Barnett & Lerner, P.A. Blog http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php Injured Overseas Blog en-us Injured Overseas? What Civilian contractors need to know. http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=32



By Samuel Frankel, Esq. and David C. Barnett, Esq.



For many years, civilian workers, regardless of their citizenship/nationality, have assisted the United States military and the United
States government on many overseas construction projects. Civilian participation in these overseas projects has skyrocketed with
the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Also, the U.S. government has looked to private security contractors to supplement and assist the military. Unfortunately, as more civilian workers live and work in war zones, many of them have been injured either physically or psychologically. Regrettably, these injured civilian workers are all too often unaware of their rights and entitlements under U.S. law. This discussion is intended to help civilian workers injured overseas understand their rights to medical and wage benefits, and to further prepare civilian workers getting ready to deploy overseas in support of the Global War on Terrorism.

 
 

The Law Protecting Civilian Workers Overseas


During World War I, a longshoreman in New York City fell off a gangplank ten feet from the dock and into New York Harbor, injuring himself. Because the injuries did not occur on the dock, or on the ship itself, the longshoreman was left without any coverage or payments for his injuries. In 1927, Congress enacted the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) in order to afford injured maritime workers, such as the injured longshoreman from 1917, benefits consistent with workers’ compensation laws in other states, particularly those in effect in New York at that time.

The LHWCA required employers hiring longshoremen and stevedores had to have an insurance policy that would pay the benefits outlined in the law, or else the employers themselves would be responsible for paying the benefits themselves. The LHWCA was extended to cover other groups of similar workers over the years. One of the extensions of the LHWCA was the Defense Base Act (DBA). As an extension of the LHWCA, the DBA itself did not have any sub- stantive benefits of its own; rather, it defined what types of workers would be entitled to Longshore benefits.

Today’s civilian employees working in Afghanistan or Iraq are afforded the workers’ compensation benefits set out under the LHWCA, due to the Defense Base Act’s extension of these benefits to them.
 
 


Summary of Benefits Available to Injured Civilian Workers


Employers performing services overseas for the U.S. government have to purchase an insurance policy providing these benefits for their workers, and these insurance policies are usually called “DBA policies”, which provide“DBA benefits.”

The two primary classifications of benefits are medical benefits and wage loss benefits. A civilian employee is entitled to medical treatment for physical or psychological injuries sustained while working overseas. This medical treatment is provided at no cost to the injured worker, and covers everything related to the injury: office visits, tests, x-rays, surgeries, prescriptions, and mileage reimbursement to and from the doctor’s office. The injured worker even has the right to pick the treating doctor! Medical care also includes treatment for any psychological injuries, which have become all too common in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many civilian workers, regardless of their past military training or exposure, are returning home with sleep disorders, anxiety, depression, adjustment disorders, and other psychological symptoms not necessarily connected to a physical injury. These conditions are also
covered under the Defense Base Act. Under the DBA, the work overseas does not have to cause a new injury. If an injury was caused by the employment, or if working conditions existed which could have aggravated a pre-existing condition, then the entire injury is covered – even the pre-existing part!


The overseas working conditions encompass the entire deployment setting, including pre-deployment training and travel to and from the ultimate duty location. Due to the nature of overseas employment,  working conditions also include the time an employee is not working – recreation, eating, sleeping – and the actual conditions and requirements of the location itself – sandstorms, heat, wearing personal protective equipment, rough or uneven terrain, and insurgent attacks, just to name a few.

The other major type of benefit is “compensation”, or lost wages as a result of the overseas injuries. If an injured worker’s salary is reduced or stopped because of an injury, the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits. These wage loss benefits cover the time the injured worker is out of work receiving medical care, and can possibly continue for the remainder of the worker’s life, whether he returns to work or not.

Regarding the amount of benefits, the LHWCA sets forth several different formulas to calculate the wage loss benefits. Without getting bogged down in the details, the dollar amount paid for wage loss benefits will depend on the amount of money the injured worker earned overseas for the year before the injury, or the terms of the overseas employment contract, if the worker was employed overseas for less than one year.

It is imperative for workers to keep good records while they are employed overseas. As an example, workers should strive to maintain copies of the employment contract and any extensions, pay stubs or direct deposit receipts, bank records, tax records, pre-deployment documentation such as pre-deployment physical examinations and “welcome aboard” packages, names of supervisors, site managers, and witnesses, dates and times of accidents, injuries, or enemy attacks, and in-country medical records.



