LI G) RARY
OF THE
U N IVERSITY
or ILLINOIS
331.1
v\o. \-2.5
\e5i
0.25
INSTITUTE OF
LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
WORKMEN'S
COMPENSATION
IN ILLINOIS
THElI3i,ni(y0f T^i.-
IVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
I
EDITORIAL NOTE
The Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations was establisht-d in 1946
to "inquire faithfully, honestly, and impartially into labor-management
problems of all types, and seeurc the faets which will lay the foundation
for future progress in the whole field of labor relations."
The Institute seeks to serve all the people of Illinois by promoting
general understanding of our social and economic problems, as well as by
providing specific services to groups directly concerned with labor and
industrial relations.
The Bulletin series is designed to implement these aims by periodi-
cally presenting information and ideas on subjects of interest to persons
active in the field of labor and industrial relations. While no effort is
made to treat the topics exhaustively, an attempt is made to answer ques-
tions raised about the subjects under discussion. The presentation is non-
technical for general and popular use.
Additional copies of this Bulletin and others listed on the back cover
are available for distribution.
RoBBEN W. Fleming Barbara D. Dennis
Director Editor
ILIR BULLETIN NO. 25
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS BULLETIN
Volume 53, Number 17; October, 1955. Published seven times each month by the Univer-
sity of Illinois. Entered as second-class matter December 11, 1912. at the post office at Urbana,
Illinois, under the Act of August 24, 1912. Office of Publication. 207 Administration Building,
Urbana, Illinois.
3 s ; ,
■ '" cs ir WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION IN ILLINOIS
^^^^' ^^ by Arnold R. Weber
A CHECK LIST OF THE CONTENTS
( For Employers, Supervisors, Stewards, and Workers )
To Find the Answer Check These Pages :
WHY DO WE HAVE A WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION SYSTEM? 5.7
WHAT IS THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION AND WHERE IS IT LOCATED? 7
WHERE CAN I GET FURTHER INFORMATION? 52-55
IS THE EMPLOYER COVERED?
If lu- is Is his coverage automatic under the
hazardous enterprise provisions? 7-9
Did he elect voluntary coverage? 9
If he is not How does an employer elect voluntary coverage? 9
How can an employer insure his
liability under the Act? 9, 45
What can an employer do if he is refused
insurance by commercial insurance companies? 45
WHEN IS AN EMPLOYEE ELIGIBLE FOR COMPENSATION?
Who is injured? Does an "employee-employer" relationship exist? ... .9-11
How did the Did the injury "arise out of and in the course
accident happen? of employment" ? 1 3- 1 6
Was it "'accidental"? 11-13
Has the injury \V'as the injury reported to the employer within
been reported? the legal time limit? 7, 13, 28
Has the claim for compensation benefits been
made within the time limits allowed by the Act? ...7, 28
If agreement on payment of benefits is reached be-
tween the injured employee and his employer, have
the necessary forms been submitted to the Industrial
Commission? 1 6, 27, 28
What was What is the extent of disability arising from
the injury? the injury? Is it temporary total, permanent
partial, permanent total, or fatal? I6-25
. Does the injury involve partial or complete loss of
use of any "specific member" like an arm or leg? .22-23
Has the accident resulted in disfigurement
of the employee? 25
Has the accident resulted in a hernia? 13
Is there any '"pre-existing" c<jndition? 12-13
WHEN COMPENSATION IS AWARDED —
Hou arc What was the workers average weekly or
benehts annual wage before he was injured? I6-21
computed. jf j^g employee is married, does he ha\e
children under the age of 18? How many? I6-20
. Are any other persons dependent upon the
injured employee for support ? 1 8-2 1
What are the time limits on the payment
of benefits? 19, 20-21, 22, 24
When can benehts be paid in one lump sum?. 32-33, 40-4i
What if a fatally injured employee leaves
no dependent sur\i\ors? 19
How about
medical
care?
What arc the benefits?
For temporary total disability? 19-21
For permanent partial disability? 21-22
. For specific losses? 22-23
For permanent total disability? 23-24
For disfigurement? 25
What kind of medical care is available
under the Act ? 25-26, 43-44, 46-47
Can an employee select his own doctor? 25
What is the policy concerning operations
or surgery ?
25-26, 43, 44
CAN THE EMPLOYEE AND EMPLOYER SETTLE A CLAIM DIRECTLY? 27-28
WHEN A CLAIM IS DISPUTED —
What arc
the first
steps?
Appeal of
arbitrators
decision
28
Should legal help be sought?
Has an application for adjustment of claim
been filed with the Industrial Commission?
Can disputed claims be adjusted by
compromise settlements? 32-33
What does the arbitrator do? 28-29, 33-34
How can an employer or employee appeal
the decision of an arbitrator? 34-36
Has the petition for review of the arbitrator's deci-
sion been filed within the allowable time limit? 35
Have the necessary forms and records for appeal
been submitted to the Industrial Commission? 35
How can the employer or employee appeal the
decision of the Industrial Commission?
Appeal of
Commission's
decision Have the necessary forms and records for appeal
been submitted to the appropriate court within
the allowable time limit? 36
What kind of aid is available to employees who
do not have the money to meet the expenses in-
volved in proceedings before the Industrial Com-
mission or appeals to the courts? 39
Reopening When can an employer or employee request
a claim reconsideration of a previous award or vol-
untary settlement? 21, 24, 37-39
What steps must be taken to reopen a case? 37-39
OTHER PROVISIONS —
What is the Special Fund? 19, 24
What is the "Poor Person's" provision? 39
Are there penalties for delaying a case? 39-40
SPECIAL PROBLEMS —
What should be known about lump sum payments? 40-41
What should be known about the use of lawyers? 29-30, 41-43
What are the problems of medical care? 43-44
What should be known about insurance companies? 45
How is the Act amended ? 45-46
Does workmen's compensation cover rehabilitation? 46-47
How does workmen's compensation relate to industrial safety? 47-48
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION IN ILLINOIS by Arnold R. Weber*
INTRODUCTION
During eveiy working day in Illinois, more than 200 workers are reported
as injured on the job — more than 25 for each work hour.^ Most of
these people will receixe workmen's compensation.
What is workmen's compensation? Who is eligible? How does an
injured worker make a claim? Which employers are covered? I'his
Bulletin is written for those in the State of Illinois who need or may
need to know the answers to these questions.
But first, why do we have workmen's compensation? The answer is
quite simple. Industrial injuries are costly. They are costly to the injured
worker in physical and mental well-being and in loss of earnings. They
are expensive for the businessman in the loss of key men, time, and pro-
duction. They are costly to society in both economic and humanitarian
terms.
Workmen's compensation, by itself, cannot prevent injuries, but it
may help reduce the number of injuries by encouraging employers to
introduce safety programs. In a more direct fashion, workmen's compen-
sation eases the lot of the injured worker and his family and outlines
the extent of the employer's legal liability.
HISTORY OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
In the nineteenth century, an injured worker could sue his employer for
damages. He had little chance of collecting, however, because it was
generally up to him, under "common law," to prove that the accident ( 1 )
occurred in the performance of his duties, (2) was not caused by his own
negligence or the negligence of another employee, and (3) was incurred
while he was assuming an extraordinar)- risk of which he was unaware. -
Under these circumstances, few workers ever received damages for
work-connected injuries. Many of the cases that did reach the courts
were subjected to long, costly legal action which the worker could ill
afford. In addition, the potential award was always uncertain because
there were no rules relating an award to the extent of injury.
Workmen's compensation, as we know it, started in Europe. Ger-
many had an early system under Bismarck. • England's first real work-
men's compensation act was passed in 1897 following public investiga-
tions and working class agitation.*
In this country by the end of the nineteenth century many states had
* Prepared under the supcr\ision of Richard C. Wilcock, associate professor of
labor and industrial relations.
passed laws related to worker injuries. These early laws made employers
liable for industrial accidents only in special cases. During the same
period, however, several states appointed committees to investigate reme-
dies for the growing problem of industrial injury.
In 1910, New York made the first real attempt to build a compre-
hensive system of workmen's compensation. Although the law was
promptly declared unconstitutional, it paved the way for other efforts.
The turning point came in 1917 when the United States Supreme Court
upheld the New York and Iowa laws as legitimate exercise of the states'
"police powers."'' Once the legal groundwork was laid, workmen's com-
pensation spread rapidly to other states. By 1921, forty-two states and
all the territories had compensation acts. The other six states adopted
such legislation between 1921 and 1948.''
THE PHILOSOPHY OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
Workmen's compensation, like unemployment compensation and old age
and survivor's insurance, is a type of "social insurance." It represents a
particular concept of responsibility. Considerations of blame and negli-
gence are no longer prime factors as they were under the common law
system. Instead workmen's compensation embodies the view that the
injured worker should be compensated for loss of income regardless of
blame. The cost of industrial injury becomes the responsibility of the
employer in particular and society in general.
Workmen's compensation is designed to replace the extreme variation
of common law awards with a modest and more certain schedule of
compensation administered by a special government agency. However,
the courts still stand in the background as review agencies.
Indirectly, workmen's compensation aims to ( 1 ) rehabilitate the
injured worker and return him to society as a useful, productive member
and (2) encourage the employer to develop safety programs to reduce
accident frequency. When compensation is charged to the employer,
it becomes a significant factor in his over-all production cost.
DEVELOPMENT OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION IN ILLINOIS
Illinois was among the first ten states to enact workmen's compensation
legislation. The first act in Illinois was passed on June 10, 1911, and
went into effect May 1, 1912.' The law provided that an employer had
the right to elect coverage, but it also stated that the usual common law
defenses would not be available to employers in certain hazardous in-
dustries if they did not elect coverage. In 1917, following the landmark
Supreme Court decision, coverage was inade compulsory for extra-
hazardous industries.
The law was completely rewritten in 1913 and again in 1951, but
basically it remains unchanged.** It has been rephrased in more simple
and direct language, and some provisions have been changed as a result
of court decisions interpreting the Act.
Benefits have been increased periodically by separate amendments —
most recently in 1955. In 1913, a schedule providing for loss of use of
specific parts of the body was introduced. A 1917 amendment gave
added benefits to injured workers if they had dependent children. In
1925, medical benefits were linked directly with the need for treating
the injury.''
The original Act provided for administration by a three-man Board
of Arbitrators. This was changed to an Industrial Board of three mem-
bers in 1913. In 1917, the board was enlarged to five, and the admin-
istrative agency's name was changed to the Industrial Commission. The
Commission operates as a part of the Illinois Department of Labor. In
addition to the Workmen's Compensation Act, the Commission is respon-
sible for administering the Illinois Occupational Disease Act, under which
covered employees may receive compensation for disability proven to
result from certain occupational diseases. Headquarters of the Illinois
Industrial Commission are at 160 North LaSalle Street, Chicago 1.
PROVISIONS OF THE LAW
The foundation of the workmen's compensation system in Illinois is, of
course, the law itself. The purpose of the Illinois Act, as specified in
its preamble, is "to promote the general welfare of the people of this
State by providing compensation for accidental injuries or death suf-
fered in the course of employment.""
COVERAGE
When a worker is injured on the job, he is eligible to receive workmen's
compensation if the business is covered by the Act and if there is an
employee-employer relationship. The employee who is injured must
notify his employer not later than 45 days after the accident occurs. In
addition, he may lose his right to compensation unless he files his appli-
cation for compensation with the Industrial Commission within a year
after either the date of the accident or the date of the last compensation
payment.
AUTOMATIC COVERAGE
An employer whose business is considered extra-hazardous does not have
the right to elect or reject coverage. ^^ Coverage is compulsory for those
employers whose business involves —
1. Erection, maintenance, or demolition of any structure.
2. Construction, excavation, or electrical work.
3. Carriage by land, water, or aerial service. This includes any loading or
unloading related to the "carriage," and the distribution of the com-
modity by horsedrawn or motor vehicle. However, there must be more
than two employees involved.
4. Operation of any warehouse or general storehouse.
5. Mining, surface mining, or quarrying.
6. Manufacture or use of explosive materials, molten metal, injurious
gases, inflammable fluids or vapors, or corrosive acids.
7. Use of sharp-edged cutting tools.
8. Regulation by statute or ordinance concerning the use of machinery and
appliances or safety of the employees and the public.
9. Work in connection with laying out or improving subdivisions of tracts
of land.
10. Treatment of timber or wood with creosote or other preservatives.
The State and its political subdivisions also are automatically cov-
ered. Excluded from automatic coverage, however, are farmers or their
employees or those who lease land for such purposes "no matter what
kind of work or service is being done or rendered."
In deciding specific cases, the courts have described these general
classifications more fully.
For example, coverage is automatic for all employees of a firm engaged in
"extra-hazardous" activities even though only some of the employees are
actually involved in the more dangerous work tasks.'" If an employer owns
two separate businesses, however, they must be treated individually. The
fact that one is "extra-hazardous" does not insure coverage of the other
one automatically."
In addition, these dangerous activities must be in the "usual course"
of the employer's business.
For example, if a real estate agent hires a man in a single instance to
repair or tear down a building, the employee is not covered under the
automatic provisions of the Act. However, if this same real estate agent
customarily hires a construction crew to repair such units, the firm would
probably be automatically covered by the Act.
This highlights the fact that a business does not have to be specif-
ically listed as "extra-hazardous" to come under the compulsory provi-
sions of the Act. Considerable discretion is given the Industrial
Commission and courts in applying this section. If a certain business is
judged to be "extra-hazardous" and is not specifically excluded, then
coverage becomes compulsory.^*
Thus the automatic provisions of the Act arc quite ilcxible.
Employees of a motion picture theater were covered automatically because
the theater was affected by an ordinance requiring a fireproof projection
room. And employees in a sawmill owned by a farmer were included auto-
matically under the Act because the sawmill was operated as a separate
business, not related to exempted farm operations.'"
