Compensation for Firefighter with Parkinson’s Disease
Published on Posted onPlease note that this post was written for Victorian audiences and the information within may not apply to other regions.
Recently Zaparas Lawyers successfully assisted a retired firefighter to obtain WorkCover compensation including medical and like services and a period of weekly payments in relation to his Parkinson’s Disease.
Our client, Joe*, a 79-year-old retired firefighter that had been employed by the Melbourne Fire Brigade and/or Fire Rescue Victoria for over five decades was diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease in early 2021. Joe has no family history of neurodegenerative conditions nor Parkinson’s disease.
Throughout the course of Joe’s firefighting career of over 50 years he had attended a range of fires including numerous chemical factory fires whilst wearing a range of personal proactive equipment (PPE) including PPE without respiratory protection or breathing apparatus in his earlier years as well as occasions without decontamination processes. Given the nature of a firefighter’s role and risk of exposure to a large variety of harmful substances over their lifetime as an active firefighters, even with PPE firefighters can never be fully protected.
Firefighting and Parkinson’s
Firefighters respond to various types of fire including structural, wildland, chemical and vehicle fires. Such exposures subject firefighters to many harmful substances such as combustion products, by-products of combustion, diesel exhaust, building materials, asbestos, as well as exposure to ultraviolet radiation and performing shift work which could all lead to damaging health effects. Further, the smoke and atmosphere involving fires is complex and the released gases, vapours and particulates can contain a range of containments that are toxic to our nervous system, including carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, total petroleum hydrocarbons, polybrominated diphenyl ether, trihalomethanes, styrene, chlorinated solvents and metals such as lead and magnesium. Earlier this year, the Lancet, a medical journal, published a series of research articles also supporting an association between increased Parkinson’s Disease risk and exposure to chlorinated solvents and specific types of pesticides. Other studies have found that despite the use of PPE, toxic contaminates were detected on the bodies of firefighters including on their neck, wrists and face.
Our Client’s Story
Joe had lodged a WorkCover claim alleging exposure to hazardous chemical and chemical by products including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heavy metals over the course his employment performing firefighting duties significantly increased the risk of him developing Parkinson’s disease. The WorkCover agent, Gallagher Bassett, rejected Joe’s claim on the grounds that he had not sustained an injury arising out of or in the course of his employment and his employment was not a significant contributing factor to his claimed injury. The agent relied on the opinion of an Independent Medical Examiner (IME) who opined that Parkinson’s can occur in increased frequency in patients over 65 years of age without any significant trigger as art of the neurogenerative process. They also opined there was no convincing evidence that our client’s employment had been a significant contributing factor to his Parkinson’s disease. Unfortunately, and typically for occupational disease claims, the WorkCover agent failed to apply the correct legal test and consequently had not asked the IME the appropriate questions.
WorkCover and Occupational Disease
In Victoria there are two separate legal tests in which an entitlement to WorkCover compensation could be established for an Occupational disease:
- Arising out of or in the course of employment
Firstly, entitlement to compensation can be established if there is, or is likely to be, a sufficient causal connection between our client’s Parkinson’s disease and his employment with Fire Rescue Victoria (and its predecessors).
Our client must have been injured doing something that he was employed to do, or incidental to what he was employed to do. In other words, there must be a causal connection between the employment, its incident, and the injury.
- Significant increased risk
Secondly and alternatively, entitlement to compensation can be established if there was some characteristic, distinctive feature, or special risk due to the nature of our client’s employment as a firefighter with Fire Rescue Victoria (or its predecessors) that significantly increased his risk of developing Parkinson’s disease. This is quite separate from whether he can in fact show that there was any causal connection and is a lower threshold to meet.
This is the test Joe was relying on.
Our client was aggrieved by the Agent’s claim rejection and on behalf of our client we disputed the decision by commencing proceedings in the County of Court of Victoria.
We obtained a range of scientific evidence including research articles and occupational hygienist and toxicologist opinions supporting that firefighters, due to the nature of their role, are exposed to a range of toxic substances to the central nervous system that increases their risk of developing Parkinson’s disease.
A few months ahead of our client’s Court Hearing, the Agent, albeit with a denial of liability, has accepted to pay our client WorkCover statutory benefits compensation in relation his Parkinson’s disease. This now allows our client to seek medical and like services which will become more critical as his condition progresses, receive a limited period of weekly payments (due to being past retirement age) and in event he should pass away from his condition his family will be to claim funeral and related costs.
Our Clients Outcome and the Impact of this decision
Zaparas lawyers is thrilled to have assisted Joe in obtaining his positive claim outcome and the potential this has for other Parkinson’s suffers whose nature of work may have increased their risk of developing this unfortunate progressive condition. Whist this outcome is pleasing and provides reassurance Joe will be financially supported as he navigates his condition, his WorkCover journey is not uncommon among current and past workers who may be living with an occupational disease. Senior Associate and head of the Zaparas Lawyers Occupational and Dust Disease Practice, Kehela Vandenberg, states that WorkCover claimants who are suffering from an alleged occupational disease often face delays, stress and significant financial concerns due to WorkCover Agents repeatedly failing to apply the correct legal tests when assessing claims, even when supportive material and reminders of the tests are provided at the time of claim lodgment.
If you believe you have a illness or disease that may have been caused by your current or former work or the nature of your current or former work significantly increased your risk of developing or contracting your illness or disease we firstly recommend you consult your general practitioner or specialist and provide an occupational history, and secondly, given the complex nature and potential difficulties in having occupational disease claims accepted, we recommend you seek legal advice from a personal injury solicitor familiar with occupational disease claims.
*name changed for privacy reasons