The Reality of the Situation


Most of these employers have many offices around the world, with human resources, payroll, and corporate offices in different locations, and almost never in the actual foreign country where the work is being performed. To complicate matters, many employers are themselves subcontracting to other, larger general contractors, which have the actual contract with the U.S. government. Good communication is particularly important when a worker is injured.

An injured worker cannot rely on the local base clinic, medical provider, or employer to maintain medical records after the worker has left the theater of operations. Especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, with the multiple nationalities participating in the operations and medical care out-sourced to doctors in the surrounding countries, medical records are destroyed regularly, local laws restrict access, medical records are generated in a foreign language, maintained off-site, or they are simply lost. Getting copies of these records will be nearly impossible once the injured worker goes home, and sometimes these records are the only history created immediately after an injury. If at all possible, injured workers should get copies of all in-country medical records before returning home.



Frequently, when an injured worker returns home and contacts the insurance company seeking benefits, the insurance company is not aware of the accident or injuries, and the claim may be denied for many different reasons. Usually these reasons involve a lack of information, but sometimes the reasons can be based on specific legal arguments.

All of this can be very maddening to injured civilian workers who believe they were helping the U.S. government. This, in turn, leads to a feeling of abandonment and distrust of both the private employer and the insurance company. Unfortunately, the only way to remedy the misplaced denial of a claim is to pursue legal action before the U.S. Department of Labor, which has jurisdiction for all LHWCA claims.




If you would like additional information of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, the Defense Base Act please contact us.


 


 

Injured workers can download useful forms here: http://www.injuredoverseas.com/forms.php







  ]]>
Tue, 08 May 2012 09:48:42 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=32
Defense Base Act Workers Compensation Claim 'HOW To File' Process 7 Action Steps & Video Playlist http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=31

Defense Base Act Workers Compensation Claim -  'HOW To File' Process Action Steps & Video Playlist

Please watch the video playlist above as Mr. Brian Karsen explains the steps involved in the Defense Base Act claim process. Each video in the playlist will cover key points taken in the action process to file a claim and a successfully receive compensation for that claim. The 7 action steps involved that are covered include the following:
  1. VERIFICATION
  2. DOCUMENTATION
  3. PRESERVATION
  4. REPRESENTATION
  5. COOPERATION
  6. LITIGATION &
  7. COMPENSATION
The last video in the playist is an animated educational overview video defining the Defense Base Act in an entertaining and informative way.

Below you will find a brief written summary of the content covered in each video.
Total playlist runtime is 20 minutes


Playlist Summary

1) Defense Base Act Action Step1 - Verification Process (Playlist Video #1)

There are however a series of actionable steps needed to be taken as the responsibilty of the injured worker to better assure that restitution will be madein the case of an accident while working for a civilian contractor.

Watch the video above to learn about the process of Verification if injured overseas on the job (or if you are a Longshore Harbor Worker) and the things you can and must do to protect your claim by securing the proper proof of verification of your injury.

Here is a summary of some of the important keypoints Mr. Brian Karsen covers in this video.
  1. Notices of Injury
  2. Clinical Records
  3. Incident Reports
  4. Medical Reports
  5. Email Correspondence
  6. Proof of Employers Knowledge
  7. Local Medical Records
  8. Copies of All Records Onsite
  9. Times Frames
  10. Work Being Done at the Time
  11. Event that Occurred
  12. Work Enviroment
  13. Be Concise
  14. What is the Injury
  15. Where is the Pain
  16. What is the Cause

2) Defense Base Act - Documentation and  Preservation Process (Playlist Video #2)

Now that we have covered the Verification Process lets talk about the next two steps to be aware of in the Defense Base Injury claim process. They are Documentation and Preservation. In this video Brian Karsen, Esq. outlines the important key factors to be aware of and to action steps you must take before you can successfully receive compensation for your injuries. Some of the points covered in this video are listed here:

DOCUMENTATION:
1) Medical Evidence of Treatment
2) Proof of Medical Advice for Continued Treatment
3) Medical Documentation of Work Limitations
4) Medical Evidence Includes a Documented Professional Opinion

Proper Verification and Documentation of your injury with then enable Barnett & Lerner to prepare and take action int he the next step of the process to help you to your entitled benefits covered in the Defense Base Act.

