For years, the public employer community has become increasingly concerned with the number of employees, especially those working in public safety, being diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  Along with the concern for the well-being of their employees, the disease leads to significant losses of human capital and ongoing medical and retirement expenses for employers.

However, in response to the growing number of cases, employers began contesting the determinations of medical providers, with regard to the permanence of PTSD with employees, and the Minnesota Supreme Court recently issued a decision over the necessity of continued compensation for employees who have been determined to no longer be suffering from PTSD.

In Chrz v. Mower-County, a former deputy for Mower County was diagnosed with PTSD, and suffered from its effects from September 25, 2019 to March 30, 2021.  However, after March 30, 2021, Chrz had no diagnosis of PTSD, and instead suffered from two other psychological disorders (a fact that was agreed upon by Chrz’s own medical professional).  Despite his lack of a diagnosis, Chrz argued that he was entitled to workers’ compensation benefits because he remained “disabled from a mental illness.”  A workers’ compensation judge agreed with him, based on the judge’s finding that Chrz was “temporarily totally disabled as a substantial result of his work-related occupational disease,” but that decision was reversed by the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals (WCCA).

In its decision, the WCCA held that while Chrz was suffering from psychological disorders, he was no longer suffering from a compensable disease under the Workers’ Compensation Act, because his own chosen medical professional diagnosed him with “other specified trauma or stressor related disorder.”  Chrz appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

To begin, the Court found “that the only ‘mental impairment’ covered by the Workers’ Compensation Act is PTSD.” It then reiterated the test for analyzing a claim for eligibility for benefits:

1. The employee has an “occupational disease;”
2. The employee experiences “disablement;” and
3. The disablement “results from” the occupational disease.

The Court held that because PTSD is the only compensable occupational psychological condition under the statute, that only when PTSD is diagnosed by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist is it compensable.  Because Chrz no longer had a PTSD diagnosis from any licensed professional, he no longer met the “occupational disease” element of the compensability test.

The Court found that the legislature had “plainly decided that an employee is only eligible for benefits so long as they meet the precise definition of PTSD” under the statute (opening the door for the legislature to modify the statute in the future).  The Court cited its precedent that “eligibility for benefits ends when an employee is no longer disabled or when an employee continues to be disabled, but no longer due to a compensable work injury.”

This is a major win for employers.  While PTSD is a terrible disease that disables many workers throughout the country, it is good to know that it is curable, and that a court is willing to end the benefits for an individual who is no longer suffering from its effects.  We will see what steps the legislature takes if it feels the Court’s ruling is not consistent with its intent.  But for now, there is a light at the end of the tunnel for employers.  If you, or your organization, need assistance in working with disabled employees, guiding them through the workplace accommodation process, or challenging the determinations of PERA with regard to employee disabilities, contact Wiley Reber Law, for legal advice that works.