FOX16 News obtained surveillance video of the attack at a McDonald’s on Rodney Parham that left an employee with multiple gunshot wounds. The August 2008 video shows a man wearing a white shirt hitting a woman. Seconds later, an employee runs in to break it up and the attacker is forced outside. Off camera, the employee was shot three times. He walks back inside and then collapses before medical attention arrives.
Six days after the attack, LRPD detectives arrested Perry Kennon, 27, charging him with shooting Nigel Haskett. After three surgeries, $300,000 in medical bills and six months recovery, Haskett filed a workers compensation claim for his injuries. Claims specialist Misty Thompson with insurance company Ramsey, Krug, Farrell and Lensing responded, denying Haskett’s claim. “We’ve denied this claim in its entirety, it’s our opinion that Mr. Haskett’s injuries did not arise out of or within the course of his employment,” a portion of the statement reads.
Philip Wilson is Haskett’s attorney. He says the defense from McDonald’s insurer is baffling.
“Seems like any employer would want a disturbance stopped and that’s what this young man was simply trying to do,” Wilson says. As part of the denial, the insurer included a page that details expectations of employees during orientation. In a robbery situation it tells employees not to do anything that would put themselves or anyone else in danger. Wilson asserts that clause does not apply in this incident.
Yeah, that seems fair.
# 20 Mark said, “Paddy-O: Insurance _policy_. Not sure what you’re saying here.”
What is covered under W/C policies (AOE, COE) is stipulated under State W/C statues, for the most part. Not, by ins companies. That i why it can be appealed to state agencies. When a company doesn’t pay they usually quibble over definitions, not coverage policies of the Ins company.
Paddy-O is correct. He will be able to appeal this deisicion to the Arkansas Workers’ Comp Commission and then into the courts. Because the work comp law is what sets the terms of the policy.
Worker’s Compensation, sometimes referred to as “Workman’s Compensation” or “Worker’s Comp”, is the name given to a system of laws meant to protect injured workers. The goal is to make sure that somebody who is injured at work receives appropriate medical care, lost wages relating to the on-the-job injury, and, if necessary, retraining and rehabilitation, so as to be able to return to the workforce.
[...]
Ordinarily an employee who qualifies for Worker’s Compensation benefits may not file a personal injury suit against the employer.
Notice it is a system of laws — government mandated insurance that companies must pay premiums for.
I know dozens of people who have filed claims against WC and every single one of them have been denied. Most are still rejected the second time the claim is made. And a couple on the third time.
One example is my father-in-law. He had a heavy chain hoist fall on his head. He had severe headaches that night and decided to go to the doctor. He was denied because he was able to walk into the doctor’s office. He went to get a second opinion and they put him in the hospital right then and performed surgery to fuse together some vertebrae. It took four times going before the state board before they finally approved the surgery.
It may sound cynical, but I think it is standard policy for WC to reject everything the first time around. WC should pay this claim but I am not surprised they aren’t.
#9 Well John I am neither high nor am I pro union. The article states that the argument occurred in the the parking lot as the result of a domestic dispute. Nothing in the article states the either was a customer. People walk through parking lots all the time without being a customer. The company that I work for would deny my claim in a similar situation, as it has before for other employees. Because I am not a cop and stepping in is not one of my job duties. If I do so than I am responsible for MY actions good bad or otherwise. And before its said I am neither republican nor democrat I’m a registered independent.
Yep, WC is a statutory scheme meant to protect BOTH employer and employee from injuries “arising out of” the employment relationship.
If you have cancer and it progresses to where you collapse AT work==no coverage.
If you are AT work and your boyfriend drops by to beat you up==no coverage.
If you are AT work and you leave the workplace to play cop==no coverage. Now, I do think if the disruption had occurred on premises and/or to a customer and the employee “violated” company rules, coverage would still apply.
Philosophically, we could have rules that applied AT WORK but it can be a fine line what with aggravating circumstances and what not to draw that line between collapsing from cancer and the violent boyfriend.
At least it “makes sense” from a stated policy objective. The real complaint here should be that most likely the employee did not have a work provided insurance program to cover the bills. And of course, that leads to the lack/expense of not having Universal Healthcare. Again, all for good policy reasons?
#25 said, “The real complaint here should be that most likely the employee did not have a work provided insurance program to cover the bills. And of course, that leads to the lack/expense of not having Universal Healthcare. Again, all for good policy reasons?”
