Longshore Workers’ Comp Attorney

Recent Laws & Cases Affecting Longshore Workers Comp

The landscape of Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act cases continues to evolve through legislative changes and significant court decisions that shape the rights and benefits available to injured maritime and dock workers. These developments can substantially impact the compensation and medical benefits injured workers receive, often in ways that may not be immediately apparent without specialized legal knowledge.

For injured longshore workers navigating the complex workers’ compensation system, staying informed about these legal changes is challenging yet essential. Recent years have seen multiple significant court decisions and regulatory adjustments that modify coverage determinations, benefit calculations, and procedural requirements under the LHWCA.

The implications of these developments extend beyond individual cases to influence the broader framework of maritime workers’ compensation law. Insurance carriers and employers actively monitor these changes to adjust their claims handling practices, making it equally important for workers and their advocates to understand how these developments affect their rights.

At Cantrell Green, our Long Beach longshore workers’ comp attorneys continuously track and analyze these new and ever changing legal developments to provide our clients with the most current and effective representation. In this article, our longshore workers comp attorneys examine several recent significant changes in LHWCA law that all maritime and harbor workers should understand.

“Maximum Medical Improvement” in Longshore Workers Comp Cases

In the landmark 2021 case Roberts v. Sea-Land Services, Inc. (565 U.S. 93), the Supreme Court provided crucial clarification regarding the determination of maximum medical improvement (MMI) and its effect on disability benefit classifications. The Court held that the transition from temporary to permanent disability status must be based on comprehensive medical evidence rather than administrative convenience or arbitrary timelines.

The ruling established that employers and carriers cannot unilaterally declare MMI without substantial medical support from treating physicians. This decision significantly strengthens protections for injured workers who face premature benefit reductions when their recovery plateaus but might still show improvement with additional treatment. The Court emphasized that the determination must consider potential future medical interventions that could improve the worker’s condition.

Practically, this decision affects how longshore cases proceed when medical opinions differ regarding MMI status. The Court outlined specific factors that administrative law judges must consider, including the treating physician’s assessment, the stability of the condition, and whether reasonable medical options for improvement remain unexplored. This framework provides clearer guidelines for resolving disputes over disability classification.

For injured longshore workers in California ports, this decision creates additional safeguards against premature termination of temporary disability benefits. Longshore workers now have stronger legal grounds to contest MMI determinations that seem premature or inadequately supported by medical evidence, potentially extending their access to higher temporary disability rates while meaningful treatment continues.

 Scope of Covered Maritime Employment in Longshore Workers Comp

The scope of LHWCA coverage received significant expansion through the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Pacific Operators Offshore, LLP v. Valladolid (634 F.3d 472). The court established a “substantial nexus” test for determining whether workers who divide time between maritime and non-maritime activities qualify for LHWCA coverage. This ruling directly impacts workers whose job duties include both traditional longshore work and support functions that might otherwise fall outside strict maritime definitions.

Under this test, workers can establish LHWCA coverage if they demonstrate a significant relationship between their overall employment and maritime activities, even if the specific injury occurred during tasks that might not independently qualify as maritime work. This represents a departure from earlier, more restrictive interpretations that focused narrowly on the specific activity at the moment of injury rather than the worker’s overall employment context.

The practical impact extends particularly to workers at mixed-use facilities like those common in the Port of Long Beach, where loading/unloading operations often integrate with warehousing, transportation, and administrative functions. Workers who previously might have fallen into coverage gaps between the LHWCA and state workers’ compensation systems now have stronger claims to federal coverage, which typically provides more comprehensive benefits.

This decision provides critical protection for many workers at the margins of traditional coverage definitions. The “substantial nexus” test has subsequently been applied to grant LHWCA benefits to workers including equipment maintenance personnel, warehouse workers supporting loading operations, and certain clerical staff working on maritime premises, reflecting the integrated nature of modern port operations.

New Guidance on COVID-19 in Longshore Workers Comp

The Department of Labor’s Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) issued significant guidance regarding COVID-19 claims under the LHWCA in DLHWC Notice No. 2020-04, later supplemented by updated bulletins through 2022. These guidelines established the framework for evaluating occupational disease claims related to pandemic exposure, recognizing COVID-19 infections as potentially compensable when arising from maritime employment.

The guidance articulated a “reasonable likelihood” standard for establishing the work-relatedness of COVID-19 infections. Under this approach, longshore workers must demonstrate that workplace exposure represented a reasonable likelihood of being the source of infection, rather than meeting the higher “proximate cause” standard sometimes applied in occupational disease cases. This more accessible standard acknowledges the difficulty in precisely tracing infection sources during a pandemic.

Particularly significant was the OWCP’s recognition of certain presumptions regarding workplace exposure for frontline maritime workers. The guidance acknowledged that workers in positions requiring substantial public contact or close proximity to colleagues faced heightened risk, creating an easier path to establishing compensability. This provision proved crucial for longshore workers who continued essential loading and unloading operations throughout pandemic lockdowns.

For longshore workers in the Long Beach area, these guidelines established important precedent not only for COVID-19 claims but potentially for future occupational disease claims involving airborne hazards. The reasonable likelihood standard may influence how other exposure-based claims are evaluated, providing a more worker-friendly framework than traditional causation standards that often require definitive proof of workplace origin.