VOLUNTARY COVERAGE
If an employer is not included within these extra-hazardous classifica-
tions, he may choose to be covered. To do this he must file written elec-
tion of coverage with the Industrial Commission or directly insure his
liability under the Act with an authorized insurance company. Once a
notice is filed with the Commission, the employer is bound to continue
under the Act until January of the next year. If election has been made
by obtaining insurance, the employer is covered until the policy expires
or is cancelled.^''
Over time, other groups besides farmers have been exempted from
the coverage of the law. Domestic servants, the self-employed, inter-state
railroad and maritime workers are generally not included in the Illinois
workmen's compensation system. The latter two groups are covered,
however, by similar federal legislation. Although employees of the State
and political subdivisions are included under the automatic provisions,
the issue has been brought to court in several cases with varying deci-
sions.^' The State government has elected coverage, however.
Approximately three out of four workers in Illinois are covered by
the Act.^® Most manufacturing firms are subject to automatic coverage
because of ordinances or statutes regulating the use of machinery or re-
lating to industrial safety. Most other employers have elected coverage
to bring their liability under the provisions of the workmen's compensa-
tion system.
THE EMPLOYEE-EMPLOYER RELATIONSHIP
The fact that his firm is included under the Workmen's Compensation
Act automatically or by election is not sufficient to guarantee coverage
for an injured worker. There must also be an "employee-employer" re-
lationship. In any disputed case, the employee seeking compensation
must prove the existence of this relationship.
The terms "employee" and "employer" have been broadly defined
by the law as guides to further interpretation. Thus, an "employer"
includes "every person, firm, public or private corporation . . . who has
any person in service or under contract for hire . . . ," and "employee"
is defined as "every person in the service of another under any contract of
hire. . . ."^^ The employment contract may be oral or written.
In determining whether an employee-employer relationship exists,
a vital factor is the element of control one party has over the other. If
an employer controls both the type of work done and the results of the
work, an employee-employer relationship will exist in most cases. With
this principle as a guide, the payment of wages is not a necessary condi-
tion, nor does the payment of wages always prove the existence of an
employee-employer relationship.^-'
The question is whether the individual is an "independent contrac-
tor" or an "employee." An independent contractor generally is considered
to be a person who undertakes work for another but determines the
specific methods himself.
An electrician, who was installing fixtures in a building, fell off a ladder
and broke his leg. He was not compensated because he was considered an
independent contractor. He had been hired by the owner of the building
for a given task, without particular regard to the methods used."' However,
a house-mover assisting in moving a boiler for a public utility company at
an hourly rate of pay was compensated when injured on the job. He was
considered an employee."
What happens if an employee is "loaned"?
Suppose a worker was hired by one company but loaned to another for a
particular job. In most cases, the employer who borrowed the employee is
responsible for compensation if the employee is injured while performing
this job."'
Coverage of employees of the State and its political subdivisions,
where it exists, generally applies to all employees except "officials." In
most cases, an "official" is one whose position has been specified by
statute or ordinance.
Thus, the injury of a city bridge-tender was uncompensated because his
job was created by an ordinance. On the other hand, a policeman in
another city was compensated for injury because there was no ordinance
creating his position and elevating him to the status of an official."*
What happens if interstate commerce is involved in the employee's
work? The important factor is the place of contract — that is, where the
employee was hired.
A watchman engaged in guarding a trucking van loaded with goods for
shipment solely within the State may be covered by the Illinois law. But
an inspector working with trains traveling between states may have to seek
compensation under federal legislation if injured. If an employee is hired
in Illinois but works in Indiana, generally he may seek compensation under
10
the Illinois law even though he was injured in Indiana. His case probably
would be strengthened further if he lived in Illinois even though he
crossed the State line to work.""
There is one exception to the employee-employer relationship rule.
If an employee is injured while working for a subcontractor who has not
insured his liability under the Act, the general contractor who hired the
subcontractor can be held liable for compensation. He becomes the
"employer" under the law.^
Detcmiination of an employee-employer relationship usually falls
on the shoulders of the Industrial Commission. Each case that comes
before it is viewed in the light of its own particular circumstances, and
generalizations are difficult. The Commission, however, decides each case
in a manner which it feels is consistent with the law. The courts gener-
ally have upheld decisions of the Commission.
WHAT ARE "ACCIDENTAL INJURIES"?
The Workmen's Compensation Act specifies that accidental injuries
arising out of and in the course of employment are subject to compensa-
tion awards. In practice, it is exceedingly difficult to draw a fine line
between accidental and nonaccidental injuries, because accidents gener-
ally must be traced to a particular occurrence at a specific time and
place.-'
If a painter falls from a ladder and breaks his leg, the circumstances of
the case usually can be pinpointed. Barring other complications, the injury
can be considered "accidental" and compensated promptly. However, if a
steel worker develops a strained back not traceable to any particular task
he performs, the case is not as simple. The employee, or his representa-
tives, must prove that the injury was "accidental."
Although an injur)' is most firmly established as accidental if traced
to a definite occurrence, one should not rule out other causes.-"* For
example, the fact that a specific time of injury cannot be established does
not automatically prevent compensation. The steel worker's strained
back, upon investigation, may be the result of repeated lifting of heavy
loads over a long period of time.
Many employees work under conditions of extreme heat or cold.
Heat prostration or frostbite may be ruled accidental if the employee is
subjected to a substantially greater hazard than the general public.
Thus, the widow of an employee who died from heat prostration while
working in a boiler room on a hot day was awarded full compensation.
The outside temperature created discomfort for the general public, but
constituted an added hazard to the boiler room employee — leading to his
accidental death.""'
PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS
When an employer hires an employee, he cannot assume that the worker
is "perfect" or "normal." Thus, an employee can receive compensation
for aggravation of a pre-existing injur)^ Within the framework of work-
men's compensation, however, it usually must be shown that the pre-
existing condition was aggravated in close connection with an injury
on the job.
A diabetic employee stubbed his toe while at work. His foot became in-
fected, and eventually he died as a result of the infection. Full compen-
sation was awarded because it was ruled that the infection and subsequent
death stemmed from aggravating his pre-existing condition. On the other
hand, compensation was denied to survivors of an employee who died as a
result of a perforated ulcer because it wasn't proven that a work injury
worsened his condition.*'
The situation is similar for diseases such as heart ailments, tuber-
culosis, and strokes. A work injury often may have grave effects upon a
pre-existing condition and bring the total injury under workmen's com-
pensation. Decisions depend upon individual circumstances.
For example, a worker was overcome by bad air in a mine. His injury,
added to a pre-existing asthmatic and heart condition, resulted in total
disability. Only partial disability was allowed when it was ruled that the
injury did not aggravate the pre-existing condition, but added to the over-
all disability. The employer was liable only for the disability caused by the
"bad air."" If the asthmatic condition or heart ailment was proven to be
aggravated by the "bad air," it is probable that a greater amount of dis-
ability compensation would have been allowed.
As a result of rulings on pre-existing conditions, some workers have
difficulty finding jobs. Many companies are reluctant to employ workers
with certain kinds of medical histories. Many businessmen also feel that
compensation too frequently has been awarded where pre-existing con-
ditions were involved. Some union specialists, on the other hand,
maintain that the workmen's compensation system should recognize an
individual's pre-existing condition as a more "human" approach to the
problem of industrial accidents.
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONDITIONS
Hysteria, neuroses, and similar conditions also may be considered acci-
dental injuries if the circumstances of the case warrant it. In many
instances the claim will stand or fall on the testimony of competent
medical experts. Such cases require careful consideration to prevent
unjustified awards on the basis of imagined ills.
All cinployee was awarded compensation for the effects of a spinal injury
although medical examination revealed no real physical disabilty. The
Industrial Commission and the courts ruled that the inability of the em-
ployee to work stemmed from a hysterical condition arising from his
original injury.''
HERNIAS
A hernia can be considered an accidental injury only under certain con-
ditions, according to the law. To be compensated for hernia, an employee
must prove that (1) it was of recent origin; (2) its appearance was
accompanied by pain; (3) it did not exist prior to the accident; and
(4) it was immediately preceded by a "trauma" or shock arising out of
and in the course of employment. ^^ In addition, hernias must be reported
to the employer within 15 days rather than the 45 days specified for
other types of injury. If an employee has a hernia when he is employed
and it is aggravated by a work injury, it is judged like other pre-existing
conditions.^*
Some union spokesmen have criticized these provisions concerning
hernia as unrealistic and unreasonable. Their criticisms are countered
by management contentions that they are necessary to protect the
employer from illegitimate claims.
THE "ARISING" QUESTION
In addition to being accidental, an injury' must arise out of and in the
course of employment. The "arising" question has been the source of
much dispute in the administration of workmen's compensation. The
provisions of the Act provide few specific guides for judgment. Again,
each case must be investigated carefully in the light of the circumstances.
The "arising" provision attempts to establish a connection between
the accident, the work the employee- had been hired to do, and the
conditions surrounding his job. As in other phases of the Act, it the
claim is disputed, the burden of proof is on the employee.
WHAT ARE THE CIRCUMSTANCES?
If a lathe operator loses a finger or hand while carrying out his assigned
task, there is very little doubt that the accident arose out of the condi-
tions of employment. Other situations are less clear cut.
13
Generally, accidents occurring on the way to and from work, but sustained
off the work premises, are not compensable. But if the employee is injured
on the premises while reporting for work and using a customary path
through the premises, compensation is more likely. If he falls or is hit
while changing clothes or washing up, the injury also may be judged to
arise from the conditions of his employment.
The "arising" issue is not restricted to specific work tasks.
A machinist walking through a railroad roundhouse on his way from work
was hit by a switch engine. Because it was customary for him to take this
path, his claim for compensation was upheld. In another instance a worker
who fell from a high place while eating lunch was awarded compensation.
The claim was approved because this on-the-job eating place was not for-
bidden or deemed hazardous.'''
Accidents which happen away from the place of business may be
given further consideration in certain cases. Many jobs require traveling
or leaving the shop or office, and if additional risks are involved, it is
quite possible that any injury incurred will be compensated.
An employee of a construction company was returning from an out-of-town
job by automobile at the request of his employer. He was compensated for
injuries suffered in an automobile accident while en route. However,
another employee who was doing private business while supposedly working
away from his place of employment was refused an award for injury. The
injury was judged to have arisen outside the scope of employment."'
ARISING ON THE JOB
Most industrial accidents take place in the shop or plant. In many types
of employment, a worker is hired to do only a specific job. // art employee
is injured while doing work which is forbidden or not assigned to him,
his chances of receiving compensation may be considerably diminished^'
Employment often means the job for which the worker has been hired.
A drill press operator was injured while he was helping a milling machine
operator — after he finished his own job. He would not receive compensa-
tion because he had not been assigned to assist on milling machines.
The picture difTers, however, if the employee has been given no
specific instructions concerning his job. In some businesses a well-defined
division of labor is not the rule. Instead of receiving an assignment to a
specific task, an employee may be told to "help out in the shipping de-
partment" or "help bring materials to production workers." An accident
which happens when a worker is doing a job reasonably related to such
general instructions is often considered to arise out of the conditions of
employment.''*
VOLUNTARY ACTS
W'ht-n a worker is injured while \olunteering on a job outside his regular
duties, his rights to compensation may be diminished — even if his efforts
benefit the employer. The "voluntary act," however, must be clearly
outside the scope of employment and not something done in the past
with the employer's approval. ^'■* The employee has assumed the added risk
on his own initiative. An exception is when an employee acts in a sudden
emergency to protect life or property. ■*"
Although the interpretation of the law has been somewhat strict in
judging what an employee may do, it has been less exacting on how the
job should be done. An employee who violates a company's established
way of doing a job does not necessarily forfeit compensation if injured.
Many workers develop their own individual methods of doing a job.
A punch press operator injured when feeding sheet metal "his own way"
can be compensated barring other complications. The fact that the com-
pany has standard methods does not rule out compensation. The employee
is viewed as an individual, subject to distinctly human failings.
Many claims arise from injuries caused by "horseplay" on the job. Horse-
play probably is found in every work situation, but sometimes it gets out
of hand and unintentionally results in injury to a worker. The circum-
stances of the injury will determine the payment or nonpayment of com-
pensation. If an employee is injured as a result of horseplay which he
started himself, it is unlikely that he will be compensated. Such behavior
is clearly not within the scope of "employment."*^
On the other hand, if an employee is injured as a result of the
"sportive acts" of others and he did not participate, the decision may be
more favorable.
An employee was knocked down and injured as a result of jostling while
waiting in a pay line. Compensation was awarded because he was an in-
nocent victim of horseplay.^"
FIGHTS
In the administration of the law, injuries resulting from fights have been
examined in the light of the over-all philosophy of workmen's compensa-
tion. That is. injuries from fights arising out of the job itself may be
compensated. However, an award generally will be withheld it the in-
jured worker is proved to be the aggressor or to have started the fight.
The survivors of a foreman who was killed by an employee he had fired
were compensated. In another case, compensation was denied when an
employee was injured in a fight over a personal matter."
The "arising" issue is of vital importance in the administration of
the workmen's compensation system in Illinois. The law provides only a
general guide for its administrators. They may fall back on prior cases or
court decisions, but the circumstances surrounding the injuiy must be
taken into consideration in each case.
BENEFITS PAYABLE
Benefits payable depend upon the nature and extent of the injurs' or
disability brought about by the accident. Six general classes of disability
and several detailed schedules are provided in the law as yardsticks for
determining the size and duration of benefits.
1. FATAL INJURIES
Application for compensation must be made within two years from the
date of the accident, if no compensation has been paid previously under
other provisions of the Act. If the employee received any compensation
payments before he died from the effects of an injury, application must
be made within two years after receipt of the last payment. In all cases,
however, application for death benefits must be filed by the employee's
survivor within one year after the date of death. This last provision is
designed to protect the rights of the employee's survivors or dependents
when death does not immediately follow the injury.
Payment for fatal injuries is determined by the number of survivors
who were dependent upon the deceased employee. If an employee leaves
a widow or children whom he was legally obligated to support at the
time he was injured, death benefit payments are figured on the basis of
9.25 times the average annual wage earned by the employee."** However,
benefits paid shall not be less than $6,000 nor more than $9,250.
Additional benefits are authorized if the employee leaves one or more
children under 18 years of age in addition to his widow. Additional bene-
fits for children are related to the minimum and maximum sums stated
above.