Umm, no. It is a W/C situation. You wouldn’t want to use med ins for this. One would have to know something about ins to understand that point though.
Well Paddy, the point is that it is NOT a WC situation==thats what the insurance/WC provider has said. If that changes, then it changes.
Maybe I should have added “the employee should have had work place paid for private health insurance plan.”
The whole point of filing a CLAIM is to see whether or not it is a WC situation, and until the man decides it is, it ain’t.
You are less than cute when being obnoxious and wrong at the same time. Please pick one or the other.
Bobbo,
Paddy-O is correct on this one. The incident is covered by WC, or should be.
A business owes a duty to all patrons and the public for their safety. If there is a situation where the public, another employee, or even property is about to be or could be injured or damaged, and an employee takes steps to protect the public, person, or property and is injured in the process, they are covered.
Yes, almost every cashier manual will tell you to give the money to a robber and not get hurt. This was not a robbery though. This was an assault and someone’s life was in danger on restaurant property. He was mitigating a crime that McDonald’s could have ultimately been held liable for.
What would happen if the robber shot the cashier even though s/he gave them the money anyway? As Paddy-O said, it is a matter of statute of his being covered for a work related injury.
Um, The company that made the call as most posters have noted is the insurance company. He may be able to draw disabiltiy from S.S.
I think the workers comp people hope you will die or just give up before they have to pay you.
I don’t have a clue what a jury would make of this.
Many years ago I drove a city bus in urban Cleveland. A male rider was harassing a female rider. It wasn’t to the level of punching or slapping. If I had gun like many drivers carried I might have broken it up. I saw what was happening in the mirror and knew that the lady would get off soon. It still troubles me that I didn’t do something. I hale Nigel for his stepping in but I am very sad that about what happened to him. I tend to think that if this happened in a different time and at a different company he would have gotten his worker’s comp..
Ronald MacDonald must DIE!
BTW,John calling your readers pricks, I love it.Keep it up.
Isn’t there a store that is being sued because the store workers were told that there was a baby locked in a hot car with the windows up in their parking lot and they pretty much said that it was not their problem? I think we as a society are getting tired of the “it’s not my job” mentality. McD’s should be happy that they actually have an employee with some initiative and is willing to get off his ass.
it was reported by Fox News. I have learned on this blog to not believe anything from Fox nees. Probably never happened.
He should not have gotten involved. They shouldn’t pay him anything.
Sounds like the attacker was forced outside and the lady remained inside. Why did the employee follow the attacker, who had a gun, outside? Once the attack was halted, the employee’s “duty” as a caring human being was met. Once he stepped outside to pursue an armed suspect, he put himself in an indefensible position. I think the insurance company is correct from a business standpoint. I also think it is up to McDonald’s to step up and absorb the health-care costs of this employee — and then fire him.
If it is not covered under workers comp, he can always file a personal injury lawsuit against his employer. That is probably the case here.
“Um, The company that made the call as most posters have noted is the insurance company.”
The insurance company adjusters are required to make the initial acceptance or denial decision based on the what is in the WC law of the satate. Should an injured worker not agree with this he or she may, at no cost and without even needing a lawyer have the decision examined by the State WC commission.
I’ll give you a real world example of a State W/C board decision.
Inside sales person:
Company policies in place.
A) Employees are prohibited from bringing any knives to work, including pocket knives.
B) Employees are provided all office supplies, pens, computers, paper, etc.
Salesman sitting at desk and his click ball point pen gets jammed. (Boxes full of pens is 10′ feet from his desk for the taking)
Salesman decides he’ll “fix” his broken $.25 pen instead of grabbing new one. Pulls out pocket knife and accidentally stabs himself in finger. Wound & resulting infection (because he didn’t tell anyone of bother to get bandage) $600.00.
Insurance company denied claim.
W/C ALJ overturned and awarded claim.
RE: #39, Paddy-O,
What the nimrods that would refuse the victim don’t see is the difference between company policy and how the law reads. In Paddy-O’s example, the sales person’s action is grounds for dismissal. But that dismissal is totally different from the injured party’s right to be compensated for an injury on the job.
Another example would be a worker that is taught to read the labels on containers before mixing them. For whatever reason, the worker grabs the wrong bottle and causes an explosion, injuring himself and damaging the equipment. It wouldn’t matter if the reason was because he was discussing last night’s game, was upset because his wife just left him, or was distracted by the Supervisor.
The only reason the company could possibly use as a defense would be if the victim was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. And even that is not a given.