PRESERVATION:
1) File a Claim with the Department of Labor
2) Preserve  Your Entitlement to Benefits
3) Even over a long passage of time (months or even years).



3) Defense Base Act -  Representation Process (Playlist Video #3)

Once we can provide verification and evidence is collected with proper documentation, Barnett & Lerner can then begin representation by filing your claim with the Department of Labor and ultimately carry through to the Office of Administrative Law Judges in Washington DC.

4) Defense Base Act - Cooperation and Litigation Process (Playlist Video #4 )
Cooperation of our clients is such an important factor for Barnett and Lerner to successfully litigate our clients' Defense Base Act cases. Only with our clients' full cooperation and due diligence in assisting our team can we make the litigation process as smooth and efficient, and effective as possible. Employers may make allegations to refute a clients claim for compensation under the DBA guidelines, this is why we must complete a thorough checklist that can only be done with client cooperation.

Our clients must be actively involved in the claim process with Barnett & Lerner with full cooperation, for example in locating pertinent documents (like an old employment contract) to determine wages, duration and relevancy to the claim. Cooperation creates a solid attorney/client relationship while securing verification and documentation to move forward with the claim.

Follow up for acquiring COMPLETE additional information is crucial, and only attainable with client/attorney cooperation.

5) Defense Base Act - Compensation (Medical Treament) (Playlist Video #5)
Compensation may vary greatly and could consist of financial payments for debilitating injuries for the rest your life. However, keep in mind that even if you are fully recovered now, but did receive medical treatment for some period, compensation may be awarded for the time a worker who may have been incapacitated due to injury and could not perform duties for that said period of time. This may be true even if the worker had received medical treatment in their home country, although each case is individual and would rely on the proper verification and documentation of each specific case.



6) Defense Base Act Claim Process Summary (Playlist Video #6 )

Mr Brian Karsen, Esq. continues the conversation by summarizing that with proper Co-operation we can get Verification, and Medical Documentation, which leads to Preservation of a claim, and entitlement of benefits. Barnett & Lerner can then provide Representation, and potentially successful Litigation with continued co-operation to ultimately get compensation of the claim filed for our clients' well being. 

7) Defense Base Act Educational  Animation Overiew (Playlist Video #7)

Did you know all civilian contractors and workers working on US Government contracts overseas in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, are eligible for workers compensation under the Defense Base Act? Including all workers from foreign countries as well as US citizens!

This video is an introduction and overview of the history of the Defense Base Act and how it benefits civilian employees working on US Government contracts working overseas.

For more information you can email Mr. Karsen directly at: Brian@BarnettandLerner.com
 
or call Toll Free in the US: (888) 732-7425
]]>
Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:04:39 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=31
FIRM PREVAILS AGAINST MINE-TECH INTERNATIONAL & CNA http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=29 On April 19, 2012 Judge Chapman entered an Order Approving a Stipulation Awarding Benefits in G.M. v. Mine-Tech Int’l & CNA
 
Zimbabwean national lost his right eye as the result of a mine explosion in Iraq, and suffered other physical injuries.  The Employer, a sub-contractor conducting de-mining operations in Iraq, returned the Claimant to Zimbabwe once he was medically stable, and failed to provide any benefits after his return home.  Five years later, after the Claimant returned to work in Iraq for another employer, a claim was filed against the sub-contractor, which no longer existed.  The law firm of Barnett & Lerner, P.A. prepared the case for trial against the general contractor and their insurance carrier.  Immediately prior to trial, the general contractor, Mine-Tech Int’l agreed that it was responsible for the injuries sustained while G.M. worked for its sub-contractor.  As a result, Judge Chapman entered an Order for payment of past-owed compensation and medical benefits, payment of scheduled benefits and ongoing medical care pursuant to a Stipulation. 
 