Special provisions have been drawn up covering cases where 9.25
times the average annual wage of the fatally injured employee is only
slightly above the maximum of $9,250. (See Table.) Presumably these
provisions are designed to prevent survivors of such employees from get-
ting proportionately higher benefits than those whose annual earnings
times 9.25 is well over the maximum.
COMPENSATION FOR ACCIDENTAL INJURIES RESULTING IN DEATH
WIDOW AND
NO CHILDREN
CHILDREN UNDER 18
IF 9.25 TIMES
AVERAGE ANNUAL
WAGE IS —
1 CHILD
2 CHILDREN
3 CHILDREN
4 OR MORE
CHILDREN
$6,000 or less
$6,000
$6,950
$7,140
$7,330
$7,330
$6,000 — $9,250
9.25 times
9.25 times
9.25 times
9.25 times
9.25 times
average annual
wage
average annual
wage + $950"
average annual
wage + $1140
average annuel
wage + $1330
average annual
wage + $1330
Over $9,250
$9,250
$9,750
$10,500
$11,500
$12,000
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
$9,250 — $ 9,610
$9,610
$10,180
$10,750
$9,250 — $10,180
$10,180
$10,750
$9,250 — $10,750
$10,750
Over $9,610
$9,750''
Over $10,180
$9,750
$10,5001^
Over $10,750
$9,750
$10,500
$1 1,500b
'This amount may not exceed $9,750. ^ ^gximum amounts.
A Still different method is used to increase benefits for dependent
children where 9.25 times the average annual earnings falls between
$6,000 and $9,250. Total compensation payments here are increased by a
given amount specified for one or more children. (See Table.)
Payment of death benefits also may be affected by other factors. If
the fatally injured employee is an z7/^cra//y-employed minor under the age
of 16, benefits are increased by 50 per cent. If an employee has been
awarded compensation for the same injury before it resulted in his death,
the amount already paid is deducted from the death benefit. Cost of
necessary medical or hospital fees, however, is not deducted.
Since the total benefits are paid in installments over a long period
of time, except where a lump sum settlement has been approved by the
Industrial Commission, the continuing marital status of the widow is
important. If the widow was not left with any dependent children at the
time of her husband's death, benefits will be cut by 50 per cent if she
remarries. This does not affect installment payments already made. But
if she has dependent children, benefit payments are not reduced if she
remarries.
In cases where there is one dependent child and he or she reaches
the age of 18 and is physically and mentally competent at that time,
benefit payments will be decreased proportionately. However, if a widow
has more than one dependent child and only one of them reaches the
age of 18, benefit payments will remain th(" same.
Thr existence of a legal marriage is, in most cases, sufficient to es-
tablish proof of dependency. The fact that the wife may be employed
does not cancel out her rights to compensation as the widow of the
deceased employee. In cases of divorce where the husband or wife has not
remarried, the payment of alimony does not establish the ex-wife's right
to some compensation upon the death of her ex-husband. The divorce
ended the marriage and wiped out the legal obligation to support as
provided in the Act.
A widow and surviving children have first claim to compensation
benefits in cases of fatal injury. But what happens when the employee
does not leave a widow? May others claim compensation?
If there is no widow but the employee is survived by any parent, child or
children, or husband who is totally dependent upon the deceased, one of
these parties may receive compensation under the law. Once again, bene-
fits will be equal to 9.25 times the average annual earnings of the fatally
injured employee — with a minimum of $6,000 and a maximum of $9,250.
A claimant must prove that he was totally dependent upon the
deceased. Mere payment of money from the employee to the claimant in
the past is not necessarily positive proof of such dependency.
Generally these same standards apply to a husband whose wife has
been working — a fairly common occurrence today.
If there is no surviving widow and no one who had been totally
dependent on the deceased employee, partial dependency on the part of
any parent, child, or children might provide a basis for a claim. The same
benefit factor of 9.25 is applied to the annual wage of the deceased em-
ployee. However, the minimum payment in such a case would be $2,400
and the maximum $8,200.
Benefits will be paid on the basis of the percentage of dependency
that is proven by the parent or child.
For example, a fatally injured employee left no widow or children. How-
ever, his mother proved 25 per cent dependency on his earnings. The
employee earned $2,000 per year. This sum was multiplied by 9.25 to give
a total of $18,500. Twenty-five per cent of $18,500 equalled $4,625, the
maximum amount that would be awarded to the partially dependent
mother under the circumstances of the case.
The law also provides for situations where there is no dependency on
the part of close family relatives.
In these cases, grandparents or grandchildren or "collateral heirs,"" like
nephews and nieces, may be awarded compensation if they prove that they
were at least 50 per cent dependent upon the deceased employee. Compen-
sation is computed in the same manner as in other cases of partial de-
pendency with a maximum limit of $8,200.
18
Finally, it the fatally injured i inployee is without survivors who are
legitimate claimants for death benefits, the employer is required to pay
$500 to the undertaker or to friends of the deceased who have incurred
burial expenses. An additional $400 is paid into a Special Fund. (The
Special Fund is used for benefit payment under the "second injury"
provisions of the Act. See page 24.) Death benefits, of course, may be
paid to only one of the parties noted in the discussion. If there is a dispute
over who is the beneficiary, the Industrial Commission makes the final
decision, subject to appeal to the courts.
Survivors of fatally injured workers also may be eligible for benefits
under the Federal Old Age and Survivors Insurance."'''
2. TEMPORARY TOTAL DISABILITY
Fortunately most industrial accidents do not result in death. The more
usual result of work injuries is some temporary or permanent disability.
Almost all of these compensation cases initially fall into the category
of "temporar\- total disability" — which covers the period immediately
after the injury. It is the "period of the healing process" before it can
be determined whether there is any permanent disability.'*"
An injured worker can receive compensation for temporary total
disabilitv if he is disabled for more than six working days. Six days is the
so-called "waiting period" under the Illinois Act. In effect, compensation
payments begin as of the eighth day of temporaiy total disability. // the
disability lasts more thaJi 28 days, the injured worker also is paid for the
first seven days. As in all cases of injuries covered bv workmen's compen-
sation, notice of the accidental injury must be given to the employer
within 45 days from the date of the accident.
The benefit schedule provides that compensation shall be equal to
73 per cent of average weekly earnings with a minimum, base of $16.75
per week and a maximum of $34.00. The percentage rate is increased to
82'/2 per cent if the injured worker has one child, 90 per cent if he has
two children, and 97'/.' per cent of average weekly earnings if he has three
or more children.
The minimum and maximum weekly benefit rates also are adjusted
for the number of children as the percentage increases.
Thus, in a case where an injured worker would be entitled to the minimum
of $16.75, the benefits would be increased to the following amounts:
1 child
$25.00
2 children
27.75
3 children
28.25
4 or more children
28.50
If an injured %sorker would be entitled to the maximum of $34.00 pro-
vided by the schedule, benefits would be increased by the following
amounts:
1 child $35.00
2 children 37.00
3 children 39.00
4 or more children 40.00
Under the prevailing level of wages in Illinois, the percentage basis
for computing benefits has little significance. At the present time, maxi-
mum benefit rates apply in most cases.
For example, the average factory employee in Illinois earns approximately
$70.00 per week. If he has a wife but no children, theoretically he is en-
titled to 75 per cent of his average weekly earnings or $52.50 while he is
temporarily totally disabled. However, this amount is well over the $34.00
maximum provided in the schedule. Thus his compensation benefits would
be stabilized at $34.00 for the period of his temporary total disability.
But suppose he has four children. Under the Act he is entitled to 97 V2 per
cent of his weekly earnings. This amounts to $62.25, still well over the
maximum weekly benefit amount of $40.00 specified in the schedule for
a man with four children. Therefore he would receive $40.00 per week for
the period of his temporary total disability.
Two additional provisions cover those with lower wage rates. If the
injured employee's average weekly earnings are between $15.00 and
$30.00. compensation is computed on the percentage basis previously
noted, taking into consideration the number of dependent children. This
sum is then increased by an additional 32.5 per cent. However, the total
weekly benefit payment to an injured employee cannot be less than the
minimum nor more than the employee's weekly earnings.
For example, an employee with two children has an average weekly wage
of $28.00. He is entitled to 90 per cent of his wages, or $25.20, as his
weekly disability benefit. But because his weekly earnings are between
$15.00 and $30.00, his benefits are increased by 32.5 per cent, or $8.19.
When this amount is added to $25.20, the total is $33.39 or more than his
average weekly wage. Because his weekly benefit cannot be more than his
weekly wage, he would receive only $28.00, the maximum amount allowed
him under this section of the Act.
The second special provision provides that if an injured employee's
wages are between $30.00 and $40.00, he may receive the maximum
amount to which he is entitled. Again, he cannot receive more than his
weekly earnings.
Benefit payments usually arc paid either in weekly installments or
at the same time interval used by the employer. An injured employee
20
cannot receive benefit payments for temporary total disability for more
than 64 weeks.
3. PERMANENT PARTIAL DISABILITY
Certain permanent or long-lasting physical or mental incapacities may
still disable a worker after his temporary injury has healed. Often these
longer-lasting disabilities will not completely prevent a man from working,
but they may limit his job abilities and thereby reduce his former earninii
power.
Compensation for permanent partial disability is measured in either
of two ways. First, the amount of compensation paid may be related to
the loss of income resulting from the disability. Second, loss of a "specific
member" like a hand, foot, or eye is compensated on the basis of a
schedule which provides a given number of weeks' compensation for each
member.
A bricklayer received temporary total disability compensation for a bark
injur)- over a period of 42 weeks during the "healing period." At the end
of this time he found that his back was permanently weakened, and medi-
cal testimony confirmed the condition. Thus, he could not go back to his
old trade where he made $80.00 per week. Instead he took a job as a
watchman at $50.00 per week. Under the provisions of the Act, he would
be entitled to compensation equal to 75 per cent of his loss of income.
These payments, however, are scheduled in the same manner as
compensation for temporar)- total disability. Thus, a worker can receive
only a maximum of $35.00 per week if he has one child, $37.00 if he
has two children, and so forth. The percentage of lost income compen-
sated will vary from 75 per cent to 97'/2 per cent, depending on the
number of children the injured worker must support.
Thus, in the case above, the wage loss is $30.00 per week. If the worker
has two children, he will be compensated for 90 per cent of the loss. His
weekly compensation payment then would be $27.00.
Compensation for permaneyit partial disability is not continued in-
definitely. Compensation payments cannot be extended beyond eight years
nor be more than the emoloyee's survivors would have received as a
death benefit. Also, if the partially disabled employee should increase his
earnings, the compensation payment will be reduced accordingly. // the
disability itself decreases, the employer may file for reduction or termina-
tion of compensation payments even though the employee's earnings have
not reached their foimal level. The burden of proving that the disability
has decreased lies with the employer.
The injured employee must fulfill two conditions to receive compen-
21
sation for permanent partial disability. He must prove, by the testimony of
eoinpetent medical authorities, that he has been disabled as a result of an
industrial accident. He must also prove a definite loss of earnings. Com-
pensation is not made solely for "pain and suffering." The law, however,
does not require a man to work when he is in excessive pain from the
effects of an injury or where continued work will hinder his recovery.
4. SPECIFIC LOSS
Reduction of earnings is not a necessary condition where there is the loss
of use of a "specific member."
Thus, if a tool and die worker loses a hand by amputation, which prevents
him from going back to his old job, he may still be compensated even if
he earns as much or more in any new job.
The Act includes a detailed schedule which provides compensation
for a certain number of weeks for the loss of each "specific member." If
an employee loses a hand in an industrial accident, he may receive 190
weeks' compensation; a thumb, 70 weeks; or an arm, 235 weeks. He
would receive 140 weeks' compensation for loss of use of an eye and an
additional 10 weeks' compensation if he lost the eye completely. The
weekly compensation payment is computed in the same manner as com-
pensation for temporary total disability. The important factors are the
average weekly earnings of the worker and the number of his dependent
children under the age of 18.
The specific injury schedule thus includes many parts of the body
which are distinguished easily from the other "members," such as fingers,
feet, toes, legs, and testicles. Permanent total loss of hearing in one or
both ears also is compensable.
Compensation for specific loss is in additioyi to the compensation
paid for the original temporary total disability. Thus the total amount of
compensation paid for temporary total disability and specific loss may
be more than would have been paid as a death benefit. In addition, pay-
ments for medical care or artificial limbs are not deducted from the total
amount paid for specific loss. Compensation for specific loss, however,
rules out benefits under any other provisions of the Act except temporary
total disability.
Amputation is not a necessary condition for compensation. Benefits
are paid for loss of use of an arm or leg as well as for actual physical
loss of the member. Nor does the schedule work on an "all or none" basis.
That is, payment often is made for partial loss of use of a specific member.
A steel worker's leg is crushed when a load of bulk steel falls on it. The
leg is not amputated, but after treatment the worker has a severe limp and
the leg has been pcrniancntly weakened. The parties to the ehtim may
agree that the worker has lost 75 per cent of the use of the leg. Since
complete loss of use of a leg calls for 200 weeks" compensation, the steel
worker will receive benefits for 75 per cent of 200 weeks, or 150 weeks.
How about a second injun' to the same incmbcr?
For example, the steel worker described above may go to work in a difTer-
ent job in the plant after he has recovered. His leg is injured again, and
this time it has to be amputated. Amputation is complete loss. The em-
ployer now is responsible only for 25 per cent loss stemming from the
second accident.
The major problem in the application of the specific injury schedule
is determining the extent of loss of use of a "member." Often it is diffi-
cult to decide whether an employee has lost 33 per cent or 50 per cent
of the use of an arm or toe. The text of the law provides some standards,
but these generally apply to cases of amputation. For the most part, the
extent of loss of use must be determined by technical medical testimony.
In disputed cases, the Industrial Commission and arbitrators view this
testimony in the light of their previous experience in administering the
Act. It is necessary to determine not only the percentage of loss for
general use, but also the amount of loss for industrial use in the work
situation. A slight limp might be negligible in terms of physical use of a
leg, but it may have a serious effect on the worker's ability to do a specific
job requiring balancing or lifting.
5. PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITY
The loss of specific members can mean permanent total disability. The
Act specifies that the loss of any two members, such as two hands, two
legs, or a leg and an arm, in a single accident constitutes permanent total
disability. Application of this section of the Act is automatic and cannot
he reversed. The fact that the disabled worker obtains employment at a
later date does not affect his right to compensation for permanent total
disability. It should be noted, however, that this provision applies only
to loss of major members or eyes. For example, amputation of two toes,
also included in the specific injury schedule, does not entitle the employee
to compensation for permanent total disability.
The situation is somewhat different if the two major members arc-
lost in two separate accidents.
An employee who has lost the use of his right arm in one accident obtains
another job. He has a second accident, and as a result his left leg is
amputated. Together, the loss of the leg and the arm is the loss of two
major vieinhcrs, and thus he is entitled to permanent total disability auto-
23
matically. However, the second employer is legally responsible only for the
loss of the leg, as covered by the specific injury schedules, and pays bene-
fits in accordance with the schedule.
Additional compensation payments necessary to bring the benefits up to
the level specified for permanent total disability are paid out of the
Special Fund. Thus, the second employer pays only 200 weeks' benefits
for the loss of the leg. A purpose of the "second injury" provision is to
make it mpre feasible for employers to hire disabled workers. This pro-
vision applies in any case of loss or loss of use of a second major member
or eye in a separate accident; it applies whether the previous loss had
been due to accident, disease, or any other condition."*'
Permanent total disability does not always require loss of two major
members.
A lineman receives a severe electric shock which results in paralysis and
complete loss of income. Medical evidence demonstrates that the worker's
condition appears permanent. The employee cannot return to work in any
capacity. Therefore a condition of permanent total disability exists, and
compensation will be awarded accordingly.
A benefit award for permanent total disability does not necessarily
end a case. A disabled worker may recover enough to work, but not at
his old job. Since all or part of his earning power has been restored, com-
pensation for permanent total disability may cease. If the worker makes
considerably less at his new job than he did at his old one, he may
receive compensation for permanent partial disability as outlined above.
Over a period of time, if the employee believes that his disability has
increased and he no longer is able to work at his new job, he may file
a petition with the Industrial Commission for review of his case. The
petition must be filed within one year of the earlier termination or reduc-
tion of compensation. However, an employee who has lost two major
members would not have his compeyisation reduced or terminated even
though he might take some kind of employment.
Compensation payments for permanent total disability are based
upon the payment schedule for temporary total disability. The same per-
centages, maximums, and minimums are in eflect. These payments con-
tinue until the employee has received a sum equal to a death benefit.
After this total is reached, the disabled worker receives a pension.
If the worker is disabled by loss of two members, his annual pension
is equal to 12 per cent of the amount his survivors would receive as a
death benefit. In other cases, a pension equals 8 per cent of a death
benefit. A pension is paid in monthly installments as long as the person
lives. It may be augmented by Federal Old Age and Survivors Insurance
retirement payments if and when the worker is eligible.
6. DISFIGUREMENT
An employee who is seriously and permanently disfigured on his hand,
face, head, or neck as a result of an industrial accident may receive com-
pensation up to 42Vi per cent of the sum that would be paid as a death
benefit. Differences in social standards between the sexes are recognized.
A female employee also may claim compensation for disfigurement to her
arm, her leg below the knees, and her chest above the axillary line.
Payment for disfigurement rules out compensation for permanent
partial disability. However, an employee can receive awards for both dis-
figurement and specific loss of use in cases where the disfigurement and
specific loss involve two separate members.
The amount of disfigurement is settled by arbitration or by agree-
ment of the parties. "Serious" and "permanent" disfigurement must be
interpreted in each case.
It is not necessary to prove direct loss of earnings because of the disfigure-
ment,^* nor is it likely that every small scar will be compensated. Instead,
if the employee proves that the disfigurement will interfere with his usual
employment or mark him as reckless and quarrelsome, his claim probably
will be strengthened.
MEDICAL BENEFITS
Medical care is a highly important part of the benefit structure of work-
men's compensation. Where accidental injury occurs on the job, the em-
ployer is required to provide first aid and ''all necessary medical, surgical
and hospital services." Such services are limited, however, to those which
are "reasonably required" to cure or provide relief from the effects of the
accidental injury. In addition, where the injury results in the amputation
of an arm, leg, or foot, or the loss of an eye or any natural teeth, the
employer is required to provide artificial members or braces, if necessary.
The employee must accept the medical services offered by the em-
ployer. He can select his own doctor or hospital services and be reim-
bursed only when they are not provided by the employer. If the worker
rejects the employer's offer of medical care and uses his own doctor
instead, he forfeits his right to these services under the Act.
On the other hand, the employer is bound to provide medical care
without limit to cure or relieve the effects of the injury. However, the
employer does not necessarily admit his liability by furnishing such care,
nor does the fact that medical care was offered mean that the worker's
claim for compensation will be granted later. This section of the Act was
designed to prevent an employer from withholding necessary medical
care intentionally.
25
It might be noted here that some injured employees may receive
supplementary benefits under private programs. Some plans have been
put into effect unilaterally by employers. Others are part of collectively
bargained health and welfare programs. Typically, supplementary bene-
fits are provided through accidental death and dismemberment clauses in
group life insurance, group accident and sickness insurance, or sick-leave
plans.*'*
Some private plans are not intended to supplement workmen's com-
pensation and are limited to nonoccupational disabilities. A 1955 addi-
tion to the Act specifies that if an employee receives benefits from a
private group plan which he should not have received because he suffered
an occupational injury, the amount so paid "shall be credited to or
against any compensation payment . . . made or to be made" under the
Act.
COMMENTS ON THE BENEFIT STRUCTURE
The various benefit schedules are designed to measure the employer's
responsibility for different kinds of disability and to provide the injured
employee with adequate and automatic compensation when he needs it
and is entitled to it. But application of these benefit provisions is not
always simple. Usually technical medical testimony is necessary to de-
termine the nature and extent of the disability. Past judicial and admin-
istrative decisions must be considered. The points of view and prior
experience of the administrators also influence the final settlement.
This complexity often means uncertainty and dissatisfaction. Some
of the following criticisms have been made: benefits have been far from
adequate to meet the needs of the injured worker; benefit payments have
not kept pace with either the rising cost of living or average wage rates;
provisions for dependents arc not adequate; the reduction of benefits
to widows who remariy is unfair and discriminatory.
Various suggestions also have been made for changes in coverage:
for example, that there should be compensation for partial loss of hearing
and not for complete deafness only, and that the specific injury schedule
should be expanded to include certain types of back injuries.
Most of these criticisms and suggestions come from union officials
and those primarily interested in bettering workers' protection. Em-
ployer spokesmen voice equally strong views concerning benefits. They
oppose unlimited medical care, periodic increase of benefits, and wide
scope of disabilities covered. They point out that the specific loss schedule
covers all major members, provision is made for additional benefits for
employees with dependents, and loss of earnings is the basis for benefit
payments in most cases of disability.
It would be overly optimistic to hope that the benefit jjrovisions will
ever be entirely satisfactory to all parties. Since they are the veiy heart
of the workmen's compensation system, these provisions provide fertile
ground for dispute and compromise, both in specific cases under the
existing Act and in discussing amendments to the Act.
ADMINISTRATION OF THE LAW
THE SETTLEMENT PROCESS
A major purpose of the workmen's compensation system is to bring about
the quick, fair settlement of claims between employees and employers.
To help do this the law provides administrative machinei^. In addition,
and of almost equal importance, are the various informal procedures for
settlement which have developed over the years. The settlement process
thus represents a blend of various formal and informal procedures whose
effect is felt at each level of decision provided by the Act.
Settlement may be simply an agreement between the employer and
the injured employee on the amount of compensation to be paid. At the
other extreme, it may require a decision by the Supreme Court of Illinois,
the last step in the formal administrative machinery set up by the Act.
In cases where the parties themselves cannot reach an agreement on com-
pensation, application for adjustment of a claim is made to the Indus-
trial Commission. The first step is a hearing before an arbitrator; second,
before a single commissioner; and third, before a majority of the mem-
bers of the Industrial Commission. If a dispute is not settled by the
Industrial Commission, the case may be appealed to the Circuit Court
and finally to the Supreme Court of Illinois.
MAKING A CLAIM
A majority of compensation cases are settled without dispute under the
provisions and procedures of the workmen's compensation system. The
injured employee reports his injury to his employer within the specified
time limits. The employer provides necessary medical care and, working
through his representative or insurance company, makes payment on the
basis of the employee's disability.
When the employee has recovered from the effects of his injury and
returns to woi-k, compensation payments stop. A final report is submitted
to the Industrial Commission specifying the type of disability and the
total amount of compensation paid. Fhis is called "settlement by final
receipt."
The Act is intended to provide rapid and semi-automatic settlement.
Many cases are settled in this way since nearly 50 per cent of compensable
injuries involve only temporary total disability. '^^ In addition, specific loss
cases often are clear-cut and readily covered by the schedule outlined in
the Act. Other cases of disability also may be worked out by the parties
in an atmosphere of good faith and submitted to the Industrial Com-
mission for approval.
Often, however, a dispute arises over the right to compensation, the
amount of compensation payable, or some other point covered by the
provisions of the Act. In such situations, the claim is submitted to the In-
dustrial Commission for further action.
TIME LIMITS
Time limits are important. In all accident cases, the employee must
notify his employer within 45 days from the date of the injury. Notice
may be either written or oral. In large establishments, notice can be
given to a foreman or other supervisory employee acting as a representa-
tive of the employer. The notice generally should include the time and
place of the accident and the circumstances surrounding the injury. In-
accurate information given at this time will not necessarily bar future
compensation."'^
Application for adjustment of a claim must be made to the Indus-
trial Commission within a year after the date of the accident where no
compensation has been paid, or within a year after the date of the last
compensation payment received. Thus, the employer may pay the em-
ployee immediately for temporary total disability but not make payments
for other types of disability. The employee can then submit his claim
for further payments to the Commission within one year after he receives
the last payment. The furnishing of medical care is not considered a
compensation payment for this purpose.
ADJUSTMENT OF A CLAIM — ARBITRATION
The Commission files and numbers each application for adjustment.
Notice of filing is sent to the respondent (that is, the person against
whom the claim is. made). The respondent usually is the employer. The
case is now prepared for submission to an arbitrator for a hearing — the
first step in what often turns out to be a long, difficult process.
There are 14 arbitrators on the staff of the Industrial Commission.
Arbitrators are appointed by the State administration, and each time
the administration changes hands, the turnover is almost complete. Each
arbitrator is a full-time employee and receives $7,000 per year.
28
The 14 arbitrators arc assigned throughout Illinois on the basis of
the work load. Nine of the 14 are located at the Industrial Commission
offices in Chicago, since a majority of the claims arise in that heavily
industriahzed area. The rest of Illinois is divided into five general regions
as follows:
1. Granite City, Alton, East St. Louis, and Belleville.
2. Springfield, Peoria, Taylorville, Bloomington, Rock Island, and Pekin.
3. Mt. Vernon, Herrin, Cairo, Benton, DuQuoin, Harrisburg, and Fairfield.
4. Quincy, Decatur, Danville, Mattoon, Galesburg, Kewanee, and Jackson-
ville.
5. Sterling, Rockford, Ottawa, Joliet, Kankakee, Wheaton, Elgin, and
Freeport.
Ordinarily a dispute is heard by a single arbitrator. In cases involv-
ing fatal injur)' or total permanent disability, a committee of three
arbitrators may be used upon petition of one of the parties to the dispute.
However, this right is rarely exercised.
LEGAL REPRESENTATION
Recent experience shows that approximately three-fourths of the em-
ployees who bring cases to the Industrial Commission are represented by
lawyers. Occasionally, an individual employee may come to the Com-
mission's office in Chicago seeking information concerning his case. Such
general information usually is provided by the Commission secretary.
In most cases, an employee is represented by a lawyer at a hearing
before an arbitrator. Unions often advise injured employees to seek legal
aid before attempting to settle a claim with an employer, and a few
unions have staff members who supply this aid in simpler cases. A union
also may refer a member to a lawyer it believes competent and trust-
worthy.
C The employer is almost always represented by legal experts in
handling claims for compensation. In the first place, the majority of
employers have insured their liability under the Act with licensed insur-
ance companies. When a compensation case arises, it is referred imme-
diately to the insurance company which usually has a staff of lawyers
and claims adjusters well versed in workmen's compensation procedures.
Generally the insurance company tries to reach a settlement before the
claim is taken to the Commission, but failing in this, it will act as the
employer's representative in any later hearings before the Commission or
the courts.
Secondly, employers who insure their own liability usually also have
their own lawyers or claims adjusters. Many of the larger firms have a
"comp" man on their staff. Some self-insurers, without a company
lawyer or with a less complete legal stafT, may employ a claims agency
which specializes in compensation cases. Others merely hire a lawyer
when the need arises.
PREPARATION FOR THE HEARING
In working on a case before a hearing, attorneys for each party look for
the issues. For example, if the "arising" question is involved, they
examine the circumstances of the accident, attempt to find witnesses who
can substantiate their client's claim, and study past court decisions to
see if there are any precedents that will bolster their arguments. The
most common claim in dispute, however, deals with the nature and extent
of the injury. The employee and employer representatives try to deter-
mine the percentage of disability or loss of use of a specific member
injured in the accident. This may influence the size of the final settlement.
Very few firms use the "stipulation waiver" method to settle cases
concerning the nature and extent of injury. In this method, the employee
is examined by a doctor on the Industrial Commission's staff". Both
parties agree beforehand that they will accept this doctor's report con-
cerning the employee's injury and disability. The amount of compensa-
tion to be paid is then determined by the Industrial Commission. An
order is entered by the Commission which disposes of the case on the
basis of the parties' previous agreement, and compensation is fixed by the
Commission.
PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS
In many cases involving the nature and extent of injury, settlement is
not so harmonious. Typically, the employer will ask the employee seeking
compensation to take a physical examination. If the employee refuses.
he forfeits any compensation he may be receiving, and no compensation
will be paid for the period of his refusal. There is no limit on the number
of reasonable examinations that may be requested. The fact that an
employer completely denies any liability in the case does not affect his
right to have the employee examined. ^^
The employer selects the examining doctor and assumes the expense.
If the examination is not made in the vicinity of the place of employ-
ment, he also reimburses the employee for any necessary expenses in
traveling to and from the place of examination. In addition, the em-
ployer must pay the employee for any time lost from work, on the basis
of his average daily wage.
The employee has the right to bring his own doctor to the examina-
tion — at his own expense. No matter whose doctor makes the physical
examination, a report must be delivered to the other party at least 48
hours before the time set for the hearing before the arbitrator. If reports
are not exchanged, the examining doctor is not permitted to testify at the
hearing if the other party objects. In practice, medical reports are seldom
exchanged. The examining doctor submits his report with carbon copies
to the party requesting the examination. The latter than decides whether
he wishes to exchange reports."''^
The doctor who is treating the employee for his injury is not neces-
sarily the one who examines him to determine the extent of disability.
Many lawyers feel that "treating" doctors tend to be too optimistic about
the prospects for recovery and are not experienced enough in judging
industrial loss of use of a member as opposed to physical loss. However,
a report of the treating doctor usually is sent to the employer's repre-
sentative who can then make some estimate of the seriousness of the
injury and the probable extent of disability and compensation payments.
Lawyers who handle compensation cases regularly often refer their
clients to certain doctors in whom they have confidence. This confidence
does not necessarily apply to the doctor's medical ability, but rather to
his familiarity with workmen's compensation. Some doctors may be
labeled "petitioners' " or employees' doctors, others may be "respond-
ents' " or employers' doctors, and a few may have a reputation for being
willing to accommodate both sides.
It is pointed out. however, that this condition is found primarily
in Chicago where a heavy volume of cases comes before the Commission.
There a small number of physicians may rely upon fees for workmen's
compensation examinations and testimony for a large share of their
income. Because of this situation, many initial reports of examining
doctors are not taken seriously by attorneys for either side. Medical re-
ports on the same injury may be very different. For example, a doctor
hired by an employee may maintain that an injured arm is 75 per cent
disabled, while the employer's doctor may report only 40 per cent dis-
ability.^*
In some cases the employee may be re-examined several times by
doctors on both sides. These re-examinations are made for various
reasons — to check on the first doctor's report, to obtain a number of
similar reports to fortify the argument for one side, or to get the opinion
of a doctor whose medical ability commands greater respect from the
lawyers on both sides. ■^'' Although the examining doctor may not testify
pL^rsonally, his report often is submitted in evidence if and when the case
is brought to a hearing.
PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCES
Many disputed cases never reach the arbitrator. Instead they are settled
in informal "pre-trial conferences" between the lawyers for each side.
Usually neither side is anxious to bring the case to arbitration.
Hearings are time-consuming, and any decision handed down may be
appealed later to the Commission and the courts. This creates some
pressure on the individual lawyer to settle each claim without prolonging
the case in proceedings before the Commission. Most lawyers, however,
undoubtedly have a deep concern for the interests of their clients and
will continue to press a claim until they believe a just settlement has
been reached.
In a "pre-trial conference," the attorneys meet, discuss the various
aspects of the case informally, and often arrive at a compromise agree-
ment. The compromise generally is somewhere between the two extreme
estimates of disability submitted by the examining doctors. The lawyers
estimate the strength of each other's case and the possible outcome if it
were taken to arbitration. Some lawyers are anxious to settle; others will
drive a harder bargain. One lawyer's professional estimate of the other's
ability may also enter into his decision to compromise for a given per-
centage of disability.
COMPROMISE SETTLEMENTS
A majority of the compromise settlements are for a lump sum. This
means that the estimated future benefit payments are lumped together
and paid at one time. Often these lump sum settlements are less than the
total benefits would be if they were paid in weekly installments.
For example, the attorneys may compromise on 50 per cent loss of use of
a hand. Under the provisions of the specific loss schedule, this amounts to
95 weeks' compensation. If an employee's weekly benefits would be $30.00,
his total benefits would be $2,850. The compromise might be a lump sum of
$2,500. In fact, after a while employee and employer representatives tend
to figure benefits in terms of lump sums — $5,000 for a hand; $2,000 for
a thumb.
When the two parties agree, a settlement contract is drawn up and
submitted to the Commission. An additional petition for lump sum pay-
ment is prepared when such payment is agreed upon.
Although a majority of the Commission members must approve each
settlement contract, the agreement is first brought before a single Com-
missioner. The proceedings usually are brief. The employee is sworn in
by the Commissioner. The settlement agreement is read to him, and he
is asked whether he fully understands it and agrees to the provisions. If
32
there is a lump sum involved, the Commissioner asks if he realizes that
this will elose his case forever. The lawyer for the employee is asked the
amount of his fee and what percentage it is of the total benefit. The
Commissioner then approves the settlement and passes it on to two
other members of the Commission for their signatures. They, in turn,
look over the settlement contract and usually sign it.
Approval by the Commission is not always cut-and-dried, however.
Because most Commissioners have long experience with the law, they can
easily recognize an unjust settlement. Often they examine the employee
personally to get an estimate of his disability, and they are quick to note
any glaring discrepancy between the extent of injury and the amount of
the settlement. In such a case, they may disapprove a settlement and
make recommendations. If a settlement is disapproved, the lawyers may
either confer again and try to reach a new agreement or decide to take
the case to arbitration.
Ironically enough, it is sometimes the injured employee who is
overly anxious to settle. He is swayed by the prospect of a large sum of
money coming at one time, even though it is less than he should get.
There have been cases where the employee has gone to a Commissioner
strongly requesting approval of a settlement even though the Commis-
sioner disapproved it as being against the worker's best interests.
THE ARBITRATION HEARING
In the fiscal year 1953-54, there were slightly more than 4,000 arbitrators'
decisions out of less than 18,000 applications for adjustment of claims.^"
Although the informal nature of the proceedings is emphasized, hearings
are conducted in accordance with legal principles, including Rules of
Evidence used in regular court trials. A "court reporter" is on hand to
make a complete transcript of the hearing. Each party is pemiitted to
cross-examine witnesses.
Evidence must be based upon objective symptoms and not on the
"feelings" of the injured employee. Where there have been no eye-
witnesses to an accident, circumstantial evidence may be admitted. Testi-
mony and opinions of expert witnesses (such as doctors) are accepted
only if the expert is found "qualified." Opinions and conclusions of
nonexperts may be rejected if either of the lawyers objects. A doctor who
has examined the employee specifically to testify cannot base his opinions
on the "history of the case."^'
The role of the arbitrator is somewhat limited. He may request any
of the parties to introduce certain records or evidence. He also may call
for X-rays bearing on the case. An X-ray viewing machine is generally
located in the hearing room for the use of the arbitrator or any medical
witness who presents these films to support his opinions and conclusions.
However, the arbitrator cannot go too far in questioning the wit-
nesses directly when attorneys for both sides arc present. The Supreme
Court of Illinois has ruled that generally he must limit his questions to
requests for clarification of testimony already presented. '^^^^ On occasion,
the arbitrator may examine the injured employee personally. Because of
limitations on the arbitrator's role, the hearing may be overshadowed by
legal interplay between attorneys (much like any other court trial)
rather than a more straightforward determination of the facts. The
arbitrator acts as judge and rules on the form or admissibility of certain
evidence.
Great amounts of conflicting testimony may make it diflficult for an
arbitrator to reach a just decision. Often the points in conflict relate to
complex medical questions. In most cases, an arbitrator has no formal
medical training. Instead he must acquire most of this technical knowl-
edge by listening to medical testimony during the hearings. The arbitrator
may examine the injured employee personally in the hope of shedding
some additional light on a claim, but he is confronted with his profes-
sional limitations.
An arbitrator has other problems. In the first place, he may not be
a lawyer, and thus he might lack the legal training helpful in applying
Rules of Evidence and other legal concepts. Secondly, after a while he
comes to know the various lawyers and doctors with whom he is dealing.
On the basis of his experience, he may tend to discount the testimony of
one doctor more than another, or have greater faith in the integrity of
one lawyer as opposed to another. Often these feelings cannot help but
enter into his final decision. However, most decisions are on the "weight
of the evidence." Since an arbitrator's decision technically is only a
recommendation, it need not be the final step.'"'^
APPEAL TO THE COMAAISSION
After the arbitrator has made his award, the parties have three alterna-
tives: (1) They can accept the award and settle the case. (2) They can
use the arbitrator's award as the basis for a compromise settlement.
(3) They can take the case to the Industrial Commissioners for further
review. In recent years fewer than one-quarter of the arbitrators' awards
have been appealed to the Commission.""
The Industrial Commission is composed of five members — two
representing employers, two representing employees, and the chairman
who represents the general public. They are appointed for four-year
terms by the Govrrnor with thi- approval ol the Stati' Scnatr. Ti-rins of
office are staggered in the hope that experienced men will be serving
on the Commission at all times. One Commissioner has retained his
position for 15 years, undi'r several different State administrations. Many
of the Commissioners are lawyers, and most have had considerable
experience with workmen's compensation.
The Commission hears appeals, determines the acceptability of
settlements brought before it, and transacts other routine administrative
duties at its home office in Chicago. During the second week of the
month, each Commissioner travels downstate to hear appeals and pass
judgment on settlements in cases arising in those areas. The downstate
region is di\ided into four parts for this purpose :
1. Peoria, LaSallc, Galcsburg, Quincy, and Rock Island.
2. Harrisburg, Benton, Lawrenceville, Centralia, and Cairo.
3. Joliet, Rockford, Aurora, Kankakee, and Evanston.
4. Danville, Springfield, Decatur, and East St. Louis.
Certain conditions must be satisfied before an appeal can be heard
before a Commissioner. The party seeking review must file (1) a "Peti-
tion for Review of Decision of Arbitrator" within 15 days after receipt
ol the arbitrator's award, and (2) a typewritten transcript or an agreed
statement of the facts of the previous hearing within 20 days after
receipt of the arbitrator's award. The Commission may extend the time
limit on the second requirement up to 30 days.
The petitioning party may lose the right to have a decision reviewed
by the Commission if the necessary papers are not submitted in time.
However, if the transcript is filed late, the requirement may be waived
by the other party, although he has the right to object. But if he par-
ticipates in the hearing without any objection, he cannot raise it at a
later time.*^^
A single Commissioner hears the first review. Such a hearing in-
cludes a review of the evidence already presented to the arbitrator.
Parties to the dispute are represented by their lawyers, new evidence may
be introduced, and witnesses may be called to testify. The Commissioner
can deal with all questions of law and fact in the case. He may uphold
the arbitrator's award, change it, or reverse it. He files his decision and
sends a copy of the award to the parties or their attorneys, noting the
time when it was filed.
ORAL ARGUMENT
If the lawyer of either the employee or the employer decides that he
wants a case heard before other members of the Commission, he may
35
request a review by at least three of the Commission's five members. This
is called "oral argument."
Oral argument before the Commission is of a more fonnal nature
than the earlier proceedings. The parties are given notice ten days before
the date of the hearing. Generally all five Commissioners are present. The
hearing opens with a discussion of the case by the Commissioner who
handled it before it came to full review. The lawyers are given a total
of 20 minutes each for arguments and rebuttal. The Commissioners often
ask the attorneys specific questions to clarify points or to seek additional
information. They also may clear the hearing room and examine the
injured employee personally. The Commissioners then meet in private
and arrive at a decision.
JUDICIAL REVIEW
In cases involving claims against the State of Illinois, the decision of
the Industrial Commission is final. In cases involving private employers,
the decision of the Commission may be appealed to the courts for further
review. Fifteen days are provided after the date of the decision for the
correction of any clerical errors or error in the computation of benefits.
Proven existence of fraud, of course, makes the decision of the Commis-
sion or arbitrator subject to change.
Judicial review of a decision by the Industrial Commission provides
for two levels of appeal : ( 1 ) the Circuit Court of the county or the City
Court of the city in which the accident was sustained, if it is more than
25,000 population; and (2) the Supreme Court of Illinois.
TO THE CIRCUIT COURT
If there is dissatisfaction with the award of the Industrial Commission,
it may be appealed first to the Circuit or City Court. The case is tried
primarily on the basis of the record presented. The record reviewed by
the court must be complete; otherwise it may be presumed that the
omitted section will act to sustain an award. '^- Presentation of the case
is, of course, bound by all the traditional legal procedures. The court can
pass judgment on both fact and points of law or interpretation of the Act.
The Circuit Court can take three courses of action: it may uphold
the award of the Commission, it may reverse it, or it may send it back
to the Commission for rehearing if there is doubt concerning the suffi-
ciency of the evidence that has been presented. The Commission must
follow the directives of the court.
In practice, very few cases are carried as far as the courts. Disputed
claims reviewed by a court often involve an especially large award or
some "principle" which one party (often the employer) feels is of great
importance to the future interpretation of the Act — thus justifying the
expense of a court appeal. In the past three years, about 100 cases a
year have been appealed to the Circuit Court — a small percentage of
the total claims settled on all levels." '
TO THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT
The Supreme Court of Illinois is the highest court of appeal in the ad-
ministration of the Workmen's Compensation Act. It considers only those
issues which have already been presented in the lower courts or before
the Commission. Points of dispute cannot be raised with the Supreme
Court for the first time.
The approach of the Supreme Court to cases on review may vary
from time to time. Where the facts of the case are not in dispute and
the point in issue is a question of law, prior decisions of the Commission
and the lower court are not binding.
Thus, if both the employer and employee representatives agree that the
employee lost 50 per cent use of his right hand from a severe case of frost-
bite, the Supreme Court generally will accept this as fact. However, it
will pass judgment on the disputed contention that the accident and dis-
ability "arose out of and in the course of employment."
In regard to the facts of the case, the Supreme Court generally ac-
cepts the findings of the Commission, but there have been exceptions.''"'
On issues which have not been clearly settled, the Supreme Court may
pass judgment on considerations both of law and fact at its discretion.
