glossary

Activities of Daily Living: There are eight commonly measured categories of Activities of Daily Living: self-care, personal hygiene, communication, physical activity such as standing, walking, sitting, reclining and climbing stairs.

ACOEM: American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

ACOEM Guidelines: These guidelines for treatment of various injuries have been adopted by the California Legislature as the official guidelines for treatment of injured workers in California who have been injured on the job. The ACOEM treatment guidelines are presumed correct under Labor Code Section 4604.5. Thus once the injured worker's treating doctor has made a treatment of diagnostic recommendation that complies with the ACOEM Guidelines, the employer must either respond by providing the treatment or bear the burden of proving that the ACOEM guideline was inadequate. Disputes involving issues of ACOEM compliance usually come up during the Utilization Review (UR) process. Since the legislature passed the 2004 legislation which overhauled the California Workers Compensation system, there have been thousands of bad faith UR denials of treatment by employers and by employers' insurance carriers. Many of these UR denials are unlawful for a variety of reasons: (1) The treatment recommendation for which the Primary Treating Physician (PTP) is seeking authorization complies with ACOEM although the employer's doctor claims it does not, and has denied on that basis; (2) The PTP's request for treatment authorization is not governed by ACOEM (3) The employer failed to respond to the PTP's treatment authorization request within 14 days as is required by Labor Code Section 4610.

ADL: Activities of Daily Living

Agreed Medical Examiner: A doctor who is a specialist in an area of occupational medical practice, such as orthopedic medicine, psychiatric medicine, or internal medicine with expertise in diagnosing industrial injury who the parties agree will determine certain medical/legal issues such as causation, nature and extent of injury, or apportionment. California case law holds that the opinion of an Agreed Medical Examiner is to be given great deference.

Almarez/Guzman: This is the case name of two Petitions for Reconsideration that were consolidated for En Banc decision by the WCAB. The decision which issued on Feb. 3, 2009 allows a reporting physician to rebut the AMA Guides impairment rating of an injured worker if the doctor believes the AMA Guides rating to be unfair, or inequitable. When that doctor's rebuttal of the Guides is presented to the local Board in a trial, the WCJ may accept or reject the rebuttal. If the WCJ accepts the rebuttal, he/she may proceed to consider any proposed rating outside the AMA Guides which is fair, equitable and reasonable. Since April 19, 2004 when Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law the “reform” legislation commonly known as SB 899, Attorneys for injured workers in California have been complaining that the AMA Guides provide an unreasonably low and inherently unfair rating value for the types of permanent disabilities which result from work injuries in California. The good news is that the Almarez/Guzman decision now provides a better alternative for doctors to lay the groundwork for a fairer rating of permanent disability of injured workers in California.

AMA Guides: Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, American Medical Association. Adopted by California Legislature in April 2004 “Reform” legislation as the ultimate authority in rating the percentage of permanent disability of a work injury; however the Guides do not use the term disability, rather the Guides speak of impairments in the activities of daily living. Thus under current law, the evaluation of impairment in the activities of daily living replaces work disability as the primary focus in determining permanent disability.

AME: Agreed Medical Examiner

Applicant: Workers compensation designation for the Plaintiff, claimant, or person hurt at work who is filing a claim for injury.

Applicant's Bar: The attorneys who represent injured workers.

Compromise and Release: This is the most favored method of settlement of a workers compensation claim in California. It is a full and final settlement so that it is impossible to reopen the claim, or continue medical treatment at the employer's expense once the Worker's Comp. Judge has approved the Compromise and Release. Release is the operative word. It is well established in California law that a signed release may not be set aside unless it was accomplished through undue influence, fraud or mistake.

C&R: Abbreviation for Compromise and Release.

CAAA: California Applicant's Attorney Association. This is the organization that all of the better Applicant's attorneys are members of. The organization plays a major role in influencing legislation that will benefit injured workers.

The organization also plays a major role in educating its members about changes in the laws that govern injuries in the workplace. Twice a year the organization holds Seminar/Conventions which contain valuable educational opportunities for lawyers who wish to do their best for persons hurt at work. The educational functions also focus a lawyer on how to use the law to obtain maximum benefits for the client who was hurt at work.

