Background
Christopher Thomas, a line foreman for the Russellville Electric Plant Board, contracted COVID-19 in July 2021 after working near crew members whom he believed had exposed him to the virus. His illness caused pneumonia, a lengthy hospitalization and ventilator treatment, and lasting respiratory and neurocognitive impairment. Thomas sought workers’ compensation benefits, alleging a work-related communicable-disease injury and an occupational disease.
An administrative law judge rejected the occupational-disease theory but found that Thomas contracted COVID-19 through workplace exposure and was permanently and totally disabled. The Workers’ Compensation Board vacated the award, and the Court of Appeals agreed that the claim required remand because two material factual findings lacked evidentiary support, while holding that the ALJ had applied the proper statutory standard and had reasonably interpreted the university evaluator’s causation opinion.
The Court’s Holding
The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed. It held that the ALJ had considered the two elements then required under KRS 342.0011(1): whether Thomas contracted COVID-19 in the course of employment and whether the nature of his employment exposed him to a greater risk of contracting it than the general public. Applying Estate of Perkins ex rel. Perkins v. North American Stainless, however, the Court instructed the ALJ on remand also to determine whether the extent of Thomas’s injury exceeded the normally anticipated effects of a general communicable disease.
The Court agreed that substantial evidence did not support the ALJ’s findings that Thomas was required to share a vehicle with another employee or that he rode with a symptomatic coworker. Because those findings were critical to the award, a new compensability assessment was necessary. The Court also held that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s reading of Dr. Bob Moldoveanu’s report as finding Thomas’s condition causally related to his work environment.
Key Takeaways
- A communicable-disease claimant must prove work-related contraction, an employment-created risk greater than that faced by the general public, and effects beyond those normally anticipated from the disease.
- An ALJ’s factual findings receive deference only when supported by substantial evidence; the record did not show that Thomas had to share transportation or rode with a symptomatic coworker.
- The university evaluator’s express causation statements constituted substantial evidence that Thomas’s COVID-19 condition was work-related.
Why It Matters
The decision confirms that Kentucky workers’ compensation claims arising from COVID-19 or another communicable disease require a fact-specific showing that the employment both caused the exposure and increased the claimant’s risk. General workplace contact, without supported findings about required duties and actual exposure conditions, may not suffice.
The opinion also directs ALJs to apply the three-part framework announced in Perkins, including a separate finding about whether the injury’s severity exceeded the disease’s normally anticipated effects. The opinion is designated not to be published and is not binding precedent under Kentucky RAP 40(D).