injury.
On September 17, 2023, the claimant sustained compensable work injuries to her neck and back. As a result, she began receiving total disability benefits. On April 15, 2024, the employer filed a petition seeking to terminate those ongoing benefits. At the October 24, 2024, hearing, the claimant agreed she was capable of performing sedentary work but argued entitlement to ongoing total disability as a displaced worker based on a job search.
The claimant testified that beginning in April 2024, she submitted over 130 applications through Indeed.com, as well as 70 more applications through other methods. Her search resulted in interviews with two companies. The Industrial Accident Board found the claimant’s job search reasonable. There was testimony that the claimant told potential employers about her physical limitations, although it was not clear from the decision if that information was provided to all of the prospective employers, most of the prospective employers, or just some of the prospective employers. This information seems important since, if a claimant advises prospective employers that she has a physical limitation and she does not get the job, there is an inference that the employers turned the claimant down because of the partial disability.
Having found that the claimant conducted a reasonable job search and apparently inferring that her job search was unsuccessful because of her work-related injury, the Board next considered and rejected the employer’s rebuttal and found that, for now, the claimant is actually a displaced worker.