Causation: causation of injury raises the legal question of whether the injury was industrial or non-industrial. In California Workers Comp. procedure, the jargon is AOE/COE. The first question is whether the injury occurred in workplace. If the injury occurred at work, but after the employee had clocked out, the employer will no doubt deny that the injury was industrial. If the employee was still on the premises, I would disagree with the employer and fight for the employee.

COLA: Cost of Living Adjustment - According to L.C. Section 4553(a) for all injuries occurring after Jan. 1, 2003 the minimum and maximum temporary disability rate are to be increased each year beginning Jan 1, 2007. The annual adjustment is tied to the State Average Weekly Wage, (SAWW). For example, California injured workers received a raise in the temporary disability rates of roughly five percent on 1/1/ 2007 as the State's maximum temporary total disability rate increased to $881.66 from $840.00. This same increase should occur on each January 1 in perpetuity. The COLA also applies to permanent disability rates.

According to Labor Code Section 4661.5 the same COLA is available where the injured worker was still temporarily totally disabled as of 1/1/2007 for injuries which occurred prior to 1/1/2003.

The COLA is also applicable to the lifetime pension in cases valued at 70% permanent disability or more.

The COLA is also available in death claims.

Cumulative Trauma/Continuous Trauma: This is an injury or occupational disease which developed over time. Carpal Tunnel Syndrome is often diagnosed as having been the result of cumulative trauma. The same is true of other “overuse syndromes.”

CT claim: Cumulative Trauma claim.

Compensable Consequence: As is set forth above, an injured worker suffering from a painful physical injury such as a herniated disc in the lumbar spine, will quite naturally become depressed at some point in time. Thus while the initial industrial injury was not a psychiatric injury it can be said that it would not have occurred but for the initial industrial injury. Likewise, if an injured worker with an industrial back injury undergoes surgery involving medical malpractice, the employer will be responsible for the corresponding enhanced injury and disability caused by the malpractice which could not have occurred but for the original industrial injury.

Declaration of Readiness: The WCAB form filed by either party stating that the Board's assistance is needed in order to resolve the matter, and that the case is otherwise ready for trial.

Defense Bar: The attorneys who are hired by employers' workers compensation insurance carriers to defend workers compensation claims. Their job is to investigate claims and claimants and to limit or reduce the value of those claims. Whenever possible these defense attorneys will attempt to prove that a claim is not based on an industrial injury, or that the person hurt on the job was not actually employed by the employer (i.e. the injured worker was only an independent contractor), or that a statutory defense such as “post termination” claim bars recovery by the person hurt at work.

One of the major areas that defense attorneys actively work, is to try to steer hurt workers to defense oriented doctors for examination and treatment. Once an injured worker has been evaluated and disability has been rated, the defense attorney will do all in her power to exclude from evidence a report that is favorable to the hurt worker, or try to dissuade the doctor from being generous in assigning a disability rating to the injured worker.

DOR: Work Comp. abbreviation for Declaration of Readiness.

En Banc: A decision of all seven Commissioners of the WCAB sitting together and deciding a matter together. These decisions have the most weight of all WCAB decisions.

The “Going and Coming Rule”: This is the work comp. general rule that if an employee injured while going to work or coming from work, the injury is not an industrial injury and the employer is not liable for the injury. Please note that there are many exceptions to this rule, and the injured worker whose claim is denied for this reason should consult an attorney who is willing to fight.

Hearing Rep: Abbreviation for Hearing Representative. In the California Workers Compensation system certain non-lawyers who have attained a high level of knowledge and competence in workplace injury law are permitted to practice before the Board so long as they are supervised by a member of the State Bar of California.

Labor Code Section 132(a) Claim: This is the injured worker's response to a termination following the filing of a workers compensation claim by the worker injured at work. These terminations are often retaliatory in nature from our perspective, or at the very least are an attempt to create the “post termination defense.” In almost all cases, it can be said that if the worker, hurt on the job suffered a disabling injury, the typical employer is afraid to retain that employee since he/she may no longer be able to perform work at his/her pre-injury capacity. The employer in most cases simply does not want to keep an employee who will need to be provided modified duty, or be permitted to work with restrictions. If any of the above can be proven, the injured worker has born his/her burden of proof under Labor Code Section 132(a) and the award may be increase by up to 10% at the discretion of the trial judge.

Lien: All providers of medical treatment or other services for the benefit of the injured worker are to file a lien for payment with the Workers Compensation Appeals Board. Under no circumstances is the injured worker to be billed for services provided.

