By Fred J. Lewis<\/p>\n
Good news for injured Idaho workers. In Hackworth v. Super 8 and Employers Workers Compensation Co<\/em>., the Claimant injured her left wrist as she was lifting a box. A local orthopedic surgeon performed four surgeries on her left wrist. Claimant was able to return to work at or near her pre-injury wage. Therefore, she had little or no wage loss. However, her treating orthopedic surgeon gave her no permanent restrictions. Claimant was also seen by Dr. Bates, a physical medicine doctor from Meridian, Idaho, who believed she should have restrictions of 30 lbs. lifting, with no forceful gripping, and no pronation or supination of her wrist. The Commission was convinced that after four surgeries to her wrist the Claimant really should have some restrictions to prevent further injury to her wrist. \u00a0In deciding that the Claimant was entitled to disability in excess of employment, the Commission stated the following:<\/p>\n Due to her functional limitation , her options for employment are more limited than younger, non-disabled workers who have\u00a0more than high school educations and more transferable skills. It is important to note in particular the fact that due to the weakness\u00a0of left hand, Claimant can no longer safely perform child care work, one of her most frequent past occupations, which is demonstrative\u00a0of her reduced employability. The evidence, therefore, does not support Defendants\u2019 contention that, merely because Claimant has had\u00a0continuous employment since her industrial injury and has suffered no wage loss, she has also not suffered any disability in excess of\u00a0impairment.<\/p>\n