Babcock-Bucklin

Babcock-Bucklin v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

Good Law
156 Cal. App. 3d 135·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 2074·202 Cal. Rptr. 670·49 Cal. Comp. Cases 425
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 21, 1984No. F003246California2,141 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Andreen, J.

*138 Opinion

Petitioner Carol J. Babcock-Bucklin (Babcock) seeks review of a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Board), which granted reconsideration in favor of her employer, Edith Kirk, and the employer’s insurer, State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF). The issue before us is what information must be available to an employer in order to trigger an obligation to inform the employee of the availability of rehabilitation benefits.

Facts

The only matter in dispute is whether temporary rehabilitation benefits 1 were due Babcock between the time she stopped work and the actual commencement of rehabilitation efforts approximately one year and four months later. All other issues were settled by a compromise and release which was approved by the workers’ compensation judge.

Babcock was employed as a hair stylist. After a time she began to suffer contact dermatitis of the hands, which became so severe she was forced to terminate her employment on November 8, 1979. The contact dermatitis was caused by exposure to various chemicals used in the beautician business.

Babcock testified that she complained to Edith Kirk that they should change the brand of shampoo,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.