Lighting Up: This is a type of causation of injury which involves an industrial injury aggravating a pre-existing condition. An example would be a person who experiences job stress which causes elevation of pre-existing high blood pressure. The Law Offices of GEORGE HENDERSON are currently fighting a “lighting up” case in California's Second District Court of Appeal, Joel Grimaldo vs. Abbey Event Services. In that case the injured worker suffered an admitted industrial injury to his left foot on the job. Unbeknownst to the worker hurt on the job, he was afflicted with diabetes at the time. He had never previously been diagnosed or suffered difficulties in wound healing. As a consequence of his on the job injury, combined with his pre-existing diabetic condition, he experienced complications with healing of the crush injury to his foot. He had to undergo two amputations. He currently has had his left leg amputated below the knee, and must wear a prosthetic for the portion of his leg which was amputated. The issue of whether his diabetes constituted an industrial injury was taken to trial before the Hon. Cynthia Quiel, Workers Compensation Administrative Law Judge. She found that the admitted industrial injury to the foot “lit up” or aggravated the pre-existing asymptomatic diabetic condition, and thus the diabetes was also an industrial injury that the employer was liable to provide medical treatment for, and to compensate for. The employer appealed to WCAB appellate panel in San Francisco. The WCAB reversed Judge Quiel. GEORGE HENDERSON then appealed to the Second District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles, where a Writ of Review was issued by the Second District Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal ruled in Mr. Grimaldo's favor March 19, 2009. Among other things they held that the employer takes the employee “as is” on the date of employment, so that if a pre-existing non-industrial condition such as diabetes is found by substantial medical evidence to have been accelerated, or aggravated by an industrial injury, such as the crush injury to Grimaldo's foot, the entire injury is industrial, including the aggravated, or “lit up” pre-existing condition. So whereas some have taken the position that the 2004 amendments to the Labor Code did away with “lighting up” as a form of causation of industrial injury, the Second District Court of Appeal in Grimaldo have made it clear that lighting up is still good law. Joel Grimaldo was represented at all levels, including the Court of Appeal by George Henderson. The Court's opinion in Grimaldo vs. Abbey Event Services is available on the website of the Second District Court of Appeal for the State of California under “Unpublished Opinions.”

Mandatory Settlement Conference: This is a Court date that is set by the clerk of the WCAB after a request by either party stating that the Board's assistance is needed in order to resolve the case, and that it is otherwise ready to be set for trial.

Maximum Medical Improvement: This is just another term for Permanent and Stationary. This is the term recommended to be used in place of Permanent and Stationary by the AMA Guides (Fifth Edition). Many workers compensation treating doctors and workers comp. Agreed Medical Examiners continue to use the term Permanent and Stationary.

Medical Provider Network: The 2004 “Reform Legislation” commonly known as SB 899 provides that the employer in admitted claims may require treatment within an approved Medical Provider Network (MPN).

Lawyers for injured workers make every effort to avoid treatment within the MPN due to the fact that many MPN doctors are defense oriented. It is also true that employer's insurance companies have a habit of dropping doctors from the MPN who become known for writing reports that benefit the injured worker.

There are several ways to avoid mandatory treatment within the MPN:

1. The employer cannot force treatment within the MPN in denied claims. Since 80-90% of all claims are denied by the employers workers compensation insurance carrier, the attorney for the injured worker needs to just ignore demands for MPN treatment when the claim has been denied.
2. What can the attorney for the injured worker do in admitted injury claims? In all admitted injury claims, the attorney for the employee hurt on the job should review with the injured worker what steps the employer or its insurance carrier took to comply with MPN Notice requirements under Labor Code Section 4616 et seq. There are numerous requirements, e.g. that the employer provide the injured worker with a workers compensation statutory claim form within one work day of having been notified of the injury by the injured worker. The employer is also required to have arranged an initial medical appointment for the worker injured on the job within three business days of the employee's request for medical treatment. The employer must also authorize the provision all necessary medical treatment within one day of the employee's submission of the statutory claim form. The employer must also provide the employee who was injured at work written notice of all rights and responsibilities under the MPN rules within one day of the date the injury was reported. There are numerous other requirements the employer must meet.
3. If the employer cannot prove compliance with all MPN Notice and Treatment responsibilities under Labor Code Section 4616 and under the administrative regulations, then the injured worker may self procure treatment with a non MPN doctor according to the WCAB decision in Bruce Knight v. UPS.
4. In the unlikely event that the employer has complied with all Notice and Treatment requirements for an MPN, the wise attorney will amend the claim/application for adjudication to include psychiatric injury, and cumulative trauma, if appropriate. Either of these two new allegations is most likely to result in a denied claim for psychiatric injury or for cumulative trauma, so that it would be possible to treat outside the MPN.

It is amazing how many attorneys for injured workers choose not to fight the employer's insurance company on the MPN issue. Most of the time it is totally unnecessary to treat within the MPN. Even when it is there are rules permitting choosing your own doctor within the MPN, changing doctors within the MPN, getting second and third opinions, and getting treatment from specialists outside the MPN where there are no qualified specialists within the MPN.

Medical Treatment: Under the California Labor Code, an injured worker who has suffered an industrial injury is entitled to medical treatment at the employer's expense.

MPN: California Workers Compensation abbreviation for Medical Provider Network.

MMI: A work comp. abbreviation for Maximum Medical Improvement.

MSC: Work Comp. abbreviation for Mandatory Settlement Conference.

P&S: A work comp. abbreviation for Permanent and Stationary.

Panel Qualified Medical Examiner: This is a doctor selected from a list of three doctors provided by the State Department of Industrial Relations. Each party may strike the name of one doctor from the panel of three. By process of elimination, the remaining name, after each party has stricken one, is appointed the Panel Qualified Medical Examiner. The Panel Qualified Medical Examiner must issue his/her narrative report within 30 days or the report can be objected to and excluded from evidence. The Panel Qualified Medical Examiner must examine the injured worker within 60 days of the date of his/her appointment.

Penalties/Enhanced Compensation: A statutory increase in compensation due to the injured worker from the employer due to the employer's unreasonable delay in paying/providing benefits or treatment or late payment or late pro-vision of treatment.

Permanent and Stationary: This is a discharge report written by the treating doctor or consulting physician for the worker injured at work. This report in most cases concludes the case as to that body part or health condition being reported on. Our clients often call us and ask when their injury claim can be settled so they can have their lump sum settlement. The answer is that nothing can be done about settlement until a doctor has declared the injured worker permanent and stationary. Once the injured worker is permanent and stationary, in an admitted case, the employer's insurance company is no longer required to pay temporary disability benefits but must begin paying advances of permanent disability, which is usually a smaller amount of money that is paid bi-monthly.

Permanent Disability: Benefits are paid at the conclusion of a claim representing permanent disability, or significant handicap in performing work, or in performing activities of daily living.

Permanent Disability Advance: When the worker hurt at work has been declared P&S or MMI by a doctor, the employer's insurance carrier may terminate payment of temporary disability and must commence payment of advances of permanent disability in admitted injury cases. Since the lump sum settlement at the conclusion of the case, is for permanent disability, the total of all permanent disability advances will be subtracted from the client's lump sum settlement of permanent disability at the Mandatory Settlement Conference, or whenever the claim is settled.

PD: Permanent Disability

PDA: Work Comp. abbreviation for permanent disability advances.

Penalties: Additional compensation to the worker hurt on the job due to the employer's failure to pay a benefit, or late payment of a benefit the employer was obligated by law to pay. Labor Code Section 5814 allows the Workers Compensation Judge to award penalties, or “increased compensation” for unreasonable delay in the payment of benefits. Under circumstances of refusal to pay, or unreasonable delay in payment of benefits, such as TTD (temporary total disability), the employer can be assessed penalties in an amount up to 25% of the amount unpaid, not to exceed $10,000.00. There are additional Labor Code Sections which provide for award of penalties against the employer in specific situations of delay:

Labor Code Section 4622 allows for an award of penalties for delayed payment of medical-legal expenses.

Labor Code Section 4603.2 as well as Labor Code Section 5814 governs the award of penalties for late payment of bills for medical treatment.

Labor Code Section 5813 allows for the award of penalties for bad faith tactics that are frivolous, or solely intended to cause unreasonable delay. This species of penalty is paid into the general fund, is awarded in addition to S.C. Section 5814 penalties, and cannot exceed a total of $2,500.00.

