Subsequent Injuries Benefit Trust Fund

The public policy of the State of California is to hire workers with preexisting disabilities or encourage employers to retain workers who suffer an injury. However, the employer and insurance carrier are only responsible for the disability they caused and not the new level of disability suffered by the injured worker when the preexisting disability is combined with the new subsequent injury. The SIBTF, if met, makes up the difference.

When Gov. Schwarzenegger signed SB899 in April 2004, he changed the way California determined disability from work restrictions to impairment. This reduced the percentages of disability by as much as 70%. One of the threshold requirements for SIBTF is the subsequent injury must be 35%, before adjustment for age and occupation. This became much more difficult under the new impairment system.

However, recent case law provided a solution.

The 2005 PDRS expressly states that “… all impairments are converted to the whole person scale, adjusted, and then combined[.]” (2005 PDRS, p. 1–11 (emphasis added).) However, in SIBTF cases, the permanent disability determination cannot be completed because section 4751 expressly prohibits adjustment for occupation or age. With limited exceptions , none of which exist here, the combination of impairments under the Combined Values Chart can only occur after adjustment for age and occupation. We are prohibited from adjusting for age and occupation by section 4751; thus, we cannot apply the Combined Values Chart to the determination of permanent disability for purposes of determining whether applicant has met the statutory threshold of 35% permanent disability to qualify for SIBTF benefits. To use the Combined Values Chart prior to adjustment for age and occupation would create a result not contemplated by the statute or the permanent  [*16] disability rating schedule. The proper method of computing permanent disability pursuant to section 4751 for injuries occurring on or after January 1, 2013, is to adjust the disabilities by the 1.4 modifier and then add the disabilities. Charles Geletko v. California Highway Patrol, Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund, (2016.) 81 Cal. Comp. Cases 661