As we have addressed in the past, the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act applies to most “employees” in the State of Pennsylvania. It does not, however, apply to “independent contractors.” Often the line of demarcation between the two classes is blurry. It becomes even more blurry when the findings of a Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) are disregarded by appellate courts.
Recently, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued a decision in the matter of Edwards v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Epicure Home Care, Inc.). Here, the injured worker was a home health aide, who was hurt when she fell down the steps at the residence of one of her clients. The defense to the Claim Petition filed by the injured worker was not a medical one, but, instead, was simply that the injured worker was an “independent contractor,” and not an “employee.”
In litigating the Claim Petition, the issue of the employee/employer relationship was “bifurcated” (litigated separately prior to litigating all of the aspects of the case). The testimony of the injured worker, and a representative of the employer, was considered by the WCJ on the bifurcated issue. The WCJ concluded that the injured worker was, in fact, an employee, and made the following findings of fact: