The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1916-12-08
POLITICS in INDUSTRIAL
INSURANCE INVESTIGATION
Industrial Insurance Commission Replies to Maenen and
Criticisms Of State Of Inspection and Accommodated
Il "Nqasterpece From Standpoint of Political Ex-
pediency, illogical Conclusions and MiSate"
ments of Fact'-Daiy Papers Refuse
to Handle Story


IG AJGSA
therefore, only be assumed that these
five cases were the most fragrant
irregularities" that your examiners
we're able to find among the entire
number other than those that were
fraudulently passed through the de-
partment by J. f. Gillies, the former
claim agent, and which amounted to
S20047.35, and for which he is now
serving a term in the penitentiary.
In none of the five cases mentioned
is there any ground for accusing the
department of gross neglect" More
over, the citation of these five cases
clearly shows that the eagerness OF
your inspectors to criticse and find
fault caused them to overlook i'm
portant features of the claims which
warranted their allowance, and if the
commission had failed to do so it
would have worked a great injustice
on the injured workmen concerned.
For example, it is charged that
Claimant No. 276SS should not have
been allowed further compensation
after the case was first closed with
an award of $1,000 for permanent par
tial disability. Briefly we will recite
the facts in this case upon which the
action of the commission stands:
The law requires that upon aggra-
walton of an injury in any case after
it has been closed the workman is
entitled to have the case reOpened at
any time in the future for further
compensation. In this case the claim
ant, CORTLAND Penny, workman en-
ployed by the Seattle Lighting Com
pany, sustained severe injuries by
falling from a building on September
5. 1913. These injuries consisted of
fractured arm, a fractured leg, a
compound fracture of the skull and a
fracture of the nose. Several opera
| tons were required to remove dead
bone before this unfortunate work
1
| November 5, 1914, at a greatly re
duced wage. The commission paid
him $1,000 for the permanent partial
disability, resulting, namely: Anky
/ losis of the knee, shortening of the
left leg, and permanent disability tC
the right wrist A few months after
returning to work Mr. Pennys injury
to his left leg became seriously ag
grayated and he was compelled tc
submit to an operation for the am
putation of the leg above the knee
The commission, therefore, in accord
anCe with the law, reopened the case
restoring him to further compensation
for time loss, and on July 5, 1916, the
present commission paid him an ad
ditiOnal sum Of $500 for further dis
ability, making a total award of $500
paid to him for permanent partial dis
ability, which is the maximum amour
provided by law. Every action of The
commission in this claim, it will thus
be seen, is strictly in accordance witt
the law.
OF the four other cases mentioned
in your report as an example of gross
neglect on the part of the commission
claim No. 338SS was that of a Tacoma
workman, John L. Lafferty, who was
employed by the ST. Paul Tacoma
/ Lumber Company, and who subse
quently suffered an amputation of his
foot as a result of an injury that he
sustained in August 1912 This
claimant was awarded $1,000 for The
loss Of that member after having suf
fered for 20 months from the injury
a great part of that time being con
fined in the hospital
Claim No. 253&3 was that of a boy
Patrick Kenney, employed by the VIII
lamette Casket Company of Tacoma
who had his finger crushed and wa.
awarded $3 for five days time loss
, Claim No 36424 was that of a work
q man, &. II. Clark, who was employed
2 by the state board of control at Crane
Mound, and who received an iniur,
, TO his hand in the course of employ
. ment and was paid SIS for 3 days
disability. Claim No. 29911 was tha
oil workman, Burton Johnson, VIII,
. WAS employed in a copper mine a
. CheweIah, and received an injury t.