Nissans Return-to-Work Offer Inadequate in Comp Case

By Staff Report

Aug. 16, 2011

A factory worker is eligible for additional workers’ compensation benefits because Nissan North America Inc. did not provide her a “meaningful return to work” opportunity, Tennessee’s Supreme Court has ruled.

The case of Alicia D. Howell v. Nissan North America Inc. involved a dispute over benefits entitlement for a night-shift production line worker who required carpal tunnel surgery in 2006 and 2007.

After a doctor released Howell to return to work, she resigned and alleged that the injury affecting her hands did not allow her to keep up with the assembly line work she was provided. Nissan, however, argued that she was provided a meaningful return-to-work opportunity.

In 2008, after working a minimum wage job and still suffering from hand problems, Howell filed a petition under a Tennessee law that allows injured employees to seek reconsideration of awards of permanent partial disability benefits if they are no longer employed by the pre-injury employer at a certain wage, according to court documents.

In such cases, a trial court may award up to six times the employee’s medical impairment rating in additional permanent partial disability benefits if that worker does not receive a “meaningful return to work” offer and as long as the worker does not voluntarily resign or retire.

The law also limits permanent partial disability benefits to 1.5 times an employee’s medical impairment rating if he or she returns to work at a wage equal to or greater than the pre-injury wage.

In reviewing the reconsideration petition, a trial court found that Howell was credible and awarded her a 25 percent impairment rating and additional benefits under the law, saying she did not have a meaningful return to work experience.

A Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel reversed the ruling, finding that Howell’s decision to resign was “unreasonable.”

However, the Tennessee Supreme Court disagreed. It reversed the panel’s ruling and reinstated the trial court’s opinion, finding that Howell still suffered hand problems.

“Ms. Howell testified that her grasp is still impaired and she has trouble holding onto things,” the Tennessee high court ruled last week. “Under these circumstances, the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court’s award of 25 percent permanent partial impairment rating to each upper extremity.”  

Filed by Roberto Ceniceros of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, email


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

What’s New at

blog workforce

Come see what we’re building in the world of predictive employee scheduling, superior labor insights and next-gen employee apps. We’re on a mission to automate workforce management for hourly employees and bring productivity, optimization and engagement to the frontline.

Book a call
See the software

Related Articles

workforce blog


Minimum Wage by State in 2023 – All You Need to Know

Summary Twenty-three states and D.C. raised their minimum wage rates in 2023, effective January 1.  Thr...

federal law, minimum wage, pay rates, state law, wage law compliance

workforce blog


Exempt vs. non-exempt employees: knowing the difference

Summary Employees are exempt from FLSA requirements when they meet specific exemption criteria based on...

Department of Labor, exempt employees, Misclassification, non-exempt employees

workforce blog


California fast food workers bill: why it’s more than meets the eye and how to prepare

Summary: California signs bill establishing a “fast food council” that has the power to raise the indus...