The Supreme Court may uphold an award, reverse it, or send it
back for further testimony or evidence. Except where a claim is sent back
to the Commission for further evidence, the decision of the Supreme
Court is final, and the case is settled one way or the other.
The Supreme Court has handed down very few amplified decisions.
One study shows that between 1943 and 1952, the Supreme Court wrote
108 decisions concerning workmen's compensation.^^ A majority of these
concerned the more legal issues like the employee-employer relationship
and the "arising" question. However, the Supreme Court probably passed
indirectly on many more compensation cases by exercising its right to
refuse to take a case on appeal from a Circuit Court. In doing this, the
decision of the lower court is upheld and becomes final. Lawyers say that
the Supreme Court's refusal to take a case ".speaks volumes" to them.
REOPENING A CLAIM
All cases, except those involving a lump sum |jaynu-nt, can be reopened
even though an arbitrator, the Industrial Commission, or the courts have
37
made awards. If an cinployet' has bren receiving weekly benefit payments,
his case can be reopened under certain conditions. He may reopen the
case if he bcHcves his disabihty has recurred or increased. The employer
has the same right to reopen if he thinks the disability has decreased or
ceased entirely. Request for review of a settlement aoreement or award
must he made within 18 months from the date of the award. If a volun-
tary settlement has been made, the case may be reviewed within 18
months of the date of the last voluntary payment. (A 1955 amendment
allows an employee or employer 30 months from the date of the award
to request a review. This applies only to accidents occurring after July
1, 1955.)
Reopening does not challenge the correctness of the settlement
award. Cases may be reopened only when it is claimed that the disability
has changed since the award was made.
Thus, if an employee is awarded compensation for 20 per cent loss of use
of a leg and his condition later becomes worse, he may attempt to gain
additional benefits for his injury. The same principles apply when an em-
ployer wishes to cut down benefit payments because he believes an
employee's condition has improved or disappeared since the settlement
award was made.
It is unlikely that an employee can obtain additional benefits from
a different injury arising from the original accident if this injury was
not brought to light in the original proceedings.
For example, an employee who was injured when he fell from a scaffold
received compensation for loss of use of his right leg. The case was settled.
Later, however, he felt that his left leg also had been disabled as a result
of the fall. His attempt to reopen the case and seek compensation for
disability to the left leg probably would be denied.
This highlights the need for a thorough physical examination at the time
the original settlement is made.
An employee does not necessarily have to have received benefits to
enable him to reopen his case — once the employer's liability has been
established.
For example, in processing a case it is determined that the accident arose
out of and in the course of employment. But no disability is proven at that
time. If some disability develops within the next 30 months, the employee
can petition for review of the case and receive benefits in accordance with
the Commission's judgment concerning his disability."''
When a claim is reopened, the party seeking new action has the
burden of proving that the disability has changed. Fifteen days' notice
of the hearing before the Commission is given to each party involved.
38
The decision of the Industrial Commission on such cases can be appealed
to the ( ourts in the same manner described above.
THE POOR PERSON'S PROVISION
Bringing a case to the Industrial Commission and perhaps to the courts
is expensive. An injured worker may not be able to pay the high costs
of making his claim. To take care of such a situation, the Act includes
the so-called "Poor Person's" provision.
Under this provision, an employee first must satisfy the Commission that
he cannot meet the expenses involved in processing his claim. These ex-
penses include the cost of obtaining transcripts of the record, issuing and
serving subpoenas, filing of writs of appeal, and filing a bond. He is
allowed to file his claim, and if he receives a favorable award or a settle-
ment is made, the costs are deducted from his benefits and paid to the
Commission. The employee receives the balance. No charge is made if the
cmploxcc is unsuccessful in pressing his claim.
The "Poor Person's" provision is not used frequently because only
a few compensation cases go beyond arbitration, and many unions will
loan the necessary money to members if they need it. In some instances
the employee's lawyer assumes the expense and is reimbursed when a
settlement is reached. Nonetheless, this provision increases the possibility
for an employee to pursue his claim past the arbitration level when
financial help does not come from other sources.
PENALTY FOR DELAY
A basic philosophy of the Workmen's Compensation Act is rapid settle-
ment — to provide the injured employee with compensation for injury
when he needs it most. In line with this belief, the Act contains penalty
provisions covering "any unreasonable or vexatious delay" of payment or
"intentional underpayment of compensation. . . ." "Vexatious delay"
also includes any proceedings before the Commission which "do not
present a real controversy but arc merely frivolous or for delay. . . .'"'"
Penalty awards are 50 per cent of the amount payable at the time ol the
award.
Penalties for "vexatious behavior" are not very frequent, but this
does not mean that such behavior is not found when settling or paying
a claim. Certain delaying tactics may be used by representatives to affect
the size of an award or to prevent a case from being settled quickly.
These tactics, however, arc generally accepted as "part of the game"
and are recognized as such by representatives for both sides. In addition,
it is not easy to prove "unreasonable or vexatious delay." The law pro-
vides many grounds for dispute which the parties may use without
stretching the intent or letter of the law too much. Nevertheless, the law
provides the authority to bring the more glaring cases of intentional delay
to account.
SPECIAL PROBLEMS
THE LUMP SUM PAYMENT
Part of the original philosophy of workmen's compensation was that
it would be better for an injured w^orker to receive smaller benefit
payments in many installments than a single "lump sum," as had been
the practice under common law proceedings. Thus, the worker would
have a steady source of income to tide him over his period of disability.
The Illinois law states that lump sum payments may be made whe7i
it appears to be in the best iriterests of the parties concerned, as judged by
the Industrial Commission. In practice, the lump sum payment has come
into widespread use in Illinois, partly because of the practice of com-
promise settlements.
Figures indicate that about three-fourths of the applications for adjustment
of claim submitted to the Commission are settled eventually by contracts
involving lump sum payments. In 1953, 9,629 claims were settled in lump
sum payments. This was 21 per cent of all claims closed during that year."^
Settlement by lump sum payment often is linked to compensation
cases arising under the specific loss schedule. Thus, 50 per cent loss of
use of a hand may be settled with a $2,500 lump sum rather than by
weekly payments strung out over many weeks. In cases of total disability,
however, no lump sum payments can be approved until six months after
the date of the accident.
Several other facts about lump sum payments should be remembered.
All lump sum payments must be approved by the Industrial Commission.
Lump sum payments are not always equal to the maximum amount pay-
able. They may be compromised for lesser amounts. Unless there is an
agreement to the contrary, the lump sum payment covers all of the
employer's liability. The case is closed "for all time" and cannot be re-
opened. Finally, unless special provision is made, the employee also sur-
renders his rights to continuing medical care.
Several factors have led to extensive use of lump sum settlements.
Attorneys involved are able to settle a case quickly without going through
the time-consuming administrative hearings or judicial review. The
injured employee is often anxious for a lump sum settlement. The em-
ployer's representative — in most cases the insurance company — also
finds advantages in such a settlement, for by accepting the lump sum the
employee has closed his case for all time and cannot reopen it in case
his disability increases. In addition, lump sum settlements often arc less
than benefits would be if paid in weekly installments. Thus the insurance
company may save money in the long run.
Much criticism has been leveled at the increased use of lump sum
settlements. Some spokesmen (of both employers and employees) have a
feeling that they have "gotten out of hand." Others point out that
chances for rehabilitation of the injured worker are reduced. Theo-
retically, the payment of benefits in installments will help the injured
worker to rehabilitate himself and get back to work without too much
personal financial strain. When he gets a large lump settlement, there is
danger that he will spend the money rashly and leave himself with no
further source of income. He might be forced to return to work before
he is physically able.
These criticisms arc matched by arguments in support of lump sum
settlements. It is claimed that they speed up settlements which might
otherwise bog down in prolonged hearings or judicial proceedings. They
also prevent the appearance of "neurotic" workers who are plagued by
imaginar)' aches and pains and hope to reopen their cases for additional
compensation. Some spokesmen believe that a worker can rehabilitate
himself best by working at a job where he can feel useful again. In addi-
tion, others contend that the weekly installments often are too small to
support a family. A worker may need a larger sum to tide him over his
disability period. Finally, the Act requires the Commission to approve all
lump sum settlements, thereby offering some protection against unwisely
giving large sums to spendthrift or irresponsible persons.
There seems to be some reaction against lump sum settlements.
Some large companies, who are self-insurers, insist on paying benefits
ever)' week. Educational programs for union members often include dis-
cussions of the disadvantages of lump sum settlements. Some lawyers in
the field believe there should be a tightening up of lump sum settle-
ments — especially in cases involving permanent total disability where
the employee may never return to work again.
THE LAWYER
Under the original theory of workmen's compensation, an employee or
employer could go through the entire settlement process without the aid
of a lawyer. Partly because of this, many workmen's compensation acts
spell out disability procedures and benefit schedules in great detail. It
was further believed that this detail would help correct some short-
comings of common law damage suits.
Despite these optimistic expectations, the lawyer still remains a
major figure in the administration of the Illinois and other Acts because
workmen's compensation has become not only a method of providing
needed benefits to injured workers but also a system of law. As a system
of law, it has many complex problems of interpretation and application.
In fact, workmen's compensation has produced legal specialists. Han-
dling compensation cases requires special knowledge of the provisions of
the Act and the many legal precedents involved. Compensation lawyers
also learn certain medical facts and terminology which is so often an
important part of any hearing or appeal to the courts. Particularly in
disputed cases, the use of a lawyer or some highly trained person is
almost a necessity. Many unions, in fact, refer their members to attorneys.
Some of these labor lawyers have come to be known as "petitioners' "
attorneys.
The widespread use of lawyers in compensation cases in Illinois has
resulted in many criticisms. However, informed sources say that these
criticisms apply to a relatively few cases. In most instances compensation
lawyers act with a sincere regard for the law and their client's interests.
First, some people claim the employer and employee could settle
easily many cases now handled by lawyers. If an employee hires a lawyer,
he must, of course, pay the fee. Thus his total benefits are reduced.
Second, some lawyers are accused of "claim-chasing." A few eager at-
torneys try to pad their practices by soliciting injured workers. They may
file for a claim adjustment as soon as they get a case, regardless of the
facts, in order to keep other lawyers, promising larger awards, from luring
their client away.
However, the Industrial Commission does regulate lawyers' activities
to a certain degree. For example, it is in the Commission's power to
review a lawyer's fees for compensation cases. Most fees are paid on a
contingency basis — that is, the lawyer receives a percentage of the
award if he wins. He may go away empty-handed if he loses.
The attorney must list his fee on the settlement contract which is
submitted to the Industrial Commission. If a lawyer has prepared a case,
he usually is allowed 20 per cent of the settlement. However, in other
cases of a more cut-and-dricd nature, the Commission will approve only a
flat fee considerably less than 20 per cent.
For example, an employee who loses an arm at the shoulder receives a
lump sum settlement of $5,000. There has been no real dispute in the case,
but the employee has hired a lawyer to handle his claim. Here the lawyer
will not receive $1,000 or 20 per cent of the settlement, but probably around
$100.
The fee will be measured in terms of the lawyer's time on the case rather
than the amount of the award. Sonu' lawyers have been known to handle
cases of ncn-dy workers for nothing.
A potential agency for self-regulation is an association of compensa-
tion lawyers formed in Chicago. In addition, bar associations have the
power to discipline members if abuses are detected.
Doubtless both employers and employees will continue to use lawyers
in conipi-nsation cases. Many ol them will ni-ed legal advice because of
the complicated nature of the workmen's compensation system. It would
be almost foolhardy for an injured employee who docs not know how the
law works to make his way through the many petitions, forms, and hear-
ings involved in settling a disputed claim. A few may try, but they risk
losing compensation benefits because they can easily overlook time limits
or neglect to fill out rec|uired forms.
MEDICAL CARE
Provision for virtually unlimited medical care has been cited as one of
the strong points of the Illinois Act. Under the law, the employer is re-
quired to offer an injured employee all the medical care reasonably
necessary to cure him of his disability or relieve him from the effects of
the accident. This includes doctor's fees, hospitalization, surgery, and
institutional care for more severe cases. Thus, the cost of medical care has
been quite heavy — in some cases far surpassing the sum the worker is
paid for the disability itself.
For the calendar year 1953 it is estimated that medical costs were
approximately $14,000,000. For the same year medical costs averaged
$168 per case on claims for which full data are available. In comparison,
average compensation was $506."^
An Illinois State Medical Society study provides some added insight
into the operation of medical care programs under workmen's compensa-
tion in Illinois.'" This report is generally critical and highlights alleged
abuses in medical relations under workmen's compensation. The following
paragraphs summarize this report briefly.
Most physicians who handle compensation cases are selected by in-
surance companies and claims services. Self-insurers choose their own
physicians or have extensive medical programs. These are "employers'
physicians." When the employer provides medical care, the employee"
who uses his own doctor must pay his own bills. A common exception is
a hernia case where, under a lump sum payment of around $250, the
employee is able to select his own doctor for the opiration.
The policy of most employers and their representatives is to give
the injured worker the best medical care possible. Although the quality
and amount of medical care has improved through the years^ a number
of problems remain;
1. Some supervisors are reluctant to refer a worker with a minor injury to
the medical department. Minor injuries, if neglected, may lead to
serious illness or disability.
2. Some doctors overlook the industrial implications of injuries.
3. Some doctors are reluctant to refer a worker to a specialist when
needed.
4. Some companies and physicians overemphasize low lost-time records,
and workers are returned to jobs before they are fully recovered.
5. In some cases, an employee is not encouraged to have a needed opera-
tion. Refusal of a major operation, whose outcome is uncertain, does
not, however, mean that an employee loses his right to additional medi-
cal care."
Many of the complaints are not against specific practices but
involve "undertreatment" or "overtreatment," and some result from the
fact that in most cases the employee cannot select his own doctor.
Other criticisms are directed at a small number of doctors who
testify regularly at compensation hearings. Some are evasive in answering
even the simplest questions; some use overly technical and confusing
testimony, tending to exaggerate or understate the extent of disability;
others may be quick to establish cause-and-effect relations in cases in-
volving aggravation of pre-existing injuries. A few doctors testify as
"experts" in many different fields of medicine even though they are not
fully qualified.