LESSON LEARNED: WHEN AN EMPLOYER FAILS TO PROVIDE BENEFITS TO ITS INJURED WORKER, THE INJURED WORKER CAN STILL SEEK BENEFITS AGAINST THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR.
]]>
Tue, 24 Apr 2012 10:02:26 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=29
FIRM PREVAILS AGAINST GLS & ZURICH http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=28 G.H. v. Global Linguist Solutions and Zurich
At the time of trial, both Global Linguist Solutions and their Insurance Carrier, Zurich disputed the claim filed by G.H.  The claimant alleged that he was injured on many occasions while working as a linguist and assisting the U.S. Military, sustaining multiple physical injuries.  Global Linguist Solutions and Zurich refused to accept the case, asserting that because G.H. had settled a prior DBA claim for a shoulder injury, his current shoulder disability was not due to repetitive trauma he experienced while continuing to work.  Barry R. Lerner, Esquire tried the case in Washington, D.C.  and proved that the claimant was involved in multiple incidences which resulted in his disability.  Judge Lakes has ordered that Global Linguist Solutions and their Carrier pay G.H.  wage disability benefits from December 2010 onwards and further Ordered that Global Linguist Solutions and Zurich provide ongoing medical care which includes shoulder surgery and to reimburse G.H. for all his past medical expenses.
 
LESSON LEARNED:  A PRIOR DBA SETTLEMENT MAY NOT BE THE BASIS TO DENY ANOTHER CLAIM.   A DEFENSE BASE ACT EMPLOYEE MAY GET WAGE AND MEDICAL BENEFITS IF THEY RE-INJURE OR AGGREVATE AN OLD INJURY THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY SETTLED.
 
 
]]>
Tue, 24 Apr 2012 10:00:26 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=28
Corporate Challenge http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=25 Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:36:19 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=25 Firm Participates in Annual Longshore Conference http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=24 Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:35:03 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=24 FIRM PREVAILS ON HEART ATTACK DEATH CASE http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=23 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:46:40 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=23 FIRM WINS CASE AGAINST ITT http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=22 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:32:29 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=22 Defense Base Act and Longshore Overview Video http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=21

Barnett & Lerner Presents "Injured Overseas: Defense Base Act"

Did you know all civilian contractors and workers working on US Government contracts overseas in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, are eligible for workers compensation under the Defense Base Act? Including all workers from foreign countries as well as US citizens!

This video is an introduction and overview of the history of the Defense Base Act and how it benefits civilian employees working on US Government contracts working overseas. ]]>
Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:18:31 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=21
Dan Marino Walk for Autism http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=20 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:36:46 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=20 Valreta Whitsett Longshore Act Client Interview http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=19

 
Valreta Whitsett has been a Barnett & Lerner client for over 7 years. She was injured working on shipping docks in Florida. Fortunately, she was covered under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA). It has been a long road for Valreta in her recovery.. this is what she has to say about here experience and how she has been able to work through to closure with Barnett & Lerner.
]]>
Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:18:38 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=19
Firm prevails on appeal to the Benefits Review Board http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=18
. ]]>
Fri, 06 Jan 2012 16:59:37 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=18
Firm wins benefits for client following trial http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=17 Brian Karsen attended trial in Covington, Louisiana on September 14, 2011 after two separate insurance companies continued to deny our client's entitlement to benefits for psychiatric and pulmonary injuries suffered during the course of his employment in Iraq and Saudi Arabia.  Mr. Karsen argued that during our client's work as an interpreter over the course of several years he sustained psychiatric injuries caused by his experiencing the horrors of war and an aggravation of a pulmonary condition due to his exposure to dust and sand storms, as well as burn pits.  The Administrative Law Judge entered an Order on December 21, 2011 awarding beneifts to our client, including past compensation totaling nearly $100,000, as well as continuing compensation benefits and medical treament for both his psychiatric and pulmonary injuries.         

]]>
Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:04:34 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=17
Firm puts on Educational Seminar in Manila. http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=16 Brian Karsen and Dennis Fichtel of our firm traveled to the Philippines and put on an educational seminar in Manila on December 14, 2011. The seminar was a success in educating the attendees of their rights under the Defense Base Act. 

 

]]>
Fri, 06 Jan 2012 14:43:30 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=16
Defense Base Act Video Overview http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=15  

]]>
Wed, 07 Dec 2011 14:46:49 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=15
Philippines Seminar - December 14, 2011 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=14 The firm is currently planning a live, educational seminar on the Defense Base Act to take place in Manila. At this point in time, the seminar will be held on December 14, 2011. If you are interested in attending, you may register at www.philippinesseminar.com. ]]> Thu, 01 Dec 2011 11:59:51 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=14 Firm Participates in Turkey Trot http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=13 Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:49:54 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=13 Firm Wins Summary Judgment http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=12 Last week the Court entered an Order granting Partial Summary Judgment in the Stevens case.  In this case, the Employer/Carrier disputed the claimant's rights to benefits by asserting that he was not injured in the course and scope of employment.  The Court disagreed and found there was indisputable evidence that Mr. Stevens was injured at work and entitled to medical care at the expense of the Employer/Carrier.  The Court did not rule on lost wage benefits at this time.

