Printing - FECA-PT2 - National Association of Letter Carriers

2-0804-17 Work-Connected Events Which Are Not Factors of Employment
17. Work-Connected Events Which Are Not Factors of Employment.
a. The Cutler Rule. As the ECAB stated in the case of Lillian Cutler, 28 ECAB 125:
Workers' compensation law does not apply to each and every illness that is somehow
related to an employee's employment... Where the disability results from his emotional
reaction to his regular or specially assigned work duties or to a requirement imposed by the
employment, the disability comes within the coverage of the Act.
This concept has come to be known as the Cutler rule.
When an employee experiences emotional stress in carrying out assigned employment duties, or
has fear and anxiety regarding his or her ability to carry out these duties, a resulting disability is
considered to have "arisen out of and in the course of employment." Similarly covered is a
disability arising from a special assignment or requirement imposed by the employing
establishment. The assignment need not have been unusually strenuous, as long as the medical
evidence shows that it caused the claimed condition. The Board continues:
On the other hand, the disability is not covered where it results from such frustration from
not being permitted to work in a particular environment or to hold a particular position.
In Cutler, where the employee became emotionally upset over not receiving an anticipated
promotion, the Board held that:
the resulting disability does not have such a relationship to the employee's assigned duties
as to be regarded as arising from the employment. The emotional reaction in such
circumstances can be truly described as self-generated and as not arising out of and in the
course of employment.
"Self-generated" in this context apparently refers to the employee's voluntary application for a
higher position, when to seek promotion was not a requirement of the position she already held.
b. Reassignment. The Board has applied the Cutler standard in other cases largely by
example, always seeming to distinguish between the performance (or the results) of actual
work duties, and dissatisfaction with the structure of the work or position. Thus, under the
standard set forth in Cutler, it is clear that reassignment is not a factor of employment:
Dario G. Gonzales, 33 ECAB 119; Clair Stokes, Docket No. 82-508, issued May 24, 1982;
John A. Snowberger, Docket No. 85-2076, issued January 31, 1986; Robert C. McKenzie,
Docket No. 85-532, issued May 10, 1985; Teresa M. Lacona, Docket No. 88-1262, issued
May 8, 1989.
However, the case of Brenda Getz, 39 ECAB 245, presents a different situation. Here the
employee alleged that she had an emotional reaction to a detail assignment to another city
because of the working conditions involved. The Board concluded that the detail assignment
constituted specially assigned work duty within the meaning of Cutler and therefore any disability
arising out of an emotional reaction to the assignment would be covered.
FECA-PT2 Printed: 06/08/2010 196