H2133 amends Section 45 of chapter 152 of the Massachusetts General Laws, which governs workers’ compensation. The bill adds language providing that if, after a medical examination, a registered physician determines an injured employee is fit to return to work and the employee refuses to do so, the employee’s right to compensation shall be suspended and compensation during the suspension period may be forfeited.
In practical terms, the bill would strengthen the consequences for refusing a return-to-work determination under the workers’ compensation system. It would give employers and insurers a clearer statutory basis to stop or potentially recover benefits when a claimant declines to resume work after being medically cleared, while leaving the physician’s fitness determination as the triggering condition.
Impact
The bill would amend chapter 152, section 45 of the General Laws, altering the rules for suspension and forfeiture of workers’ compensation benefits. Its effect would be to expand the circumstances under which compensation can be withheld when an employee refuses to return to work after a physician’s fitness-for-duty finding, potentially affecting injured workers, employers, insurers, and claims administrators.
Sentiment
No committee transcript or recorded vote is available for this bill, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill text and its sponsorship, the measure appears to reflect a pro-employer, cost-containment approach to workers’ compensation administration, but the available record does not show broader legislative sentiment.
Contention
The likely point of contention is whether the bill strikes the right balance between preventing abuse of workers’ compensation benefits and protecting injured employees who may have legitimate reasons for not returning to work. Supporters would likely favor the bill for discouraging refusal of medically approved work and reducing benefit costs, while opponents may argue it could pressure workers back into jobs prematurely or create disputes over whether a claimant is truly able to return.