A crane collapsed due to the weather, Ramat Hasharon.
November 19, 2023/Documentation in social networks according to Article 27 A of the Copyright Law
In the case before us, the plaintiff began working in 2008 as an employee of a company engaged in providing garbage removal services, when his job was to drive and operate a crane truck that collects clippings from the streets of the city of Gan Yavne.
He would leave his house every day around 5:30 in the morning, work about 8.5 hours and on Fridays - about 5-6 hours.
Seemingly, a simple and risk-free job: these are very short trips, from house to house, when after a few meters the truck stops and the truck crew is required to use the crane to collect the piles of garbage left by the residents.
At the end of the collection, every day, the driver and another worker arrived at the spill site, in the industrial area in Beer Tovia, emptied the contents of the truck, and retraced their steps for another round of collection.
Another and essential detail in this story is that the crane truck with which the plaintiff worked had fixed rods on its side, "sticks", near the truck cabin, with which the crane and its bucket are operated.
Most of the modern crane trucks are equipped with a detachable remote control, but in this case, in order to operate the crane, he had to stand next to the truck's sticks and watch how the crane lifts the waste into the truck box.
For this purpose, he grabbed the two sticks to operate the crane, and at the same time he turned his body back to the tree trunk and raised his head at uncomfortable angles while turning his neck, in order to follow the crane, from the moment the tree trunk and waste was collected on the street until it entered the box and vice versa.
Not easy to work on Crane/ShutterStock
And so, during his seven years of work, he was required to turn his head quite a few times - it is estimated that it is no less than about 10,000 neck turns.
Does it look like a recipe for neck disaster?
Rightfully so.
In December 2020, during another working day, he suddenly felt an intense pain that pierced his neck.
As mentioned, in his testimony he complained about this to his employer, but he begged him to stay: "Do yourself a favor, try to hold on for the day," he was told.
At the end of that working day, he says that another problem emerged: his fingers fell asleep.
An MRI scan that was performed clarified the seriousness of his condition - he underwent emergency surgery in which three vertebrae in the cervical spine were opened and fixed.
But his life did not get back on track: he continued to suffer from terrible pain and lost his ability to work.
At this low point in his life, he turned to a lawyer who filed a lawsuit on his behalf, claiming that it was a work accident that he suffered on that day in December 2020, after he moved his neck forcefully and suddenly felt pain.
The official of the National Insurance Institute stated that the condition of the aforementioned person does not result from an accident but from a "natural" medical condition and therefore rejected the claim.
Check suitability for treatment
Israeli development: a scientific solution to body acne with over 90% success
In collaboration with Rivka Zaida Laboratories
Rejected the lawsuit on the grounds of "natural illness"/Reuven Castro
At this point, the driver turned to the lawyer Gil Ben Ari, an expert in insurance and tort law, who filed another claim, on a completely different ground: 'microtrauma'.
The difference between the causes is essential and very relevant to countless other work-related victims who may find themselves falling through the cracks.
The language of the law states that an injury at work will be defined as one of two: a work accident that happened on a certain day, during and as a result of work.
Alternatively, an occupational disease - an illness that workers contracted as a result of their work (as employees or self-employed), provided that it is one of the diseases that appear in the list of occupational diseases in the National Insurance regulations.
And what relief will all those workers receive who suffered physical damage that was not caused by an accident or by an illness that is listed in the list of illnesses that has not been updated for many years?
"The Labor Court understood that there is a buyer here and formulated an additional type of injury, which does not exist in the legislation: 'microtrauma', which is defined, among other things, as a physical impairment resulting from repetitive actions during work, which are similar to each other, and cause cumulative damage over time," notes Attorney Ben Ari.
According to him, "The claim was filed on the grounds of microtrauma, even though National Insurance publishes on its official website that 'the neck movements in the type of work of an operator, performed in different directions and angles' do not constitute a basis for a microtrauma claim."
The claim was accompanied by medical opinions from an occupational expert and an orthopedist who determined that the injury to the cervical spine, for which he was operated on and his neck vertebrae were fixed, was caused during and as a result of his work due to the many turns of the neck. The medical experts on behalf of the plaintiff determined that his condition resulted from his work and referred to medical studies in the world, in relation to operators who suffered in a similar condition to that of the plaintiff.
After conducting evidence, he appointed The court appointed a medical expert on its behalf to rule on the issue, who determined that in view of the plaintiff's work over the years and the many neck twists he was forced to do, a causal connection between his condition and his work must be recognized. After receiving the opinion, the National Insurance withdrew its position, and in a compromise agreement signed between the National Insurance Institute and the plaintiff's attorney, it was agreed that the claim would be accepted and that he would be recognized as a work casualty according to the microtrauma theory.
Attorney Gil Ben Ari/Moor Studio
Attorney Ben Ari concludes: "This is a precedent ruling concerning repetitive neck movements and is relevant to anyone whose work requires them to twist their neck 'strongly'.
In light of the decision, the National Insurance must correct its website, and invite any employee who suffers from myelopathy or injury to the cervical spinal cord and whose work involves turning the neck to the end of the range of motion, to submit a claim in order to be recognized as a work injury.
"On the merits of the case, the aforementioned suffers from a severe functional impairment and was recognized as disabled with a general disability at a rate of 100%.
The meaning of being recognized as a work casualty, apart from a high monthly allowance from the National Insurance, is also the filing of a tort claim against the employer who did not take care of the remote control and used a truck with sticks."
More on the same topic:
Claims