(There are three basic kinds of mental stress cases, physical-mental, mental-physical, and mental-mental. In 1992 the statute was changed to add two new sections under 287.120, 8 and 9, which provide:
"8. Mental injury resulting from work related stress does not arise out of and in the course of the employment, unless it is demonstrated that the stress is work related and was extraordinary and unusual. The amount of work stress shall be measured by objective standards and actual events.
9. A mental injury is not considered to arise out of and in the course of the employment if it resulted from any disciplinary action, work evaluation, job transfer, layoff, demotion, termination or any similar action taken in good faith by the employer."
In Carnal v Pride Cleaners, Injury No. 00-169544, (LIRC) 2003, the Commission ruled that an employee who had an on-th-job "panic attack" could get workers? compensation benefits due to the poor condition of her work environment, and the fact that her ex-husband was her supervisor. Those factors made her mental stress "extraordinary and unusual" when compared to other workers.
In Powell v State of Missouri, Department of Corrections, (LIRC), 2/26/02, compensation was denied to a corrections officer on the execution detail on death row, because there was no proof that his stress was any greater than other officers that had "similarly situated" positions even though the stress was extraordinary and unusual compared to other officers who did not work on death row, that is not the standard. See Williams v DePaul Health Center, below, 1999.
In Thomas v City of Springfield, Mo, (LIRC) 2002, compensation was denied to an 18 year police officer who was transferred to the Major Case Squad Response Team (MCRT) which involved homicides, kidnappings, rapes and other major crimes, which involved significant job stress, claimant shot himself at home the night before he was supposed to testify in a murder trial where he had taken part in the investigation. Claimant had spoken to several people about how he intended to kill himself. He could relate all of the details right up to the shooting. Compensation was denied because the stress the claimant suffered, even while a member of MCRT, was no greater than the stress than any other detective might endure while carrying out their job tasks. It therefore, although overwhelming for him at the time of the injury, was not so "extraordinary and unusual as to be compensable under Section 287.120.8. (ALJ Zerrer)
(NOTE: This case and the Williams case set forth below, sets forth the new standard, namely, that the stress must be "extraordinary and unusual" as compared to the stress of similar workers in the similar positions in the employment were subjected to, as judged by objective standards." This was the hope of the enactment of Section 287.120.8 and 9, and it appears the courts have recognized that to this date.)
In Maco v DBL Services, Inc., (LIRC) (2001) the Commission distinguished "mental-mental" cases under the strict guidelines of Section 287.120.8, holding they did not apply to physical injuries resulting from work-related stress, here, a fatal heart attack. The Court held that the employee was under significant stress which caused the fatal heart attack, the requirements of Section 287.120.8 did not apply.
In Russell v Board of Education, (LIRC), 2/2/01, the employee failed to prove "excessive" hours, worked as executive 50+ hours a week, no treatment by psychiatrist, no expert depos, de minimus treatment, significant domestic trauma, attorney criticized for leading questions by ALJ. ( ALJ Denigan)