]]>
Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:48:23 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=12
Firm Participates in Dolphin Ride for Cancer Research http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=11 Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:45:15 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=11 Firm Participates in Savannah Marathon http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=10 Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:43:25 -0500 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=10 Firm planning DBA Seminar in Philippines http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=9 ]]> Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:46:50 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=9 Firm wins Kenyan's DBA case! http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=8 Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:44:32 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=8 Victory School for Autism Fundraiser http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=7 Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:41:06 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=7 Barry Lerner lectures at WILG seminar in San Diego, CA http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=6 Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:20:26 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=6 Firm participates in Livestrong charity event http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=5 Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:16:12 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=5 David Barnett wins landmark decision in Second Circuit Court of Appeals http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=4 Dyncorp Intl. v. Dir. OWCP and Elizabeth Mechler, __ F.3d __, 2011 WL 3873793 (2th Cir. 2011).

Agreeing with the Board, the Second Circuit held that substantial evidence did not support the ALJ's finding that claimant should have known within a year after being shot at work that she had suffered permanent impairment of her earning power due to psychological problems, for purposes of determining the timeliness of her claim under Section 13(a).

In March 2004, after several years of working for the Kansas Department of Corrections ("DOC") as a special enforcement officer, claimant accepted a three year contract with Dyncorp in Kosovo. She was shot and wounded on her first day on the job. Thereafter, she was placed on light duty due to her physical injuries. Claimant developed psychological symptoms that were treated with counseling and medications. She also stopped working night shifts to enable a proper drug regimen. In 2004, she submitted to psychological evaluations together with the other survivors of the shooting. In April 2005, all the survivors were told by Dyncorp's successor that they were being sent home for their "mental well-being." After returning to Kansas DOC, claimant was deemed mentally unfit to carry a weapon and assigned a desk job. In April 2006, she filed a claim under the Defense Base Act ("DBA"), seeking benefits to cover the difference in salary between her former and current jobs at the DOC.

Applying the one year statute of limitations under §13(a) of the LHWCA, the ALJ found that the claim was time barred because claimant "should have been aware that her injuries would likely result in an impairment of her earning capacity at the time of Dr. Hough's evaluation of October 2004." The Board reversed and remanded. On remand, the ALJ awarded benefits, and employer appealed.

The Second Circuit initially adopted the Board's position that claims are presumed timely under §20(b). The court concluded that "the evidence in this case is not of the quantity or character that would allow a reasonable (reasoning) mind to conclude that Mechler had enough information—either from Dyncorp, her healthcare providers, or other sources—to realize more than one year before she filed her claims that her psychological problems would result in a permanent loss in earning capacity." Slip op. at *4. Claimant's placement on light duty did not contradict this conclusion, as it was due to her physical injuries and she later returned to full duty. Nor was constructive knowledge established at the time of Dr. Hough's evaluation, as he did not share his findings with claimant. The court reasoned that

"[c]onsidered as a whole, the record shows that throughout the year following the shooting, Mechler's work was largely unaffected by whatever psychological problems she was then experiencing. It shows that she did seek therapy and medication related to these problems, but that neither of these treatments was of the sort typically associated with debilitating mental illness. Finally, it shows that Mechler, along with every other surviving member of her team, submitted to psychological evaluations, the findings of which were not shared with her. On this evidence, a reasoning mind could not conclude that Mechler knew or should have known that she had suffered a permanent impairment of earning power before April 2005."

Slip op. at *6.

]]>
Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:12:32 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=4
Sam Frankel and David Barnett co-author article on the DBA http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=3  INJURED OVERSEAS
What Civilian Contractors Need to Know
By Samuel Frankel, Esq. and David C. Barnett, Esq.
         
