Ankin Law attorney, Phil Risley recently helped an injured Amazon worker receive a positive outcome from an Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission arbitrator. The injured 70 year-old man was employed as a picker by Amazon at its Matteson, Illinois facility when the accident occurred. As he was pushing a full “tote” box onto a conveyor belt and it failed to slide forward as expected. Instead, it rebounded with force, causing immediate pain in both hands and wrists. His doctor noted that he also had numbness and tingling in his hands and that his sleep was affected by throbbing pain. After multiple doctor appointments, a surgery, and several treatments he still experiences pain and his grip strength has decreased significantly.
After hearing the account of the accident, and being presented with testimony from both sides, the arbitrator awarded the injured Amazon worker:
1. Medical Benefits for all reasonable and necessary medical service in the amount of $68,051.47.
2. Temporary Total Disability payments of $512.52 for 67 5/7 weeks.
3. Permanent Partial Disability benefits of $461.27 per week for 46 weeks.
[Read the complete Arbitrator Decision here]
Below is a brief summary of important elements in the arbitration:
Procedural History:
The injured Amazon worker filed for benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act after alleging he sustained injuries arising from his job at Amazon.
The arbitration took place to determine the nature of the injury, its connection to his work, and other compensation-related issues. Specific disputes included whether the injury arose from work, its causal relationship to his condition, the appropriateness of the medical treatment, what benefits are in dispute, and whether disability benefits were owed.
Testimony of the injured Amazon worker (Petitioner):
Petitioner’s role: He worked as a “picker” at Amazon, using robots to transport inventory items, which he then manually sorted and placed in totes.
Injury description: While transferring a full tote onto a conveyor belt, the tote caught on a lip and rebounded forcefully. This led to immediate pain in both hands, particularly in the left hand.
Work environment: Petitioner explained that his job was fast-paced, with performance metrics including picking 350 items per hour. He was required to handle totes weighing 15–30 lbs each.
Injury specifics: The incident occurred early in his shift. He reported pain and swelling in both wrists, particularly the left hand, and sought immediate treatment at Amazon’s Wellness Center. Despite initial care, the pain worsened, and he had difficulty accessing medical treatment during his break.
Post-injury medical treatment: Petitioner received physical therapy and later surgery on his left thumb due to a hyperextension injury. The surgery improved his condition, but some pain and limitations persisted in both hands.
Work limitations: Petitioner reported significant difficulties with everyday tasks, such as gripping and using his hands for basic functions. He also faced limitations in his ability to return to work.
Employment status: After the injury, Petitioner was terminated from Amazon due to a no-call, no-show incident and has not been able to find consistent work since then.
Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE): Petitioner underwent an FCE and was deemed fit for “medium duty” work but believed his former job at Amazon required more physical capability.
Medical Details:
Petitioner received treatment for his wrists from various doctors, including CT scans, MRIs, and physical therapy. Despite improvements post-surgery, he still experienced some functional limitations.
He eventually had surgery on his left wrist, which involved repositioning his thumb, and experienced significant pain relief. He opted not to undergo surgery on his right hand, as the injury was less severe.
Cross-Examination:
Petitioner confirmed that he was truthful with doctors about his symptoms and the nature of the injury.
He had a history of IT work before joining Amazon but did not formally request short-term disability after the injury. He confirmed that he was 70 years old at the time of the injury and receiving Social Security benefits.
Workstation Setup:
The injury occurred when Petitioner was required to push full totes onto a conveyor. He described his workstation setup and the physical movements involved, emphasizing the speed and pressure required to meet performance metrics.
Conclusion:
The arbitration proceedings continued to focus on confirming the exact cause of the injury, the adequacy of the medical treatment, and the work-related impact on the petitioner’s health and ability to work. Petitioner’s recovery process and ongoing physical limitations were central to the case.
