Ala. Code § 25-5-57(a)(3) sets forth a rather bizarre list of 34 body parts or combinations of body parts with a corresponding number of weeks a worker may be compensated if he is unfortunate enough to be injured while at work. Of course, compensation is never a dollar-for-dollar replacement of what the worker has lost. Instead, the injured worker generally receives no more than 66 ⅔ percent of his average weekly wage. For example, if a job-related accident or illness causes permanent deafness to a worker’s ear, the worker is entitled to compensation for 53 weeks. When a worker loses his index finger due to an on-the-job accident, he receives compensation for 43 weeks. If a worker is minus a big toe after a job-related accident, he’ll receive 32 weeks compensation, and for a missing thumb, he’ll be entitled to 62 weeks of compensation. Lose an eye, you’ll get 124 weeks; a leg will get you 200 weeks; an arm will get you 22 weeks and a foot 139 weeks.
In years past, many practitioners routinely ignored the table of scheduled members because a doctor would almost always rate disability to the body as a whole as well as to the scheduled member. When the rating was to the body as a whole, the practitioner applied the 300 weeks from Ala. Code § 25-5-57(a)(3)g. The practitioner then worked the calculations using the formula for the body as a whole numbers and as well as the scheduled member numbers and argued for the higher figure. The Supreme Court attempted to apply the brakes to this practice in Ex parte Drummond Company, Inc., 837 So. 2d 831 (Ala. 2002), a decision which caused excitement, if short lived, among the defense bar. That excitement has been tempered by the practice of plaintiff’s lawyers who have simply shifted the focus to proving that “the effects of the loss of the member extend to other parts of the body and interfere with their efficiency.” Ex parte Drummond, 837 So. 2d at 834. In such cases, “the schedule allowance for the lost member is not exclusive.” Id.
There appears to be no reason or rhyme to the table of scheduled members and it is absolutely unfair to call an injury permanent and only offer compensation for such temporary periods based on the very limited number of weeks provided in the schedule. This is especially true when one considers that a worker injured on the job is entitled to receive no payment whatsoever for pain and suffering, mental anguish, loss of consortium, and the like. There has to be a better way than this body part system.