For many years, civilian workers, regardless of their citizenship/nationality, have assisted the United States military and the United States government on many overseas construction projects.  Civilian participation in these overseas projects has skyrocketed with the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.  Also, the U.S. government has looked to private security contractors to supplement and assist the military.  Unfortunately, as more civilian workers live and work in war zones, many of them have been injured either physically or psychologically.  Regrettably, these injured civilian workers are all too often unaware of their rights and entitlements under U.S. law.  This discussion is intended to help civilian workers injured overseas understand their rights to medical and wage benefits, and to further prepare civilian workers getting ready to deploy overseas in support of the Global War on Terrorism.  In this first article, we will examine the development of the law protecting civilian contract workers overseas and its history.  In future articles we will address the specifics of the benefits and methods of obtaining them.

The Law Protecting Civilian Workers Overseas

During World War I, a longshoreman in New York City fell off a gangplank ten feet from the dock and into New York Harbor, injuring himself.  This dock worker attempted to get workers’ compensation benefits through New York’s laws, but was denied because he was not hurt on land.  In 1917, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, because the waters of the harbor were within the federal maritime jurisdiction established by the U.S. Constitution, the New York state workers’ compensation law in effect at the time could not be applied to this worker.  Not only could the dock worker not receive New York workers’ compensation benefits, because he was a longshoreman, he was not eligible for benefits normally available to seaman injured on the water.  This case exposed the failure of both the state and federal laws to protect workers injured in the murky waters where state law ended and federal law began.

In 1927, Congress enacted the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act in order to afford injured maritime workers, such as the injured longshoreman from 1917, benefits consistent with workers’ compensation laws in other states.  The Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act was the U.S. government’s first comprehensive workers’ compensation system. This Act, modeled on New York’s workers’ compensation law, covered longshoremen and stevedores involved in maritime employment, such as the loading, unloading, building, repairing, and dismantling of ships.  As a workers’ compensation law, the Act provided a detailed list of benefits, including medical care, payment of lost wages, and survivor’s benefits.  Employers hiring longshoremen and stevedores had to have an insurance policy that would pay the benefits outlined in the law, or else the employers would be responsible for paying the benefits themselves.

Since the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act was the first law adopted by the U.S. government to protect an entire class of workers, it served as the back bone of other laws designed to extend workers’ compensation benefits to other classes of workers.  One of the extensions of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act was the Defense Base Act.  As an extension of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, the Defense Base Act itself did not have any substantive benefits; rather it was a definitional statute defining what types of workers would be entitled to Longshore benefits.
During the years leading up to World War II, the United States acquired the rights to build military bases from foreign governments.  Much of the construction was done by American civilian contractors working for private construction companies.  Since these construction workers were neither seamen protected under the Jones Act or other such laws, nor were they longshoremen engaged in a maritime occupation, they formed a special class requiring their own protection in the event they were injured.

On August 16, 1941, just four months before America’s involvement in World War II, Congress passed the Defense Base Act.  Initially, the Defense Base Act provided benefits to civilian employees injured or killed while engaged in any employment on a military base acquired from a foreign country after January 1, 1940, or at American military bases outside of the continental United States.  As World War II engulfed the globe, many foreign governments contracted with the U.S. to build military bases in their territories.  Coverage under the Defense Base Act was extended to include the civilian workers at those foreign bases as well.  Again, to ensure their workers were protected, the private companies purchased insurance policies providing “DBA benefits”, which were simply Longshore benefits extended to these construction workers.

On December 7, 1941 the United States was attacked by Japan, and dragged into the World War.  One of the results was an exponential increase in overseas construction projects related to national defense, but not necessarily on military bases.  This created a gap in coverage for civilian workers who were injured or killed while involved in these off-base construction projects.
Recognizing this gap in protection, in December 1942 the U.S. Congress amended the Defense Base Act to include all employees engaged in public works outside the continental United States in order to encourage private companies and qualified civilian workers to assist the U.S. government with its construction projects overseas.  After World War II, and just as the Cold War was beginning, Congress again amended the Defense Base Act in 1953 to change the frame of reference from World War II to one of “national defense”.  This extended coverage to overseas government construction projects conducted during periods when there was no formally declared war.

Finally, in 1958 Congress converted the Defense Base Act from a temporary law, enacted during the national emergency of World War II, to permanent legislation after determining that America’s overseas commitments would not diminish substantially in the future.  In summary, the Defense Base Act was designed to extend the protection of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act to civilian workers engaged in defense-related employment outside the continental United States, and was ultimately expanded to protect employees working under service contracts tied to any such construction projects or a national defense activity.  The result is that today’s civilian employees working in Afghanistan or Iraq are afforded the workers’ compensation benefits set out under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, due to the Defense Base Act’s extension of these benefits to them.