Changes to Zone of Special Danger in Longshore Workers Comp

A significant circuit split has developed regarding the application of the “zone of special danger” doctrine to longshore cases involving injuries occurring during off-duty activities. In Battelle Memorial Institute v. DiCecca (792 F.3d 214), the First Circuit expanded the doctrine to include injuries sustained during reasonable recreational activities while on overseas assignment. In contrast, the Fifth Circuit in BPU Management v. Director, OWCP (732 F.3d 457) adopted a more restrictive view, limiting coverage to activities that show a clearer connection to employment conditions.

The zone of special danger doctrine traditionally applied primarily to Defense Base Act cases – but it has increasingly been referenced in longshore claims involving workers temporarily stationed away from home. The doctrine recognizes that workers in isolated or unusual environments face risks that would not exist but for their employment, even during off-duty periods.

This developing split has created significant uncertainty for longshore workers who travel as part of their employment or who live temporarily near remote job sites. Attorneys note that the more expansive interpretation adopted by the First Circuit would provide coverage for a wider range of injuries occurring during reasonable recreational or life-sustaining activities while away from home due to employment.

While the Supreme Court has not yet resolved this split, the ongoing legal debate highlights the evolving nature of LHWCA coverage for injuries occurring at the periphery of traditional work activities. For longshore workers, particularly those accepting assignments requiring travel or temporary relocation, understanding these differing interpretations becomes crucial when injuries occur during off-duty periods.

Admin Changes to Maximum Compensation in Longshore Workers Comp

The Department of Labor has implemented significant revisions to the National Average Weekly Wage (NAWW) calculation methodology, directly affecting maximum compensation rates under the LHWCA. These changes, implemented through DLHWC Notice No. 2021-02, addressed longstanding concerns about the previous calculation methods, which some argued failed to accurately reflect true wage conditions in the maritime industry.

The revised methodology now incorporates a broader range of maritime employment categories when calculating the NAWW, resulting in higher maximum compensation rates than would have occurred under the previous formula. Additionally, the notice clarified that these recalculations apply retroactively to certain pending claims, potentially increasing benefits for workers whose cases remained open when the changes took effect.

Practically, these adjustments have produced maximum weekly compensation rates that more accurately reflect the specialized and often higher-paying nature of longshore work. For the fiscal year 2023, the maximum weekly benefit rate reached $1,862.35, representing a more substantial increase than would have occurred under the previous calculation method.

These administrative changes affecting Longshore Workers Comp cases, while less visible than court decisions, can significantly impact the total compensation available to injured longshore workers, especially those with higher pre-injury earnings. For workers in the Port of Long Beach and surrounding facilities, where wage rates typically exceed national averages, these recalculations help ensure that benefit caps do not unduly limit compensation for higher-earning skilled maritime workers.

Enhanced Penalties for Late Payment of Longshore Workers Comp Benefits in

A significant strengthening of enforcement mechanisms for prompt payment has emerged through recent appellate decisions interpreting Section 14(f) of the LHWCA, which imposes penalties for late payment of compensation. In Newport News Shipbuilding v. Director, OWCP (955 F.3d 341), the Fourth Circuit rejected employer arguments for flexibility in the strict 10-day payment deadline, holding that the penalty provision applies automatically upon late payment regardless of good faith or reasonable cause for delay.

This strict interpretation reinforces the LHWCA’s fundamental purpose of ensuring prompt delivery of benefits to injured workers who often face immediate financial pressure due to workplace injuries. The court emphasized that the 20% penalty serves not only as compensation for delays but as a meaningful enforcement mechanism to incentivize strict compliance with payment timelines.

Complementing this judicial enforcement, the Department of Labor has increased its administrative attention to payment timeliness through OWCP Bulletin No. 22-01, which established enhanced monitoring protocols for benefit payments. The bulletin implemented new reporting requirements for carriers and self-insured employers, creating greater transparency around payment practices and facilitating more consistent application of penalties.

For longshore workers in the Long Beach area, these developments provide important practical protections against payment delays that can have devastating consequences for injured workers managing household expenses while unable to work. The stronger enforcement mechanisms help ensure that approved benefits actually reach workers within the timeframes intended by Congress when establishing the LHWCA’s compensation system.

Longshore Workers Comp Attorneys| Long Beach

The recent legal developments discussed in this article illustrate the ever changing nature of complicated longshore workers’ comp law. This is why knowledgeable legal representation from an experienced longshore workers’ comp attorney. As courts continue to interpret the LHWCA and administrative agencies implement new policies, the rights and benefits available to injured maritime, harbor and dock workers continue to evolve in significant ways.

Navigating these changes requires the specialized legal knowledge of an experienced longshore workers’ comp attorney who is an expert in the unique aspects of longshore claims. At Cantrell Green, our longshore attorneys remain at the forefront of these developments, ensuring our clients receive the full benefits to which they are entitled under current interpretations of the law.

If you are a maritime worker who has suffered a work-related injury, we encourage you to contact our Long Beach longshore attorneys for a consultation. Our experienced longshore attorneys can evaluate your case in light of these recent developments and help you understand how changes in the law may affect your claim. With proper representation, you can navigate the complex LHWCA system successfully and secure the full compensation you deserve for your injuries.

Long Beach Longshore Attorneys: 800-964-8047