Labor Code Section 5814.6 permits the administrative director to impose penalties against any employer or insurer that knowingly violates L.C. Section 5814 with a frequency that indicates a general business practice; the total amount of penalties which can be awarded under this Code section is $400,000.00. L.C. Section 4610.1 permits award of penalty for unreasonable delay in UR process with administrative penalties under CCR 9792.10-12 up to $400,000.00 U.R. - Utilization Review - power granted to employer under 2004 “reform” legislation to insist of prior approval or denial of requests for authorization of medical treatment.

Post - Termination Claim: There is a defense available to employers under the Labor Code is known as the “Post Termination Claim” defense. The theory of this defense is that if an injured worker claims an injury occurred at a date prior to the date of his/her termination but was not reported to the employer until a date after his/her termination, then it is suggested that the injured employee did not in fact sustain an industrial injury, but filed the injury claim in order to get revenge for having been fired. This employer defense is found at Labor Code Section 3600(a)(10). The burden of proof is on the injured employee to prove that he/she reported the injury to his supervisor prior to the date he was terminated, and/or that he commenced medical treatment for the industrial injury prior to the date he/she was terminated. As an alternative the injured worker might prove that posting of workers compensation benefits/responsibilities posters were not posted in English and Spanish by the Employer in a conspicuous location available to all employees. It is important to emphasize that the Labor Code requires the employee hurt on the job has given notice of injury to his/her supervisor; not to a co-worker. Once proper verbal notice has been provided the employer by the person injured at work, responsibility shifts to the employer's supervisor or other management employee to provide the worker injured on the job, with a workers compensation claim form. The notice requirement may be satisfied where a medical report setting forth the
nature of injury to the injured worker has been served upon the employer although such report does not address the issue of whether or not the injury was caused by the employee's work, i.e. that it was an industrial injury. That information may be provided in a later medical report. When the worker hurt on the job reports the work injury, it is important for the employee hurt on the job to specify that he/she was injured at work; not at home, or during a sporting event, or while performing other work. It is very important to report the injury as a work injury in definite and certain terms. It would be a mistake for instance to be vague in describing the causal nature of the injury, as “might have happened at work,” or “I think I might have hurt myself at work”. If the injured employee is able to establish notice to the employer of an on the job injury prior to the date of termination then the employer injured at work has overcome the post termination defense. The injured employee will often testify that “I didn't report the injury because I believed I would be fired if the boss knew I had suffered a back injury.” While this is often truthful testimony it is much better if the injured worker can testify “I told Mr. Johnson, my supervisor that while I was lifting 70 pound boxes at work I felt something pull in my low back and immediately experienced pain in my low back.” Our office is in the habit of subpoenaing employer records, so that if the employer was provided a copy of a pre-termination medical report which reports to the employer the fact of the injury that report will often suffice to prove the employer had notice of the industrial injury. This is true although the employer claims he was not notified by the injured employee of the work injury.

PQME: Panel Qualified Medical Examiner

Predominant cause: In workers comp. psychiatric injury claims, the injured worker bears burden of proving that the predominant cause (51%) of the psychiatric injury was the industrial cause.

“Psyche” Claim: Work Comp. abbreviation for Psychiatric injury claim. Traditionally, these claims have been prosecuted due to on the job stress. More recently, with the 2004 “reform legislation,” doctors have been mandated by the AMA Guides and the ACOEM Guidelines to “treat the whole person.” This has resulted in an understanding that an injured employee suffering from a painful permanent or painful disabling injury will naturally become depressed and anxious about his/her circumstances.

Reconsideration: The method of appealing a decision of a Workers Compensation Administrative Law Judge, (WCALJ) or (WCJ) is to file a Petition for Reconsideration with the WCAB in San Francisco. The Petition must be filed within 20 days with the clerk of the local Board where the WCJ sits who made the decision that is being appealed. The Petition and the Board file is then transmitted to the WCAB Reconsideration Unit in San Francisco. Normally, the Petition for Reconsideration will be decided by a panel of three Commissioners. Occasionally, when the Chairman decides an issue is important enough, all seven commissioners will sit together and issue a decision.

S&W: Serious and Willful misconduct.

Serious and Willful: Serious and Willful misconduct by an employer, if proven entitles the person injured at work to an increase in compensation. These are extremely difficult claims to pursue, as the burden of proof borne by the injured worker is higher than mere negligence on the employer's part. In most cases it would be necessary to prove a knowing violation of an OSHA safety order.

