Executive Order Presuming Workers With COVID-19 Can Receive Workers' Compensation

On Wednesday, May 6th, Gov. Newsom issued Executive Order N-62-20. This order states that any COVID-19-related illness of an employee is to be presumed to arise out of and in the course of employment for purposes of awarding workers’ compensation benefits if all of the following are satisfied:

  1. The employee tested positive for or was diagnosed with COVID-19 within 14 days after a day that the employee performed labor or services at their place of employment at their employer’s direction;

  2. The day the employee performed labor or services referenced in requirement (1) was on or after March 19, 2020;

  3. The employee’s place of employment was not the employee’s home or residence;

  4. Where requirement (1) is satisfied through a diagnosis of COVID-19, the diagnosis was done by a physician who holds a physician and surgeon license issued by the California Medical Board and that diagnosis is confirmed by further testing within 30 days of the date of the diagnosis.

This presumption is rebuttable and may be controverted by other evidence. However, unless rebutted, the WCAB must find in accordance with the presumption. The presumption only applies to dates of injury occurring through July 5, 2020.

The order also reduces the timeframe for insurers to make compensability decisions from the typical 90 days to 30 days. However, the order permits denials after this 30-day period based on new information.

The order states that an accepted claim for the COVID-19-related illness shall be eligible for all benefits applicable under the workers’ compensation laws, including full hospital, surgical, medical treatment, disability indemnity, and death benefits.

This executive order contradicts the general case law regarding infectious diseases. Generally, “the fact that an employee contracts a disease while employed or becomes disabled from the natural progress of a nonindustrial disease during employment will not establish the causal connection.” LaTourette v. W.C.A.B., 17 Cal. 4th 644, 654 (1998).