Workplace stress, harassment, and traumatic events can seriously affect a person’s mental and physical health. But stress by itself is not necessarily a compensable Workers’ Compensation injury in California.
A psychiatric-injury claim generally requires a diagnosed mental disorder caused by actual events of employment. In most cases, the employee must also show that those employment events were the predominant cause of the psychiatric injury—that is, they contributed more to the condition than all nonindustrial causes combined. [SOC Section 5.29]
California law applies specific requirements and defenses to psychiatric-injury claims. At Walters & Zinn, Attorneys at Law, we evaluate claims involving objectively documented workplace events, serious psychological conditions, workplace violence, harassment, physical injuries with psychological consequences, and other employment-related conduct.
Psychological Injuries Following Physical Workplace Injuries
A physical workplace injury may produce a psychological condition. These claims are sometimes called physical-mental or compensable-consequence psychiatric injuries.
A psychiatric condition resulting from a physical industrial injury may still be subject to the requirements and defenses applicable to psychiatric claims under LC § 3208.3. The underlying physical injury does not automatically establish entitlement to psychiatric benefits. The psychological condition must be medically diagnosed and causally connected to the industrial injury or other actual events of employment. [SOC Section 5.29]
Workplace Violence and Threats
Psychological injuries may arise from being:
Workplace-violence claims may receive different treatment under LC § 3208.3. Instead of proving that employment events were the predominant cause, an employee may need to show that the actual events of employment were a substantial cause of the psychiatric injury. This is a lower causation threshold, but the employee generally must still establish a diagnosed psychiatric disorder and an employment-related event. [SOC Section 5.30]
Harassment by Supervisors or Coworkers
Objectively established harassment by a supervisor or coworker may qualify as an actual event of employment. Examples may include documented patterns of threatening, abusive, humiliating, discriminatory, or persecutory conduct.
However, a psychiatric claim cannot be based solely on an employee’s subjective belief that harassment occurred. The alleged conduct must be supported by objective evidence, such as communications, witness accounts, personnel records, complaints, investigations, or other corroborating information. [SOC Section 5.30]
Harassment does not automatically establish a compensable psychiatric injury. The claimant must still satisfy the applicable medical and causation requirements, including the predominant-cause standard in most cases. [SOC Section 5.29]
Conduct by Customers, Patients, Students, Vendors, or Contractors
A psychological injury may result from conduct by someone who is not employed by the same employer, such as a customer, patient, student, vendor, contractor, or other third party.
Third-party conduct is not automatically compensable simply because it occurred at work. The event must be sufficiently connected to the employment, and the employee must establish a diagnosed psychiatric disorder and the applicable causation standard. Violence, assault, robbery, or other unexpected criminal conduct may also qualify for the special workplace-violence or sudden-and-extraordinary-event rules, depending on the facts. [SOC Section 5.31]
We generally do not pursue claims based solely on ordinary workplace stress, routine management decisions, or unsupported interpersonal complaints. Examples may include:
These circumstances do not automatically defeat a claim. The legal analysis depends on the actual conduct, whether it was objectively established, whether it was a personnel action, whether it was lawful and undertaken in good faith, and whether it medically caused a diagnosed psychiatric disorder.
When Can Workplace Stress or Harassment Support a Claim?
A psychiatric-injury claim generally requires all of the following:
Harassment can constitute an actual event of employment, but not every unpleasant interaction, disagreement, criticism, or workplace dispute meets the statutory standard. The quality, frequency, severity, documentation, and medical significance of the conduct are important.
Defense? LC § 3208.3(h) provides:
“No compensation … shall be paid by an employer for a psychiatric injury if the injury was substantially caused by a lawful, nondiscriminatory, good faith personnel action.”
Personnel actions may include:
The defense is not automatic merely because the employer describes conduct as a personnel action. The relevant action must be lawful, nondiscriminatory, and taken in good faith. It must also have substantially caused the psychiatric injury.
