Catherine Antosh Applicant
Masonite Corp. Employer
Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Amer. Insurer
No. 2017-004014
Wisconsin Workers Compensation
State of Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission
December 14, 2018
Atty.
Michael H. Gillick
Atty.
Richard C. Davis
WORKER’S COMPENSATION DECISION
1
Georgia E. Maxwell, Chairperson.
Interlocutory
Order
The
commission modifies and
affirms the decision of the administrative
law judge. Accordingly, within thirty (30) days of the date
of this order, the respondent shall pay:
1. To the applicant, as compensation, the sum of eight
thousand, six hundred seventy-six dollars and forty-two cents
($8,676.42); and, as reimbursement for out-of-pocket medical
expenses, the sum of seven hundred sixty-two dollars and
eighty-four cents ($762.84).
2. To the applicant's attorney, Michael H. Gillick, as
fees, the sum of two thousand, two hundred forty-one dollars
and twenty cents ($2,241.20); and, for costs, two hundred
eighty-eight dollars and thirty-nine cents ($288.39).
3. To the nonindustrial short-term disability carrier that
paid short-term disability benefits to the applicant during
her period of temporary disability at issue, the sum of
eleven thousand, seventy dollars and thirty-six cents
($11,070.36).
4. For the applicant’s medical treatment expenses:
a. To Marshfield Clinic, the sum of five thousand, five
hundred fifty-six dollars and sixty-six cents ($5,556.66).
b. To Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Wisconsin, the sum of
twenty-nine thousand, one hundred forty-eight dollars and
eighty cents ($29,148.88).
Jurisdiction
is reserved with respect to any unpaid and future medical
treatment expense reasonably required by the work injury; and
with respect to the possibility of additional temporary or
permanent disability that is demonstrated to have been
sustained as a result of the work injury.
By the
Commission:
Laurie
R. McCallum, Commissioner, David B. Falstad, Commissioner
Procedural
Posture
This
case is before the commission to consider the
applicant’s entitlement to worker’s compensation
benefits. The applicant filed a hearing application in August
of 2016, alleging a repetitive use injury of both feet. The
employer and its insurer (collectively, the respondent)
conceded jurisdictional facts and an average weekly wage of
$726.40. An administrative law judge for the Department of
Administration, Division of Hearings and Appeals, Office of
Worker’s Compensation Hearings, heard the matter on
October 4, 2017, and issued a decision on January 2, 2018,
finding that the applicant sustained work-related bilateral
plantar fasciitis and tarsal tunnel syndrome, and awarded
benefits. The respondent filed a timely petition for
commission review.
The
commission has considered the petition and the positions of
the parties and has independently reviewed the evidence
submitted at the hearing. Based on its review, the commission
modifies and affirms the decision of the administrative law
judge.
Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law
The
commission makes the same findings of fact and conclusions of
law as stated in the decision of the administrative law judge
and incorporates them by reference into the
commission’s decision, subject to the following:
Modification
On page
3 of the decision, in the last line of the fourth paragraph,
insert the word “not” between “operator
position is” and “as physically demanding as her
support duties were.”
Memorandum
Opinion
The
applicant, who was born in 1960, worked as a laborer for the
employer for about eight years before she alleged an
occupational injury to both of her feet. For about three and
a half years, she worked in a job that required her to push
and pull trolleys carrying up to 15 doors along tracks; the
trolleys weighed from 1,500 to 4,500 pounds and the applicant
asserts she had to exert her feet to push and pull them. The
applicant claims that this repetitive exertional work caused
her bilateral occupational plantar fasciitis and tarsal
tunnel syndrome. The respondent denies a work-related injury.
The
Applicant's Injury and Treatment
The
record contains some potentially relevant older medical
records. On April 18, 1996, the applicant had pain on the top
of her right foot and indicated she had strained it and then
her daughter stepped on it.
2 An April 22, 2003, note
indicates that the applicant started smoking at age 12 and
has been a lifelong smoker. A medical note dated August 7,
2009, shows the applicant reported to the emergency room for
left foot pain because she dropped a hammer or drill on her
foot and then bumped it; x-rays showed no fracture and the
applicant was given crutches and told to bear weight as
tolerated.
3 A medical note on August 10, 2009,
diagnosed this as a left small toe contusion and a left foot
paresthesias.
4 None of the applicant s prior medical
history resulted in any permanent work restrictions; and she
did not recall any problems with her feet prior to starting
work for the employer.
5
The
applicant began working for the employer, a manufacturer of
commercial grade solid-core doors,
6 in 2007, first in a
support position in the veneer department. In this position,
she would get material and load it onto a table-type cart and
push it down a pathway to a saw, cut it to size, and reload
it onto a cart.
7 The applicant worked in the veneer
department for approximately four and a half years and did so
without any problems.
8
The
applicant then worked in a support position in detail
manufacturing for approximately four years, though she had
some layoffs during that time, including one layoll of about
eight months.
9 In this job the applicant moved carts
or trolleys filled with doors to different parts of the
factory. These carts were about 7 feet long and 3 feet
wide,
10 and weighed approximately 25
pounds.
11 The doors could be 3' x 8'
or 3' x 10 or 4 x 10.
12 The door cores could
be made out of particle board, mineral core, Tectonite,
steel, or lead.
13 The outside of the doors could be
made out of veneer, Melamine, Pionite, Wilsonart, or other
plastic applications.
14 The carts held an average of 15
doors weighing from one to three hundred pounds each, and
each cart with doors could weigh from 1,500 to 4,500
pounds.
15 The applicant is 5' 3”
tall and weighs about 110 to 117 pounds.
16
The
applicant would move the trolley on tracks a distance of 10
or 12 feet up to 150 feet.
17 The applicant would
stand on the concrete floor between the two tracks to push
and pull the trolleys.
18 The floor was flat; there were no
inclines,
19 and the applicant wore steel toed
shoes.
20 For a long time this area was
missing the nonslip surface in many areas because it had worn
off.
21 When the applicant pushed a trolley,
she would use a handle bar and walk behind it to push
it.
22 She indicated it would take all of
her weight to push the trolleys: “I would brace myself
most of the time. I would put my foot in a roller to get my
momentum. Sometimes I would turn around, put my feet in a
roller and push my back into it to move them. Sometimes no
matter what I did, I couldn't budge a load, and I d have
to go get help.”
23 She also indicated that You had
to put your toes down and give it a
heave-ho.”
24 The applicant did not get help very
often.
25 Sometimes the applicant had to sort
the doors to take them to different parts of the
factory.
26 To stop a trolley, she would pull
back on it and slow it down: “It was kind of like
skidding to a stop sometimes. Sometimes you missed your
target and just kind of had to bring it
back.”
27 The applicant s group would produce
anywhere from 400 to 900 doors per day.
28 The applicant
estimated that 75-80% of the day was spent pushing the
trolleys; the rest of the time she spent writing up
requirements for the load, getting edge bands and putting
things into the computer.
29 There was no jumping,
running, or climbing required to do the job.
[30]
In the
fall of 2015, the applicant noticed that her feet started to
hurt; by the end of the day she found it painful to walk out
to her car.
31 She did not recall having any
problems with her feet; they just started hurting one
day.
32 By the fall of 2015, they started
hurting more and they were more painful by the end of her
shift.
33
On
November 11, 2015, the applicant...
