04-12WC. Semka Mujic v. Vermont Teddy Bear Factory.

• Court: Vermont

Vermont Workers Compensation 2012. 04-12WC. Semka Mujic v. Vermont Teddy Bear Factory Semka Mujic v. Vermont Teddy Bear Factory(February 7, 2012)STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF LABORSemka Mujic v. Vermont Teddy Bear FactoryOpinion No. 04-12WCBy: Phyllis Phillips, Esq. Hearing OfficerFor: Anne M. Noonan CommissionerState File No. AA-56037OPINION AND ORDERHearing held in Montpelier on November 2, 2011 Record closed on December 13, 2011APPEARANCES:Christopher McVeigh, Esq., for Claimant Keith Kasper, Esq., for DefendantISSUES PRESENTED:1.Did Claimant's work for Defendant cause or aggravate her current cervical spine condition? 2.Does Dr. Jewell's proposed fusion surgery represent reasonable medical treatment under 21 V.S.A. §640(a)?EXHIBITS: Joint Exhibit I: Medical records Joint Exhibit II: Stipulation Claimant's Exhibit 1: Deposition of Ryan Jewell, M.D., November 2, 2011 Defendant's Exhibit A: Personnel file Defendant's Exhibit B: Site visit video, May 20, 2011 Defendant's Exhibit C: Video evaluation by Dr. Sobel Defendant's Exhibit D: Curriculum vitae, Jonathan Sobel, M.D. Defendant's Exhibit E: Curriculum vitae, George White, Jr., M.D., M.S. CLAIM: Medical benefits pursuant to 21 V.S.A. §640 Temporary total disability benefits pursuant to 21 V.S.A. §642 Permanent partial disability benefits pursuant to 21 V.S.A. §648 Vocational rehabilitation benefits pursuant to 21 V.S.A. §641 Costs and attorney fees pursuant to 21 V.S.A. §678 FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. At all times relevant to these proceedings, Claimant was an employee and Defendant was her employer as those terms are defined in Vermont's Workers' Compensation Act. 2. Judicial notice is taken of all relevant forms contained in the Department's file relating to this claim. Claimant's Work_from 1996 to 2010 3. Claimant, a Bosnian native, immigrated to the United States in 1996 and settled in Vermont. She began working as a sewer for Defendant in November 1996. Her job was to assemble component parts for teddy bears. The work was fast-paced and somewhat strenuous. It required her to force thick material through an industrial sewing machine for the whole of her eight-hour day. Claimant testified that sitting in a bent-over position as she worked the sewing machine she often felt strain in her neck, upper back and shoulders. She never reported any injury to her supervisors, however, and never sought medical treatment for these complaints during her tenure at this job. 4. Claimant worked at the sewing job for three years. In September 1999 she left to take a job assembling cable at Huber+Suhner. Claimant found this job to be much easier, as it was not as fast-paced or as stressful physically as her work for Defendant had been. 5. Claimant worked at Huber+Suhner for two years. She was laid of in September 2001. Thereafter, she was unemployed for approximately one year. In October 2002 she again sought employment at Defendant's facility and was rehired. 6. Upon returning to work for Defendant, initially Claimant resumed her old job sewing teddy bear parts. In May 2004 she transferred to the order fulfillment department. Claimant welcomed the transfer, as she anticipated that this job would be less taxing physically. 7. Claimant's duties in order fulfillment were varied.(fn1) Her primary responsibility was packing pajamas. As a cardboard shipping box containing whichever products a customer had ordered came down the conveyor belt from the picking line, Claimant would remove the products, fold and place them into a decorative organza container, then return them to the shipping box and send it down the line to the shipping department. Claimant typically spent six to eight hours daily at this task, and typically met the expected quota of 20 boxes packed per hour. 8. During her tenure in the order fulfillment department, Claimant spent most of her time on the pajama packing line. Depending on Defendant's needs, at times she worked on the bear packing line instead. This was a similar process, with the added step of dressing the bears in accordance with the customer's order prior to sending the box down the line to be shipped. 9. At other times Claimant worked on the picking line - on busy days, for up to three or four hours, less on slower days. This task involved manually moving several shipping boxes at a time down a conveyor belt, picking the products required to fulfill each customer's order as she went. The products were stored in cardboard boxes arranged on shelves to her side, from floor level to above-shoulder height. Once each order was completed, Claimant would move its shipping box from the manual conveyor to a mechanical one, where it would travel to the packing line. 10. With cross-training, Claimant sometimes performed other functions as well. One or two days per week she worked in the print room, printing and sorting incoming order forms. Other assignments included hand-checking boxes for quality control, embroidering personalized bears and hand-wrapping boxes for storage. Monthly she would have to assist with inventory, which required removing the boxes in the picking area from their shelves, counting the product inside and then placing the boxes back on the shelves. 11. One of the tasks with which Claimant experienced the most difficulty was stocking product in the picking area. She used a small box cutter to open the front of each box so that it could be accessed easily from the picking line. The cardboard was thick, and cutting through it caused pain in her right arm. It is unclear from the evidence presented how often Claimant had to perform this task. 12. Claimant worked in the order fulfillment department from May 2004 until October 1, 2010. She terminated her employment with Defendant on that date and moved to Massachusetts, where her husband had taken a job. She has not worked since. In July 2011 she was determined eligible for social security disability benefits on account of an unrelated medical condition. Claimant's Prior Medical History 13. As documented by her medical records, Claimant has a history of neck and right upper extremity complaints dating back at least to July 2000. The symptoms she reported at that time included constant neck pain, discomfort extending into her right shoulder and arm, headaches and right-sided facial numbness. Notably, during the time when Claimant underwent evaluation and treatment for these symptoms, from July 2000 through July 2001, she was working not for Defendant but in her cable assembly job at Huber+Suhner. Claimant herself...