An Analysis of Recent WCAB Panel Decisions on Rolda and McCoy Issues

JOHN P. KAMIN, ESQ.

WOODLAND HILLS, CALIFORNIA

The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board has issued a plethora of decisions during the last year analyzing the good faith personnel action defense and how it applies to body parts that emanate from alleged psyche injuries.

A stringent review of panel decisions analyzing the good faith personnel action defense shows that the WCAB commissioners are requiring parties and judges to provide a very detailed analysis under the en banc decision in Rolda v. Pitney Bowes, 66 Cal. Comp Cases 241. Defendants who fail to provide sufficient evidence to support a Rolda analysis could potentially lose out on that defense. Likewise, judges who do not provide a detailed analysis of all "actual events of employment" may see the Appeals Board remand the case back down to them for a more detailed opinion on the evidence. But when defendants and/or judges do have a clear Rolda analysis supporting the good faith personnel action defense, the WCAB commissioners have affirmed judges’ decisions in favor of the defendants.