Some attorneys involved in the hearings also come in for criticism in
the report: cross-examining lawyers often browbeat doctors who testify,
may ask confusing or misleading questions impossible to answer, or may
press for a "yes" or "no" reply in situations where such a reply is difficult
or impossible; doctors are sometimes given insufficient notice before they
are called to testify, or they may be forced to wait around for a long
period of time, once at a hearing. For these reasons, many competent and
well respected doctors refuse to testify.
The State and national medical societies have called for action to
correct what they consider abuses in medical relations under workmen's
compensation. Following publication of their study, representatives of
the medical societies met with the Industrial Commissioners and asked
them to report "unethical" doctors to the medical societies. Local chap-
ters of these societies are expected to take the necessary steps to dis-
cipline their members.
Under the Illinois Act, a tovercd employer must insure his liability. Most
employers use commercial insurance companies authorized to operate in
Illinois. Policy provisions are subject to the approval of the Industrial
Commission. The Commission can authorize an employer as a "self-
insurer" if the Commission is satisfied with his ability to assume the
risk. A bond or surety may also be required.
Some employers are refused insurance by commercial carriers. Under
a 1937 Illinois law, an employer turned down by an insurance company
applies to the Commission.'" The Commission, in turn, designates a car-
rier to issue a policy. These so-called "bad-risk" policies are distributed
among the carriers, and any losses are covered by "reinsurance pools."
Insurance companies must belong to these pools. When an employer
applies to the Commission, he must ( 1 ) not have missed any compensa-
tion insurance payments during the previous 12 months, (2) pay the
annual premium in advance or make provision to pay when due, and
(3) assure the Commission that he is complying with laws relating to
worker health, welfare, and safety.
Insurance rates are complicated and need not be examined here.
Rates for a particular firm are related to industry classification, occupa-
tions, production processes, and the firm's previous "loss experience." In
general, rates have been declining — a drop of 26.8 per cent from 1941
to 1951 compared with a decline of 19.1 per cent for the nation as a
whole. Approximately 52 cents of each premium dollar goes into com-
pensation benefits and medical costs. The rest of the dollar pays for
inspecting premises, adjusting claims, and other insurance business
expenses. ^^
Insurance companies play major roles in settling compensation cases
and providing medical care. Benefit payments are almost always met.
Most large, well established companies have reputations for fair and
realistic policies in handling cases. Although they may have differing
reputations as to the degree of their "toughness" or "reasonableness," they
generally aim to be known as "hard but fair" bargainers. Only a few
small, less secure insurance companies allegedly tend to "cut corners" and
go to excessive lengths to reduce a claim.
Apparently there is little sentiment in Illinois for adopting a State-
administered general insurance fund, although several states have them.
The widespread use of commercial carriers probably will continue un-
disturbed in Illinois.
AMENDING THE ACT
The Workmen's Compensation Act in Illinois has been amended often.
Most amendments involve benefit provisions. The usual jirocedure is the
45
"agreed bill process," a method traditionally used in drafting and amend-
ing labor legislation in the State of Illinois.'* The Act was last amended
in June, 1955. The amendments are reflected in this Bulletm.
The "agreed bill process" means that representatives of leading labor
and employer groups affected by the legislation participate in drafting
the amendments. Proposed changes in the Act are referred (by the appro-
priate subcommittees of the House and Senate judiciary committees) to
an advisory committee composed of representatives of the various in-
terested groups. After a "public meeting," presided over by the chairman
of the Industrial Commission, a subcommittee of the advisory committee
meets in private until it reaches an agreement. The agreed changes are
taken back to the parent labor and employer organizations for approval.
Sometimes the committee must meet again before final agreement. The
"agreed bill" is resubmitted through the various legislative committees
and is likely to be enacted. If the advisory committee fails to reach an
agreement, the Legislature is not likely to act.
Those who have participated in this process report that the "bar-
gaining" has generally been carried out in good faith, and changes once
agreed to are not opposed later. The advantages of the "agreed bill
process" are said to be — ( 1 ) some changes, such as increased benefits,
may be obtained more quickly than by other methods; (2) those who
know the technicalities of workmen's compensation can work out solu-
tions away from the heat of politics. The disadvantages are said to be —
(1) the process leads to "patchwork" amendments; (2) the advisory
committee does not always have the most experienced men; (3) the pro-
cedure is not subject to public scrutiny; and (4) some management
people feel they always "give" and receive little in return.
In spite of some dissatisfaction in both employer and labor groups,
the "agreed bill process" seems likely to continue, partly because it is
an orderly system of achieving compromise among competing interests.
REHABILITATION
Industrial injuries raise problems of compensation, rehabilitation, and
safety. The Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act does not deal directly
with either rehabilitation or safety. Some medical care provisions, how-
ever, relate to rehabilitation. In amputation cases, the employer is re-
quired to pay for artificial members or braces when necessary. Medical
treatment may include physical therapy or other corrective measures.
The Special Fund, described on page 24, pays the diflfcrence between
compensation for one member and compensation for permanent total
disability. Thus, an employer may feel more free to hire a worker who
46
has lost the use of one member sinee he will not be responsible if the
employee should lose the use of a sceond. This inereases the c hanees for
employment of handieapped workers.
In addition, an informal relationship exists between the Industrial
Commission and the Illinois Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. I'he
latter may receive employment-problem cases from the Industrial Com-
mission and has access to Commission records. The Division of Vocational
Rehabilitation had 777 work-injury cases (out of 12,958) in the fiscal
year 1952-1953."'' The Division provides many services to the disabled
(diagnostic, medical, surgical, psychiatric, training, use of artificial limbs),
but the recipient must show he cannot afford to pay for these services.
Weekly benefit payments or a lump sum settlement may disqualify him.
Rehabilitation that restores an injured worker to his place in indus-
trial society obviously is important. In addition, techniques in surgery,
therapy, psychiatrv', and vocational training have greatly improved in
recent years.'" An important problem in Illinois is how to bring work-
men's compensation and rehabilitation closer together. Seventeen states
have provisions in their workmen's compensation laws to provide, pro-
mote, or facilitate rehabilitation. Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wash-
ington, and Puerto Rico operate rehabilitation directly under their
workmen's compensation systems. In Illinois, considerable study of costs,
methods of financing, and expansion of facilities is needed. Rehabilitation
experts claim that an expanded rehabilitation program would really pay
for itself in reducing cases of partial or total permanent disability and in
putting disabled workers back to work.
INDUSTRIAL SAFETY
The most direct way to reduce workmen's compensation costs is to pre-
vent accidents. Employers, workers, and unions participate in and benefit
from safety programs. Insurance companies influence safety programs
through inspection of clients' premises and, in some cases, through refusal
to insure an employer.
The Illinois Health and Safety Act links workmen's compensation
with industrial safety. Under the law, the Industrial Commission writes
regulations concerning the health and safety of employed persons. The
rules relate to such matters as guarding machinery, removing gases and
vapors, using construction equipment, and handling and storing harmful
substances. In general, the Commission makes the rules on the basis of
information and arguments presented by interested parties at hearings
held for this purpose. The courts may judge the reasonableness or legality
of a regulation if a petition for review is submitted within 90 days afti-r
the Industrial Commission enters the rule.
47
The Illinois Department of Labor enforces health and safety rules.
Factory- inspectors can visit any place of employment in the State affected
by the rules to detect possible violations. If an employer continually vio-
lates safety rules, he is guilty of a misdemeanor and may be fined between
$25 and $200 for continuing offenses. In 1953, the Illinois General As-
sembly created the Workmen's Safety and Education Investigating Com-
mission which reported its recommendations in 1955.''
It is difficult to estimate the effect safety programs have had upon
the over-all accident rate. It would be even more difficult to trace the
impact of workmen's compensation on industrial safety and thus on the
number of work injuries. Many factors enter into such an appraisal. The
total number of workers employed is a significant factor. The increasing
degree of mechanization of production also is important. In many cases,
it is difficult to determine whether a certain safety program was initiated
because of concern for compensation costs.
Nonetheless, the number of industrial injuries has been declining in
Illinois.'"^ In 1927, 28 out of every 1,000 nonagricultural workers suffered
compensable injuries. By 1954, the rate had dropped to 16.8 out of even,-
1,000, although the accident rate went up and down several times during
those years.
In addition, the industrial death rate dropped even more sharply
during the same period. In 1927, there were 37 fatal injuries in every
100,000 workers. By 1954, this rate had been cut to 13.9, less than half
the earlier figure. Apparently significant progress has been made in pre-
venting major accidents due to faulty machinery or inadequate safeguards
rather than human error.
Safety specialists are especially interested in negligence or apathy on
the part of many small employers. Because of shortsightedness or ex-
tremely competitive business conditions, these employers often do not
have necessary safeguards on their machinery or on their premises in
general. The employer may not know the effect of this policy until he is
forced to make a compensation settlement of $1,000 where a $30 machine
guard might have prevented an accident.
SUMMARY
Workmen's compensation is an accepted element in industrial society
today. The need for such legislation arose because the old common law
system of compensation for work injuries was slow and inadequate. Work-
men's compensation laws are attempts to replace the old system with
rapid administrative justice, to substitute certainty for the uncertain
awards of the past. They are designed to protect the worker from the
hazards of industrial employment without considerations of blame.
Workmen's compensation, however, is not as simple in operation as
the early sponsors hoped it would be. In Illinois, as in other states, the
detailed provisions of the Act have been interpreted and reinterpreted by
the Industrial Commission and the courts. Benefit awards may depend
on many factors — the employee-employer relationship, circumstanci>s of
the accident, proper reporting, the nature and extent of injury, and
whether a claim is disputed. Also, the amount of compensation often is
afTected by the testimony and judgment of medical experts. Because the
system is complex, lawyers often are asked to handle the cases. Frequently
it is necessary to reach a compromise settlement.
In recent years interest in workmen's compensation problems has
increased both in Illinois and elsewhere in the nation. People familiar
with the system are unlikely to say it is perfect. Many aspects are criti-
cized and various changes have been sought. These criticisms and changes,
moreover, are aimed at both the substance and administration of the Act.
Those who work with the law (Commissioners, lawyers, and others)
agree that one of the first steps in seeking solutions to the many problems
surrounding workmen's compensation is more education — that is, a
wider knowledge of how the system operates. Both employers and em-
ployees should understand thoroughly their rights and responsibilities
under the law. Such understanding aids sound administration, improves
programs of safety and rehabilitation, and can help pave the way for
desired changes in the future. This Bulletin is intended to be a small con-
tribution to a better understanding of the system.
FOOTNOTES
1. Annual Report on Compensable Work Injuries, 1954 (State of Illinois, De-
partment of Labor, Division of Statistics and Research, August, 1955), Part I,
p. iii.
2. See Walter F. Dodd, Administration of Workmen's Compensation (New York:
Commonwealth, 1936), pp. 7-13.
3. Thomas C. Angerstein, Illinois Workriien's Compensation (Chicago: Burdette
Smith, 1952), Vol. I, pp. 1-16.
4. Dodd, pp. 16-17.
5. Dodd, pp. 18-34.
6. "Workmen's Compensation Legislation in 1949," Monthly Labor Review, \o\.
LXIX (November, 1949), p. 514.
7. Angerstein, Vol. I, p. 14.
8. Angerstein, \'ol. I, p. 15.
9. Dodd, pp. 41-49.
10. Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act, Preamble.
11. Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act, Section 3.
12. Illinois Publishing and Printing Co. v. Industrial Commission, 299 111. 189
(1921).
13. Peterson v. Industrial Commission, 315 111. 199 (1925).
14. Chicago Cleaning Co. v. Industrial Board of Illinois, 283 111. 177 (1918).
49
15. Ascher Bros. Amusement Enterprises v. Industrial Commission, 311 111. 258
(1924): and Peterson v. Industrial Commission, 315 111. 199 (1925), respec-
tively.
16. In cases of voluntary coverage, the employee retains his right to reject coverage
by notifying the Commission of his intentions either 30 days after he is hired
or at least 10 days before the beginning of a new year. By rejecting coverage
the employee keeps his right to seek damages for injury at common law. Al-
though the right of rejection is written into the law, no employee has ever
refused coverage within the memory of those who administer the Act.
17. See Illinois Publishing and Printing Co. v. Industrial Commission, 299 111.
189 (1921); and Village of Chapin v. Industrial Commission, 336 111. 461
(1929).
18. Annual Report on Compensable Work Injuries, 1954, Part I, p. 4.
19. Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act, Sections 1 (a)(2) and 1 (b)(2).
20. Indian Hill Club v. Industrial Commission, 309 111. 271 (1923).
21. Crepps V. Industrial Commission, 402 111. 606 (1949).
22. Central Illinois Light Co. v. Industrial Commission, 359 111. 430 (1935).
23. Allen-Garcia Co. v. Industrial Commission, 334 111. 390 (1929).
24. City of Pekin v. Industrial Commission, 341 111. 312 (1930); and Murphy v.
Industrial Commission, 355 111. 419 (1934), respectively.
25. Beall Bros. Supply Co. v. Industrial Commission, 341 111. 193 (1930).
26. Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act, Section 1 (a)(3). See also Baker and
Conrad, Inc. v. Chicago Heights Construction Co., 364 111. 386 (1936).
27. Steel Sales Corporation v. Industrial Commission, 293 111. 435 (1920).
28. Fluor Corporation v. Industrial Commission, 398 111. 616 (1948).
29. Joliet V. Industrial Commission, 291 111. 555 (1920).
30. Gudeman Co. v. Industrial Commission, 399 111. 279 (1949); and Cruzan v.
Industrial Commission, 350 111. 407 (1933), respectively.
31. Springfield District Coal Mining Co. v. Industrial Commission, 303 111. 528
(1922).
32. United States Fuel Co. v. Industrial Commission, 313 111. 590 (1924).
33. Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act, Section 8 (d)(1).
34. Perkinson v. Industrial Commission, 305 111. 625 (1923).
35. Wabash Railway Co. v. Industrial Commission, 294 111. 119 (1920): and
Rockford Cabinet Co. v. Industrial Commission, 295 111. 332 (1921),
respectively.