The analysis generally proceeds in stages. First, the decision-maker considers whether actual events of employment caused the psychiatric injury and whether the required level of industrial causation has been established. The decision-maker then evaluates whether any event was a personnel action and, if so, whether it was lawful, nondiscriminatory, undertaken in good faith, and a substantial cause of the injury. [SOC Section 5.33]
An unlawful, discriminatory, retaliatory, or bad-faith action may require a different analysis from a legitimate personnel decision.
Workplace violence may affect the required level of medical causation.
When an employee is the victim of a violent act or directly exposed to a significant violent act, LC § 3208.3 requires proof that actual events of employment were a substantial cause of the psychiatric injury. In other psychiatric-injury cases, the employee generally must prove that actual employment events were the predominant cause.
A violent act can include an assault, robbery, shooting, stabbing, sexual assault, or another serious act of violence. Credible threats may also be significant, depending on the circumstances. The event must be evaluated in context, including its severity, unexpected nature, the employee’s direct exposure, and the medical evidence concerning causation. [SOC Section 5.30]
California generally requires an employee to have worked for the employer for at least six months before receiving Workers’ Compensation benefits for a psychiatric injury related to that employer. The employment does not have to be continuous. LC § 3208.3; [SOC Section 5.31]
This requirement is not an absolute bar in every case. It does not apply when the psychiatric injury results from a sudden and extraordinary employment condition. The employee generally bears the burden of proving that exception by a preponderance of the evidence. [SOC Section 5.31]
A sudden and extraordinary employment condition is generally an event that is unexpected, uncommon, and beyond a regular or routine employment event or condition.
Depending on the facts, examples may include:
The exception is applied based on the particular work and circumstances. A serious event is not automatically “sudden and extraordinary,” and ordinary workplace pressure, routine disputes, repeated interpersonal conflict, routine criticism, and standard personnel decisions generally do not qualify. [SOC Section 5.31]
Repeated harassment may support a psychiatric-injury claim if objectively established and medically causative, but a continuing pattern of harassment is not necessarily a sudden and extraordinary employment condition for purposes of the six-month exception.
Stress can contribute to a physical injury, a psychiatric injury, or both.
A claim for a physical condition, such as hypertension, a heart condition, or a stroke, may be analyzed differently from a claim for a psychiatric disorder. The special psychiatric-injury requirements do not necessarily govern every physical injury allegedly caused by work-related stress. For a physical injury, the relevant inquiry may be whether work-related stress was a contributing cause, subject to the applicable medical and legal standards. [SOC Section 5.29]
The distinction between a psychiatric injury, a physical injury, and a physical condition with psychological consequences can be important.
A psychiatric claim arising after termination requires careful analysis.
A psychiatric injury caused by a lawful, nondiscriminatory, good-faith termination may be barred under the personnel-action defense in LC § 3208.3. Other statutory rules may also affect a psychiatric claim filed after employment ends. The timing of the alleged injury, the employment events involved, the date of termination, and the medical evidence may all matter. [SOC Section 5.42]
If workplace conduct has caused a diagnosed psychological condition or a physical condition, the facts should be evaluated promptly. Important evidence may include:
At Walters & Zinn, Attorneys at Law, our Sacramento Workers’ Compensation attorneys evaluate claims involving workplace stress, harassment, workplace violence, physical injuries with psychological consequences, and other employment-related events. We carefully consider the evidence, the medical causation opinions, the applicable statutory standards, and any potential defenses.
If you have suffered severe psychological injuries resulting from specific, high-threshold workplace events, getting legal help quickly can make all the difference. At Walters & Zinn, Attorneys at Law, our knowledgeable Sacramento workplace stress and harassment lawyers provide the guidance you need to ensure your claim is handled correctly from the start. To schedule a free consultation, call us today at 916-610-4706 or complete our online form. With office locations in Folsom and Fairfield, California, we proudly serve clients in the surrounding areas.
