Verga v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board
Filed January 23, 2008, Third District
Cite as 2008 SOS 542

Employee Denied Claims Due To Non-Work Related Injuries

Rosemary Verga had just begun work as a supervisor in the human resources department of United Airlines when she encountered problems at the office right away. Verga had the perception that neither her supervisor nor her staff respected her. Her supervisor scolds or berates her in front of her staff, and her staff ignored or disobeyed her directives.

Verga attended one meeting called by supervisor Bill Allen which she thought was held with the purpose of disciplining the staff. Instead, the meeting ended up being a criticism against her by the entire staff.

As a result, Verga was disappointed. She cried most of the time and had difficulty sleeping. Eventually, she sought the assistance of the airline’s medical department.

Six months later, she left her job.

Following that, Verga filed a workers’ compensation claim for the psychological injury she suffered as the result of the treatment she received from her supervisor and staff. She claimed that the harassment reached the point that led to her breakdown and eventually, the loss of job.

On the other hand, Verga’s supervisor and staff told a different version of the story. They claimed that Verga was an ‘abrasive, demanding perfectionist’ who had unpredictable emotional outbursts. The staff also claimed that Verga almost constantly berated her staff.

Further, according to the staff, they tried to explain their concerns to Verga but the supervisor would not listen to them. In the end, all they could do was simply ignore her.

When Verga left the company, the staff said they felt relieved.

During hearing, the worker’s compensation judge (WCJ) denied Verga’s benefit claim after concluding that there no psychological injury made during the course of her employment. In contrary, the judge noted that Verga had instead brought upon herself the disdain of her fellow workers. That feeling of resentment, the judge noted, was not an actual event of Verga’s employment.

Verga asked for reconsideration from the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. Instead, the board adopted the WCJ’s decision and denied reconsideration.

In review, the Third District court of appeals affirmed the decision of the board, holding that Verga failed to show a compensable injury.

The appeals court also found that Verga has subjective assessment of her own situation, which is contradictory to her co-workers account. In addition, the court noted, Verga’s unpleasant attitude caused her psychiatric injury and stress.

To prove this, the appeals court pointed to the testimony of the examining physicians who said that the resentment of co-workers was the main cause of Verga’s stress.

Further, the appeals court held that an employee is entitled to benefits only where her injury is caused by actual event of harassment or persecution. Accordingly, the employee must be able to give objective evidence of the harassment, persecution, or other event which caused the injury.

The court also held compensation is no allowed by law in the situation presented in which an employee harassed her fellow workers, and then claimed that their unfavorable response caused her injury (Labor Code §3208.3(b)(1). The court thus found that the board properly denied Verga’s claim for benefits.

Finally, the appellate court affirmed the judgment which held that an employee who generally maintained an unfriendly and unpleasant relationship with her co-workers was not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits for the psychiatric injury she allegedly suffered as a result.