36. General Concrete Construction Co. v. Industrial Comr7jission, 375 111. 483
(1941) ; and Public Service Co. v. Industrial Commission, 395 111. 238 (1946),
respectively.
37. West Side Coal and Mining Co. v. Industrial Commission, 291 111. 301 (1920).
38. Brooks Tomato Products Co. v. Industrial Commission, 311 111. 207 (1924).
39. Dietzen Co. v. Industrial Commission, 279 111. 11 (1917).
40. Riley v. Industrial Commission, 394 111. 126 (1946).
41. Payne v. Industrial Commission, 295 111. 388 (1921).
42. Pekin Cooperage Co. v. Industrial Board of Illinois, 277 111. 53 (1917).
43. Scholl V. Industrial Commission, 366 111. 588 (1937) ; and City of Chicago v.
Industrial Commission, 292 111. 406 (1920), respectively.
44. Average annual wage is computed on the basis of remuneration the injured
person received as salary, wages, or earnings from his employer during the
year preceding his injury. If the employee was off the job for some unavoidable
cause or if he did not work for the same employer for a full year before his
accident, his annual wage is figured on the basis of what other employees in
the same job class received during the preceding year. If annual earnings can-
not otherwise be determined, they can be figured as 300 times the average
daily earnings for jobs where it is the custom to work a full year or 200 times
the average daily earnings where it is the custom to work only part of the total
number of working days per year.
50
45. See Herman M. Somcrs and Anne R. Sonicrs, Workmen's Compensation (New
York: Wiley, 1954), p. 89.
46. Mount Olive Coal Co. v. Industrial Commission, 295 111. 429 (1921).
47. Angerstein, Vol. II, pp. 323-327, and supplement to Vol. II, pp. 61-63.
48. Williams Co. v. Industrial Commission, 303 111. 352 (1922).
49. Sec Somers and Somers, pp. 90-92, and Harland Fox, "Company Supplements
to Workmen's Compensation,"" Managernerit Record, Vol. XVII (January,
1955), pp. 19-22.
50. Annual Report on Compensable Work Injuries, 1953, Part II, pp. 7-8.
51. Angerstein, Vol. II, p. 102.
52. Paradise Coal Co. v. Industrial Commission, 301 III. 504 (1922).
53. Council on Industrial Health, American Medical Association, and Committee
on Industrial Health, Illinois State Medical Society, Medical Relations Under
Workmen's Compensation in Illinois, 1953, p. 30.
54. Based on personal interviews with administrators, lawyers, and doctors asso-
ciated with workmen"s compensation.
55. Council on Industrial Health, p. 29.
56. 1953-1954 Annual Report (State of Illinois, Department of Labor), p. 37.
57. See Angerstein, \'ol. Ill, pp. 129-154.
58. Heyworth v. Industrial Commission, 321 III. 298 (1926).
59. A "decision" is in the name of the Industrial Commission itself.
60. 1953-1954 Annual Report, p. 37.
61. Taylor Coal Co. v. Industrial Commission, 301 111. 381 (1922).
62. Smith-Lohr Coal Co. v. Industrial Board of Illinois, 279 111. 88 (1917).
63. 1953-1954 Annual Report, p. 37.
64. Hamilton Engineering Co. v. Industrial Commission, 399 111. 30 (1948) : and
Cicero v. Industrial Commission, 404 111. 487 (1950).
65. Alan J. Greiman, "A Survey of Workmen's Compensation Before the Supreme
Court of Illinois, 1943-52"' (Unpublished MS, University of Illinois, 1953).
66. Crowder Seed Co. v. Industrial Coryimission, 347 111. 86 (1932).
67. Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act, Section 19 (k).
68. Annual Report on Compensable Work Injuries, 1953, Part II, p. 8. Also esti-
mates of Industrial Commissioners interviewed.
69. Annual Report of Compensable Work Injuries, 1953, Part II, p. 15.
70. Council on Industrial Health, pp. 10-21.
71. Florczak v. Industrial Commission, 381 111. 120 (1942). On the other hand,
an employee who persists in injurious practices which retard his recovery may
have his payments reduced or suspended by the Commission.
72. Illinois Revised Statutes 1953, Chapter 73, Sections 1081-1091.
73. Harold A. Katz and Estelle M. Wirpel, "Workmen's Compensation 1910-1952:
Are Present Benefits Adequate?" Labor Law Journal, Vol. IV (March, 1953),
p. 167; Arthur H. Reede, Adequacy of Workmen's Compensation (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1947), pp. 239-246; and Council on Industrial
Health, p. 51.
74. See Gilbert Y. Steiner, Legislation by Collective Bargaining (Champaign: In-
stitute of Labor and Industrial Relations, University of Illinois, 1951).
75. Council on Industrial Health, pp. 40-41.
76. For dramatic accounts of the success of rehabilitation, see David Hinshaw,
Take Up Thy Bed and Walk (New York: Putnam, 1948). See also Somers
and Somers, pp. 236-267.
77. "Workmen's Safety Commission Holds Hearings," Illinois Labor Bulletin, \'ol.
XV (November-December, 1954), pp. 10, 11, 13.
78. The following figures are from Annual Report on Compensable Work Injuries.
1954, Part I, Tables 2 and 3, pp. A-3 and A-4; and "Compensable Work
Injuries Reported," Illinois Labor Bulletin, \'o\. XV, (May-June, 1955), p. 23.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
ON ILLINOIS WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
Angerstein, Thomas C, Illinois Workmen's Compensation. Chicago,
Burdette Smith Company, 1952. Three volumes.
This is an exhaustive study of legal decisions and doctrines developed
in forty years of administration of the Illinois Workmen's Compensa-
tion Act. Although this work is primarily intended for lawyers, non-
legal readers will not find it too difficult and may easily use the de-
tailed table of contents to find information on specific aspects of the
Illinois law.
Council on Industrial Health, American Medical Association, and Com-
mittee on Industrial Health, Illinois State Medical Society, Medical
Relations Under Workmen's Compensation in Illinois, 1953.
A detailed study of medical problems involved in administering work-
men's compensation in Illinois by an interested professional society.
This study points out several weaknesses and "abuses" in the adminis-
tration of the law. It stimulated widespread comment and some
criticism when first published. The report can be obtained by writing
to the Secretary, Illinois State Medical Society, Monmouth, Illinois.
Illinois Department of Labor, Laws Relating to Labor and Employment.
Bulletin compiled and published about every two years (most recent
copy, 1953) by the State labor department. It includes in full the
Workmen's Compensation Act, the Workmen's Occupational Diseases
Act, and the Compulsory Coverage of the Rejected Employers Act.
Free copies are available from the department at either State Capitol
Building, Springfield, or 160 North LaSalle Street, Chicago 1, Illinois.
Illinois Department of Labor, Division of Statistics and Research, Annual
Report on Compensable Work Injuries, Part I ■ — Work Injuries Reported
and Part II — Compensation Claims Closed.
Reports give year-by-year summaries on work injuries compensable
under the Illinois Workmen's Compensation and Occupational Diseases
Acts. Text and charts show reported compensable injuries by place,
cause, industry, occupation; industrial accident cost; work injury
claims closed, benefits paid, etc. Invaluable sources for clearly pre-
sented, important statistics. Available from the labor department's
Division of Statistics and Research, 160 North LaSalle Street, Chicago
1, Illinois.
Illinois Industrial Commission, Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act.
The Commission, 160 North LaSalle Street, Chicago 1, Illinois. Free.
Illinois Industrial Coniniission, Summary of U'orkmeii's Compensation
Act. The Commission, 160 North LaSallr Street, Chicago 1, Illinois. Free.
A nine-page booklet prepared speciKeally for employees. It explains
points in the law by readable question-and-answer form.
Katz, Harold A., and VVirpel, Estcllc M., "Workmen's Compensation
1910-1952: Are Present Benefits Adequate?" Labor Law Journal, Vol.
IV (March, 1953), pp. 167-82. (Also reprinted by the Industrial Rela-
tions Center, University of Chicago.)
.\n analysis of past and present benelils for work injury under the
Illinois Workmen's Coinpensation Act. The authors compare the
schedule of benefits in Illinois with those of other states and certain
standards of economic necessity. Available as long as reprints are in
stock from the Industrial Relations Center, University of Chicago,
Chicago 37, Illinois.
Soderstrom, Reuben G.. "How Can We Improve the Workmen's Com-
pensation Law and Its Administration." Lecture Series No. 10, Institute
of Labor and Industrial Relations, University of Illinois, February, 1954.
A short, critical analysis of the Illinois Workmen's Compensation Act
by the president of the Illinois State Federation of Labor. It reflects
the views of this labor group. Available by writing to the Editor,
Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations, 704 South Sixth Street,
Champaign, Illinois.
Baer, Joseph. "Survey of the Legal Profession — Workmen's Compensa-
tion and the Lawyer." Columbia Law Review, Vol. LI (December,
1951), pp. 969-76.
A discussion of problems of lawyer and compensation-client relations.
The author calls on his experience as a compensation lawyer in Massa-
chusetts and emerges with some suggestions for practicing compensa-
tion lawyers.
Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, Analysis of
Provisions, Workmen's Compensation and Discussion of Coverages.
W^ashington, D. C, The Chamber, 1952.
Contains a breakdown of the important provisions concerning coverage
and benefits payable under the compensation laws of each state. The
material is arranged in .separate tables for easy reference. Periodic
revisions are made to bring the material up-to-date in accordance with
new amendments in the states. Can be obtained for $1.00 by writing
to the Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D. C.
53
Congress of Industrial Organizations, Department of Education and
Research, "Workmen's Compensation ... A Story of Failure." In
Economic Outlook, Vol. VIII (January, 1952.)
A highly critical survey of workmen's compensation laws in the United
States with suggestions for improvement. Written from the viewpoint
of one national labor organization. Can be obtained by writing to the
CIO Department of Education and Research, 718 Jackson Place,
N.W., Washington 6, D. C. Cost is $0.15 per copy.
"The Current Status of Workmen's Compensation: A Symposium,"
Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. VII (October, 1953), pp.
31-72.
Articles by Herman and Anne Somers, S. Bruce Black, Jerome Pollack,
and Duncan M. Maclntyre.
Dodd, Walter F., Administration of Workmen's Compensation. New
York, The Commonwealth Fund, 1936.
A survey of compensation law administration in various states with
several sections on Illinois. It holds much useful information and
thoughtfully considers workmen's compensation problems. Much of
this volume is still relevant today.
Reede, Arthur H., Adequacy of Workmen's Compensation. Cambridge,
Harvard University Press, 1947.
A detailed study of benefit provisions of several states' workmen's com-
pensation laws with further analysis to determine their adequacy. This
book also contains some fairly technical material on compensation
insurance rate determination.
Somers, Herman M., and Somers, Anne R., Workmen's Compensation:
The Prevention, Insurance, and Rehabilitation of Occupational Dis-
ability. New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1954.
The most up-to-date study of workmen's compensation and its rela-
tionship to accident prevention, rehabilitation, and other forms of
social insurance. Raises fundamental questions relative to basic changes
which the authors regard as critical.
Steiner, Louise, Recent Trends in Occupational Disease Legislation, and
Strickland, Jack, Unions, Managemerit, and Industrial Safety. Both bul-
letins. Champaign, The Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations,
University of Illinois, 1951. Price is $0.10 a copy.
United States Bureau of Labor Standards, Workmeii's Compensation
Problems. Washington, D. C, Government Printing Office.
Tho Ikircau issues these proeeedings of annual < onventions of the
International Assoeiation of Industrial Aecident Boards and Commis-
sions in bulletins under this general title. Available arc No. 142 (1950
convention) for $0.50 a copy; No. 156 (1951) $0.45 each; No. 167
(1952) $0.65 each; No. 172 (1953) $0.50 each; and No. 180 (1954)
$0.65 each.
Unitrd Statis Bureau of Labor Statistics, Workmen's Compensation in
the United States, Bulletin No. 1149, Washington, D. C, Government
Printing Office, 1954.
.•\ collection of articles giving a general appraisal of workmen's com-
pensation laws and their administration. Topics include administrative
problems, court proceedings, occupational diseases, accident preven-
tion, medical benefits, and federal legislation for workers not coming
under state laws. The rehabilitation article by Jerome Pollack provides
a good short statement of this problem and its relationship to work-
men's compensation. This bulletin can be obtained from Superintend-
ent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C
Price is $0.30 a copy. The eight articles can also be found singly in
the Monthly Labor Review, Vol. LXXVI (April-December, 1953).
55
1
CURRENT INSTITUTE PUBLICATIONS
RESEARCH VOLUMES
Labor-Management Relations in Illini City, Volume 1 The Case Studies
and Volume 2 Explorations in Comparative Analysis. By W. Ellison
Chalmers, Margaret K. Chandler, Louis L. McQuitty, Ross Stagner,
Donald E. Wray, and Milton Berber, Coordinator.
Volume 1: Cloth $10.00, Case Study Reprints $1.25
Volume 2: Cloth $7.50. Both Volumes $15.00
Channels of Employment. By Murray Edelman. Paper: $2.50
Union Decision-Making in Collective Bargaining: A Case Study on the
Local Level. By Arnold R. Weber. Paper Mimeographed Text: $1.00
Legislation by Collective Bargaining. By Gilbert Y. Steiner. Paper: $1.00
National Economic Planning by Collective Bargaining.
By Murray Edelman. Cloth: $2.00. Paper: $1.50
The LTnion Member Speaks. By Hjalmar Rosen and R. A. Hudson
Rosen. (An ILIR research study published by Prentice-Hall, Inc.).
Cloth: $4.95
BULLETINS (Copics $0.10 each except where iridicated.)
Assignment and Garnishment of Wages in Illinois
Trends and Problems in L^nemployment Insurance
Unions, Management, and Industrial Safety
Supervisory Training — Why, What, and How
Workers on the Move
Job Evaluation
Motion and Time Study ($0.25 each)
Workmen's Compensation in Illinois ($0.50 each)
List of Publications, available from
EDITORIAL OFFICE
INSTITUTE OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
704 SOUTH SIXTH STREET
CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11