Workers' Compensation

What is the Industrial Commission of Ohio and What is its Process

Cynthia Felson
The industrial commission of Ohio and their process
Reading time 4 Mins
Published on Mar 19
Share

The Industrial Commission of Ohio (IC) is the administrative agency that adjudicates disputes in workers compensation claims. For state fund employers, when a new claim or additional request in an allowed claim is filed with the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation (BWC), in most cases, the BWC will make a determination as to whether the claim or request should be allowed or denied. If the employer or the claimant disagrees with the BWC’s order, either party can file an appeal from that decision. The appeal is then referred to the Industrial Commission for a hearing. For self-insured employers, the BWC cannot make initial decisions or issue orders on its claims, but must refer the matter directly to the Industrial Commission for adjudication.

The industrial commission hearing process

There are three levels of hearings before the Industrial Commission. The first level hearing is held before a District Hearing Officer (DHO). If the employer or the claimant does not agree with the DHO’s decision, an appeal can be filed for a second level hearing before a Staff Hearing Officer (SHO). If either party disagrees with the SHO’s order, a request for a third level appeal before the full Commission in Columbus can be filed. However, a third level appeal hearing is not automatic as the IC has discretion whether to grant the hearing.

Hearings on the initial allowance of a claim

  • DHO Hearing– This is the first hearing to be heard after a claim is filed. The DHO will decide whether the claim should be allowed or denied, and whether temporary total benefits should be paid. There may be many reasons why an employer has contested a claim, and the basis for the appeal will determine what evidence the employer needs to present. For example, an employer may have contested a claim because the claimant did not report the injury and the employer was completely unaware that an injury occurred. In that circumstance, the employer may want to submit a position statement reflecting its lack of awareness of the injury due to claimant’s failure to report.
    There may be situations where the employer may question the credibility of the claimant’s allegations that an incident/injury occurred, and it may be necessary to gather and submit witness statements, time cards, etc. The employer may want a representative from the employer who has knowledge of the issue, to attend the hearing to provide testimony which may contradict claimant’s allegations that an incident/injury occurred.
    In other cases, the question may be whether the medical evidence supports the claim, and the BWC may have obtained medical evidence from one of its physicians which states that the medical evidence does not support allowance of the claim. In that case, the BWC order would have denied the claim based on its physician’s report, and the employer can rely on the BWC’s evidence at the hearing and request the claim be denied. In instances where the BWC has not provided medical evidence, it may be necessary for the employer to obtain its own independent medical examination or file review to submit to the file.
  • SHO hearing– This level hearing involves an appeal by either the claimant or the employer from the decision of the DHO. New evidence may be filed at the SHO hearing. The employer may have learned information at the DHO hearing which will help in preparation for the appeal hearing before the SHO. For example, In cases where the employer was unaware that an incident/injury occurred and the claimant provided evidence at the DHO hearing, such as an emergency room report from the date of injury which reflects a description of the incident at work, the employer may be able to obtain evidence between the DHO and SHO hearings, for submission to the SHO, which may help the employer’s position.
  • Industrial Commission Hearing– An appeal from an SHO order is not automatically granted as the IC has discretion whether to permit a third level hearing. Most appeals for third level hearings are refused, and it is from those refusal orders that the parties then contemplate whether to file an appeal to a court of common pleas which must be done within 60 days of receipt of the refusal order. However, if a party strongly believes a third level hearing should be granted, it is helpful to provide the IC with a memorandum in support of the third level request.

You may want to read

See all articles
X
X
X
X