N.Y. appeals court rejects physical, mental claims by telecommuting office worker

An appeals court in New York ruled a City of New York worker reviewing construction documents while working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic did not suffer an occupational illness related to sitting at a desk for up to 12 hours.

In 2024 NY Slip Op 05610, issued Thursday, the assistant plan examiner argued that in April 2020 her workday went from eight hours to 12 hours and that she “sustained physical injuries, including to her back, right knee and right wrist, as well as certain psychological injuries, all due to working unusually prolonged hours from home in a static position at her desk.”

She stopped working in July 2021, claiming “health complications” and then filed a workers compensation claim two months later.  An administrative law judge opined that she “did not meet her burden of establishing that the alleged physical and psychological injuries were either an occupational disease or accidental injuries that developed over time.” The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed.

In affirming, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York cited “insufficiencies in the medical evidence,” stating that “the general medical conclusion that claimant’s physical injuries were causally related to working from home were not supported by a recognizable link between claimant’s physical injuries and a distinctive feature of her work in order to establish an occupational disease.”

As documented in court records, “although claimant stopped working in July 2021, she initially sought medical treatment on Sept. 13, 2021, for mental health and breathing issues, reporting that she was ‘burned out’ at work and functioning like two to three people.”

The court further explained that “it was not until February 2022, approximately six months after she stopped working, when claimant first sought medical treatment for her physical injuries to her back and knees, which treatment eventually included treatment for her wrist pain. … The medical records do not reflect that the treating physicians addressed or were aware of the change in claimant’s working conditions, including the nature and manner of her work, when such changes began or the duration of time that she spent working each day.”