Lavoie v. Re-Harvest, Inc.

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court reviewed a Workers’ Compensation Board decision finding that Re-Harvest, Inc. discriminated against Raymond Lavoie by terminating his employment shortly after a work-related injury. The court held that, where the employee was completely unable to work, the employer complied with the Workers’ Compensation Act, and there was no evidence of discriminatory motive, termination did not violate the Act’s anti-discrimination provision. The court vacated the discrimination remedy.

Holdings

1. An employer does not violate section 353 merely by terminating an employee who is completely unable to perform any job functions because of a work-related injury, provided the termination is based on legitimate employment considerations and the employer otherwise complies with the Workers' Compensation Act.
2. The Workers' Compensation Act does not require an employer to keep an employee who is completely unable to work on its employment rolls for an indefinite period when the employer has timely complied with the Act.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an employer discriminates under 39-A M.R.S. § 353 by terminating an employee who, because of a work-related injury, cannot perform any work or light-duty functions within weeks of the injury, when the employer otherwise complies with the Workers' Compensation Act.
2. Whether the Workers' Compensation Act requires an employer to maintain a totally incapacitated, nonworking employee on its employment rolls for an indefinite period to avoid liability for discrimination.

Disposition

vacated