Summary of Benefits Available to Injured Civilian Workers
 
Since the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act is the federal government’s version of a state workers’ compensation program, the benefits available mirror those available under most states’ programs.  Employers performing services overseas for the U.S. government have to purchase an insurance policy providing these benefits for their workers, and these insurance policies are usually called “DBA policies” which provide “DBA benefits.”

The two primary classifications of benefits are medical benefits and wage loss benefits.  Briefly, a civilian employee is entitled to medical treatment for physical or psychological injuries sustained while working overseas.  This medical treatment is provided at no cost to the injured worker, and covers everything related to the injury: office visits, tests, x-rays, surgeries, prescriptions, and mileage reimbursement to and from the doctor’s office.  The injured worker even has the right to pick the treating doctor!  Medical care also includes treatment for any psychological injuries, which have become all too common in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Many civilian workers, regardless of their past military training or exposure, are returning home with sleep disorders, anxiety, depression, adjustment disorders, and other psychological symptoms not necessarily connected to a physical injury.  These conditions are also covered under the Defense Base Act, and workers suffering these symptoms are entitled to medical care for them, including treatment with a psychiatrist, psychologist, or other mental health counselor.

One interesting aspect of the Defense Base Act is that the work overseas does not have to cause a new injury in order for the civilian employee to be entitled to benefits.  If the injury was caused by the employment, or if working conditions existed which could have aggravated a pre-existing condition, then the entire injury is covered – even the pre-existing portion!  Further, if the working conditions existed which could have accelerated the need for medical care of a pre-existing condition, the entire pre-existing condition is covered, too!  

The phrase “working conditions” does not mean the 12 hours a day an employee is on the job.  Working conditions encompass the entire deployment setting.  Due to the nature of overseas employment, working conditions include the time an employee is not working – recreation, eating, sleeping – and the actual conditions and requirements of the location itself – sandstorms, heat, wearing personal protective equipment, rough or uneven terrain, and insurgent attacks, to name a few.

If an injured worker’s salary is reduced or stopped because of an injury, the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits.  These wage loss benefits cover the time the injured worker is out of work receiving medical care, and can possibly continue for the remainder of the worker’s life whether he returns to work or not.  Of course, the amount and duration of wage loss benefits will depend on many factors, including the injury itself and any work restrictions given by a doctor.  The specific amount of the benefit is based upon a calculation set forth in the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, and is subject to a maximum amount established yearly by the Department of Labor.

The Reality of the Situation

Overseas communication is always a problem, whether it is trying to establish and maintain local voice communication between combat units, or simply getting a letter from home.  Civilian employers have the same logistical and communication problems with their overseas work sites.  Most of these employers have many offices around the world, with human resources, payroll, and corporate offices in different locations, and almost never in the actual foreign country where the work is being performed.  To complicate matters, many employers are themselves subcontracting to other, larger general contractors, which have the actual contract with the U.S. government.

Good communication is particularly important when a worker is injured.  Unfortunately, all too often injured civilian workers return home expecting their employers to provide medical care and wages.  The reality is, the employer does not provide these benefits themselves, as these benefits are paid and administered by the employer’s insurance company.  Frequently, when an injured worker returns home and contacts the insurance company seeking benefits, the insurance company is not aware of the accident or injuries, and the case may be denied.

This can be very frustrating to injured civilian workers who believe they were helping the U.S. government.  This, in turn, leads to a feeling of abandonment and distrust of both the private employer and the insurance company.  Unfortunately, the only way to remedy the misplaced denial of case is to pursue legal action before the U.S. Department of Labor.
 
About the Authors

David C. Barnett, Esq. is the managing partner of Barnett & Lerner, P.A., and his practice centers on representing civilian contractors covered under the DBA. Mr. Barnett has been handling these claims for over 20 years and additional information about Mr. Barnett, his firm, and his credentials can be found at www.injuredoverseas.com.

Samuel S. Frankel, Esq., is a partner in Barnett & Lerner, P. A. He has been practicing law for the past 14 years and he focuses his practice on representing injured civilian contractors. More information on Mr. Frankel can be found at www.injuredoverseas.com.
 
 
 
]]>
Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:07:33 -0400 http://www.injuredoverseas.com/blog.php?d=3