Hi-Tech Flooring v. WCAB: Disability Pension Doesn’t Prove Retirement

The case of Hi-Tech Flooring, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Santucci), decided by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania in 2022, involved a dispute over the suspension of a claimant’s workers' compensation benefits. The issue centered on whether a worker who accepted a union pension and Social Security Disability (SSD) benefits had voluntarily retired, thereby justifying the suspension of his benefits.

Michael Santucci, a tile setter and union member, sustained a work-related right knee injury in August 2014. He received temporary total disability benefits from Hi-Tech Flooring, Inc. (the employer). In 2017, Santucci began receiving a disability pension from his union and SSD benefits, leading the employer to argue that he had voluntarily retired and should no longer receive workers' compensation benefits.

Key Questions

1. Did the claimant voluntarily retire by accepting pension and SSD benefits?
2. What evidence is required to establish voluntary withdrawal from the workforce?
3. How does the "totality of circumstances" standard apply in workers' compensation cases?

The Court’s Findings and Ruling

The Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) initially ruled in favor of the employer, granting the suspension of benefits based on Santucci’s receipt of a pension and SSD benefits. However, the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (WCAB) reversed that decision, concluding that there was insufficient evidence to show that Santucci had voluntarily left the workforce.

On appeal, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the WCAB’s ruling, finding that:

• Acceptance of a disability pension does not automatically equate to voluntary retirement. The court emphasized that a claimant may receive SSD benefits and a pension due to an inability to work rather than an intention to permanently withdraw from the workforce.
• Employers bear the burden of proving voluntary retirement. The employer must show that the claimant has chosen not to return to the workforce, and a mere lack of job search is not enough.
• The “totality of the circumstances” did not support a suspension of benefits. Given the ongoing work-related disability and the lack of alternative employment options, the court found that Santucci had not retired voluntarily.

Implications for Workers’ Compensation Claimants

This ruling reinforces protections for injured workers, ensuring that employers cannot suspend benefits based solely on the acceptance of disability pensions or SSD benefits. Claimants should be aware that they have a right to continue receiving benefits if they can demonstrate that their disability prevents them from returning to the workforce.

Need Help with a Workers’ Compensation Claim?

If your workers’ compensation benefits are at risk of suspension due to claims of voluntary retirement, it’s important to understand your rights. At Whitcomb, Selinsky, PC, we provide experienced legal representation to ensure injured workers receive the benefits they deserve. Contact us to discuss your case and explore your legal options.