UNITED PARCEL SERVICE; LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY CRAIG GONSALVES WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIACRAIG GONSALVES, Applicant,vs.UNITED PARCEL SERVICE; LIBERTY MUTUAL FIREINSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants.Case No. ADJ2971436 (OAK 0253681)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION On December 29, 2011, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Appeals Board) granted reconsideration of the October 6, 2011 Findings and Award to further study the factual and legal issues. This is our Decision After Reconsideration. In the October 6, 2011 Findings and Award, the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that applicant’s employer did not violate Labor Code section 132a by terminating applicant’s employment on August 20, 1999 or by terminating applicant’s employment on June 20, 2001. The WCJ found that applicant’s employer violated Labor Code section 132a by refusing to allow applicant to return to work between June 26, 2000 and May 23, 2001. Previously, the WCJ found that applicant, while employed on March 13, 1997, sustained an industrial injury to his back. Defendant contends, in essence, that the WCJ erred in finding that it violated Labor Code section 132a by refusing to allow applicant to return to work between June 26, 2000 and May 23, 2001, arguing that the WCJ failed to make findings as required by Department of Rehabilitation v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Lauher) (2003) 30 Cal.4th 128 [68 Cal.Comp.Cases 831]. Specifically, defendant argues that applicant has not shown that his employer failed to return him to work because of his industrial injury or that he was singled out for disadvantageous treatment as a result of his industrial injury. Applicant also filed a Petition for Reconsideration. He contends that the WCJ erred in finding that applicant’s employer did not violate Labor Code section 132a by terminating applicant’s employment on , August 20, 1999 or by terminating
Menu