Specific Injury: In Workers Compensation law, an injury which results from a single identifiable incident such as a slip and fall, or a specific incident in which the person hurt on the job lifted a heavy item, resulting in back injury.

“Stip”: Work Comp. abbreviation for stipulation and award.

Stipulation and Award: This is the less used method of settling Work Comp. cases in California. It is often used where the injured employee plans to return to work for the same employer, or has returned to the job, or has continued in the employment of that employer since the date of injury. Once a stipulation and award has been approved by the work comp. judge, as long as the has not passed the five year anniversary of the date of injury, such claim maybe reopened. Under a stipulation and award, the injured employee may continue to receive medical treatment for his/her work injuries at the employer's expense.

Substantial Evidence: Most evidence in workers compensation proceedings consists of medical reports. The workers compensation laws of California require scientific evidence in order to prove any matter that is at issue. Live testimony from expert witnesses in discouraged. Thus medical reports are the primary method of proof used in California Workers Compensation trials, and mandatory settlement conferences. In order to be admissible in evidence, a medical report must constitute “Substantial Evidence.” The substantial evidence requirement is best understood by reviewing what is not substantial evidence. The Courts have held that reports which are characterized as follows to not be substantial evidence:

1. A report which contains an opinion which is based on speculation.
2. A report which contains an opinion based on a fallacy, or other incorrect information.
3. A report which contains an opinion based on medical possibility; not probability.
4. A report which contains an opinion based on an incorrect legal theory.
5. A report which contains an opinion based on irrelevant information.
6. A report which contains an opinion based on an incorrect assumption.
7. A report which contains an opinion based on an inaccurate or incomplete medical history.
8. A report which contains an opinion based on an inaccurate diagnosis.
9. A report which does not contain a complete review of the entire medical record, (i.e. A review of all records, other reports, diagnostic tests, imaging, etc.)
10. A report which contains an illogical opinion.
11. A report which contains an opinion which is conclusory; lacks a detailed analysis.
12. A report which contains an opinion which is based on incompetent evidence such as questionable hearsay. Note: hearsay evidence is admissible in administrative law proceedings such as workers compensation, but less weight is generally given to hearsay. It is not favored evidence. An example would be a doctor's statement in a report quoting an injured worker who incorrectly diagnoses himself. The hearsay statement would also be arguably inadmissible as inadmissible opinion testimony from an unqualified witness.
13. A report which contains an opinion which is unspecific as to the causal connection to the injury.
14. A report which contains an opinion which sets forth assertions as fact but fails to support such assertions. The matter is asserted as factual by the doctor in his report but is not supported elsewhere in the entire record, and elsewhere is unsupported in the doctor's report.
15. There is a lack of logical progression between the material relied on (such as history, physical examination, imaging, test results, reports/records) and the conclusion.

Temporary Disability: Monthly disability income payments paid by your employer or your employer's workers compensation insurance carrier. The amount paid is usually two-thirds of weekly earnings at the time of injury.

TD: Temporary Disability

TPD: Temporary Partial Disability

TTD: Temporary Total Disability

QIW: Workers Compensation abbreviation for Qualified Injured Worker

Voc. Rehab.: A work comp. abbreviation for Vocational Rehabilitation

Vocational Rehabilitation: Vocational Rehabilitation in California under recent “reform legislation” has severely limited what vocational services are available. The purpose of this note is to draw a distinction between the vocational rehabilitation services described in our e newsletter and what is currently available in California. Vocational counseling provided at the employer's expense is no longer available under California law. What is available is a “Voucher System” wherein the employer will issue a voucher for payment of an approved vocational school or training program. The amount of the voucher will range from $5,000.00 to $6,000.00 typically. No other vocational services are currently available in California. Injured workers are urged to contact their members of the State Senate and/or Assembly asking for reinstatement of a full service Vocational Rehabilitation program. The starting point for receipt of these limited vocational services is a designation in a medical report that the employee hurt at work is a “Qualified Injured Worker.”

WCAB: This is the designation of the Workers Compensation Board, but it is divided into two divisions: (1) The local Boards which act as trial Courts, and (2) The WCAB in San Francisco, which is the Appellate division.