Flight attendant loses Sept. 11 claim

[BoredShirtless]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/27/attac ... index.html

Flight attendant loses Sept. 11 claim
Thursday, November 27, 2003 Posted: 6:40 PM EST (2340 GMT)


TRENTON, New Jersey (AP) -- A flight attendant who would have died in the September 11 attacks if she hadn't traded shifts with a co-worker may not receive workers compensation for emotional distress, a state appellate court ruled.

Kim Stroka claimed that she was too distraught to work after her colleague died on United Airlines Flight 93, which was hijacked shortly after taking off from Newark Liberty International Airport en route to San Francisco. It crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, killing everyone on board.

Stroka, of Howell, had taken that day off without pay to care for her daughter.

She said she soon had difficulty eating and sleeping and could not return to work, and was treated by a psychologist for post-traumatic stress disorder.

A workers' compensation judge awarded her medical and disability payments but that was overturned Wednesday by the three-judge state appellate court.

The panel ruled that Stroka, 43, is not entitled to the award because "nothing happened while she was working which led to her current condition." The ruling was based on a 1979 measure that made it harder for workers to collect money for injuries that occur outside the workplace.

The judges said that if Stroka were allowed to keep the award, "off-duty police officers, firefighters and others whose jobs are inherently risky could seek compensation benefits when a fellow employee was injured or killed while taking that employee's place."

A lawyer for United, Christopher Saracino, said the company sympathizes with Stroka and anyone else affected by the attacks. He said Stroka probably could have sought permanent partial disability benefits if doctors had agreed that she could never fly again.

Thoughts? A friend dying because he took your shift can fuck you up pretty badly. On the other hand, the judgement had a point; what about the cops, firefighters, etc etc. Should they be compensated too? Where do you draw the line?

[Gandalf]

I think the ruling was fair.

[Sea Skimmer]

I must agree with the ruling, drawing the line at what happens while you are working is very clear and fair.

[Chardok]

It absolutely was fair. She knows the risks inherent in her chosen field. She knows that at any time she could be hijacked. It shouldn't have to be that way, I know, she should be able to feel safe, but the fact of the matter is, it happens, and she knows it. Quite frankly, If it were me, I would probably count my lucky stars i wasn't on that aircraft! But workers comp for emotional distress? This is a woman who deals with unruly passengers, turbulence, threat of mechanical failure, hijacking, etc. etc. etc every time she goes to work. Par for the course. Law of the Jungle. survival of the fittest. Sometimes, the fittest just happen to be the luckiest, too. Go back to work, attendant-lady!

[Darth Wong]

Personally, I have trouble treating someone's emotional fragility as a worker's compensation claim. There was a section of highway which collapsed in Toronto a few years ago. If I'd been driving along that section on the way to work, I could have died. Does that mean I should be collecting worker's compensation?

[Batman]

If I'd been driving along that section on the way to work, I could have died. Does that mean I should be collecting worker's compensation?

False anology. That would be a passenger who wasn't on the flight claiming worker's comp over it.
A better example would be a highway worker who should've been there but took the day off.

I cought Mike in a fallacy!!
*does the happy dance*


I'll comment on the OP as soon as I have made up my mind.

[BoredShirtless]

A better example would be a highway worker who should've been there but took the day off.

With your friend taking your shift. But then again, shit happens; move on with your life. Cry, but don't cry your way to a psychologist for christs sake.