documentmd

Case Study Client: National WC Carrier Demographics Maryland claim Home Health Aid Lower back injury Work restrictions include: o Lift no more than 25 pounds. o Need to change positions every 30 minutes. AWW - $390.00 Background Information Claimant had a work history of physical labor, including furniture moving, lawn care, and, at the time of injury, around the clock home health care for an elderly woman. Claimant stated he had no computer skills. This individual lived in Columbia, Maryland a city of more than 100,000 and a part of the Baltimore metropolitan area. This is a thriving community with a great diversity of industry. Enter Workfinders USA The true challenge for this case was not apparent right away. Initially we believed the challenge was finding a far less physical job for someone who had always had labor intensive employment and no computer experience. Our initial strategy was to contact viable employers, find jobs that would require little physical exertion, and schedule interviews. In spite of the claimant’s physical limitations, we felt we were in a good position to find him employment. Hoping to utilize the claimant’s previous furniture experience, we scheduled an application appointment for a customer service representative at a furniture rental store. This job involved no lifting and very little computer work, for which the employer said they would train the claimant. In our follow up conversation with the employer, the employer said that the claimant volunteered he had a felony conviction on his record. Employer said this would then take claimant out of consideration for the position. This conviction was unknown to us, but became the main challenge going forward in our job search. Our second appointment was for a pet hotel customer service representative at a national pet care chain. This employer was not put off by claimant’s felony conviction. Due to weather this lead had to be rescheduled and claimant informed us prior to the second appointment date that he was allergic to cat dander and therefore would not be applying for this job. Next we scheduled an interview at a car dealership for a porter position. This job involved driving cars around the parking lot of the dealership, and shuttling customers to and from the dealership. Employer said the interview went so well they extended a job offer to the claimant, contingent on drug test results. In the course of our follow up, employer said the claimant never took the drug test. According to the claimant, he stated that he did take the drug test but failed because the test detected

Upload: workfinders-usa

Post on 12-Apr-2017

29 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Report

Download

Embed Size (px):

TRANSCRIPT

Case Study

Client: National WC Carrier

Demographics Maryland claim Home Health Aid Lower back injury Work restrictions include:

o Lift no more than 25 pounds.o Need to change positions every 30

minutes.

AWW - $390.00

Background InformationClaimant had a work history of physical labor, including furniture moving, lawn care, and, at the time of injury, around the clock home health care for an elderly woman. Claimant stated he had no computer skills.

This individual lived in Columbia, Maryland a city of more than 100,000 and a part of the Baltimore metropolitan area. This is a thriving community with a great diversity of industry.

Enter Workfinders USAThe true challenge for this case was not apparent right away. Initially we believed the challenge was finding a far less physical job for someone who had always had labor intensive employment and no computer experience. Our initial strategy was to contact viable employers, find jobs that would require little physical exertion, and schedule interviews. In spite of the claimant’s physical limitations, we felt we were in a good position to find him employment.

Hoping to utilize the claimant’s previous furniture experience, we scheduled an application appointment for a customer service representative at a furniture rental store. This job involved no lifting and very little computer work, for which the employer said they would train the claimant. In our follow up conversation with the employer, the employer said that the claimant volunteered he had a felony conviction on his record. Employer said this would then take claimant out of consideration for the position.

This conviction was unknown to us, but became the main challenge going forward in our job search. Our second appointment was for a pet hotel customer service representative at a national pet care chain. This employer

was not put off by claimant’s felony conviction. Due to weather this lead had to be rescheduled and claimant informed us prior to the second appointment date that he was allergic to cat dander and therefore would not be applying for this job.

Next we scheduled an interview at a car dealership for a porter position. This job involved driving cars around the parking lot of the dealership, and shuttling customers to and from the dealership. Employer said the interview went so well they extended a job offer to the claimant, contingent on drug test results. In the course of our follow up, employer said the claimant never took the drug test. According to the claimant, he stated that he did take the drug test but failed because the test detected prescription drugs in his system that were not prescribed to him. Ultimately, the job offer was rescinded and we closed our case.

ConclusionWorkfinders USA was on this claim for three months. Because of our diligent follow up with employers we were able provide our client with leverage to settle the claim.

Another example of how aggressive RTW will help the defense save significant money on high exposure claims. The difference between a passive RTW vendor and an aggressive vendor could be literally hundreds of thousands of dollars per claim!