Temporary Total Disability Compensation
Ohio Revised Code Section 4123.56(A) provides for payment of an award
called temporary total disability (T.T. or TT). The temporary total
award provides compensation for the injured worker's loss of earnings
while healing from the injury.An injured worker is eligible for temporary total disability if they are not capable of performing the work they were doing when injured, as long as they have not abandoned their employment and one of the conditions for terminating temporary total set forth in R.C. 4123.56(A) are not present.
Temporary total may be terminated where
- the employee has returned to work;
- the employee's physician has made a written
statement that the employee can return to the former position of
employment;
- employment within the employee's physical
capabilities is made available; or
- the employee reaches maximum medical
improvement.
Our case index provides summaries of temporary total decisions by Ohio courts with links to the cases.
Other information:
- Court: The Supreme Court has found
that temporary total is not terminated when an injured workers'
condition has not reached maximum medical improvement, even if the
condition will "permanently" prevent the injured worker from returning
to their former position of employment. (April, 2009)
- Court: The Supreme Court has made it
clear that temporary total can restart after an injured worker has
surgery, even if the allowed condition had not worsened before the
surgery occurred. (December, 2007)
- Court: The Supreme Court has granted
reconsideration in the Gross case and held that an injured worker
remains eligible for temporary total disability even after they have
been fired for the actions which led to the injury. (October, 2007)
- Court: The Supreme Court has ruled
that an employer's decision to fire an employee does not bar temporary
total when the firing was because of the industrial injury.
(May, 2007)
- Court: An injured worker who has
received a permanent partial payment can also receive an award for
temporary total for the same condition, covering the same time
period. (December, 2005)
- Court: The Supreme Court has ruled in
a case that an employer cannot avoid the responsibility to pay
temporary total to an employee by firing them for forgetting to list a
previous job on their job application. (October,
2005)
- Court: The Supreme Court has ruled
that eligibility for wage loss compenation does not justify a
self-insurer's decision to terminate temporary total. (May, 2004)
- Court: A Court of Appeals has found
that an injured worker who performs unpaid charitable activities
remains eligible for temporary total. (March, 2004)
- Court: A Court of Appeals'
decision found that an injured worker who was fired because of
absenteeism resulting from the industrial injury remained entitled to
receive temporary total. (January, 2004)
- Court: A Court of Appeals' decision
found that an injured worker who was replaced after participating in a
lawful strike remained entitled to temporary total. (January,
2004)
- Court: An injured worker who has
voluntarily abandoned his employment regains eligibility for temporary
total after returning to work part-time. (December, 2003)
- Court: The Supreme Court has found
that an employer cannot fire an employee for absenteeism if the reason
for the absence is a period of temporary total disability as a result
of an industrial injury. (November, 2003)
- Court: According to the Supreme Court,
the only medical evidence necessary for temporary total is evidence
that the inability to return to work is due to the allowed
conditions. The claimant is not required to prove that there
are no other disabling conditions. (August, 2003)
- Court: The Supreme Court has upheld an
Industrial Commission decision to award temporary total to a claimant
who earned rental income from properties he owned. (June, 2003)
- Court: The Supreme Court has ruled
that a worker does not lose the right to temporary total when they
suffer a flare-up of a condition after they have returned to
different employment. This decision clarifies the application
of the abandonment doctrine to temporary total compensation.
(November, 2002)
- Court: The Supreme Court has held that
an injured worker who is engaged in non-paying activities in a
workplace is not barred from receiving temporary total where the
activities engaged in are consistent with the injured worker's physical
restriction against performing their former employment. (June, 2002)
- Court: The Supreme Court has decided
two cases which make it clear that an injured worker who has not
abandoned the job market remains eligible for temporary total, whatever
their reason was for leaving their job of injury. (October, 2001)
- Court: Supreme Court rules that
temporary total eligibility is lost only when an injured worker
voluntarily abandons the entire job market. (May, 2001)
- Court: The Supreme Court has issued
its new decision in State, ex rel. Baker v. Indus. Comm. The new
decision holds that an injured worker remains eligible for temporary
total after leaving the job they had been doing when injured to work at
a different job. (September 2000)
- Court: Supreme Court denies temporary
total when injured worker fired pursuant to employer's drug policy.
(April 2000)
- Court: Supreme Court grants
reconsideration in Baker case, which held that an injured worker who
leaves the job of injury may forfeit eligibility for future temporary
total. (March 2000)
- Court: Supreme Court rules leaving
employment of injury for better (or different) job may bar temporary
total. (March 2000)
- Court: The Supreme Court has decided
that where a treating doctor explains an ambiguous report (and
indicates that the injured workers' condition remains temporary total),
that report cannot be used to support a finding of maximum medical
improvement. (March, 1999)
- Administrative: Commission issues new
resolution applying Russell decision, which declared commission temporary total overpayment policy invalid. (August, 1998)
- Court: Supreme Court declares Commission temporary total overpayment policy (which involved retroactive finding of MMI) invalid. (August, 1998)