Were you fired?
You may be recognized as having had a work accident
A ruling of the labor court recognized mental harm caused to the employee as a result of his dismissal.
The ruling was given even though the psychiatric opinions attached to the case did not unequivocally state that the plaintiff had a disorder, but only that he was suffering from a mental reaction to his dismissal
Bini Ashkenazi
07/26/2022
Tuesday, July 26, 2022, 11:15 a.m. Updated: 11:24 a.m.
Share on Facebook
Share on WhatsApp
Share on Twitter
Share by email
Share in general
Comments
Comments
work accident.
The immediate ossification is a physical injury, but what about a mental beating? (Photo: ShutterStock)
Getting fired from a job is considered a difficult event for any person.
Now, a ruling by the Regional Labor Court from Haifa confirms the difficult feelings sometimes experienced by the fired.
The interesting point in the judgment is that it recognized only a mental reaction and not a psychiatric disorder as a sufficient reason to recognize the plaintiff as someone who has moved from work.
The lawsuit was filed by an employee at a sewage treatment plant in the north of the country.
The employee, whose name has been withheld from publication, was fired at the end of 2015 and then he complained about the deterioration of his mental state, despite this the National Insurance rejected his claim and hence the employee filed a lawsuit with the Labor Court.
In order to examine whether there is a causal connection between the deterioration of the plaintiff's mental state and his dismissal, the plaintiff attached a psychiatric opinion from which it emerged that he had mental symptoms after the dismissal.
Since the opinion attached by the plaintiff failed to indicate a causal link between the deterioration of his mental state and his dismissal, the court appointed another psychiatrist on his behalf, whose opinion was also inconclusive.
The court ruled: this is a work accident (Photo: ShutterStock)
Not just physical damage
Despite this, the lawsuit was accepted - as Judge Eilat Shomroni-Bernstein, and the public representatives: Amir Hunt and Nira Green wrote:
"In this case, two medical experts from the field of psychiatry were appointed. Both experts had difficulty determining that the plaintiff has a psychiatric disorder as of today.
However, the two experts They determined that the plaintiff suffered a mental reaction after his dismissal and as a result of his dismissal. The first expert, Prof. Yuval Melamed, determined that "the hearing did cause some kind of mental reaction at the time of the incident and it is possible that there was a temporary reaction of sleep disturbances and stress surrounding the incident." The other expert, Dr. Rami Aharonson, He stated that "the plaintiff suffered for a period of time from an adjustment disorder after his dismissal and that it can be assumed that this adjustment disorder would not have appeared if not for the dismissal".
The court mentioned that in the past "it was ruled that in view of the fact that work injury insurance also confers a right to healing and rehabilitation, in the category of injuries that would result in the recognition of an 'accident' as an 'occupational accident' would come not only injuries that resulted in loss of work capacity but also those injuries that required healing and rehabilitation."
And therefore "even needing medical treatment as a result of an accident is sufficient for the accident to be recognized as a 'work accident', and there is no requirement that the insured be entitled to injury compensation precisely in order for the accident in which the victim was injured to be recognized as such."
As a result, the court ruled that it was a work accident.
More in Walla!
The solution to knee pain is closer than ever - thanks to technology in the shoe
Submitted by Apostrophe
Of money
Tags
The Labour Court
work accident
Dismissal
