Employers frustrated with injured police officers and firefighters who obstruct efforts to get them back to work, or retire, will applaud the recent Superior Court decision upholding the dismissal of a Lawrence Police Department (“LPD”) officer. Bistany v. Civil Service Commission and City of Lawrence, Essex Superior Court No. 2013-00726-A. The officer defied the City’s efforts to determine whether, after three years collecting 41-111F benefits, she had reached a medical endpoint and should return to work or retire. When the officer’s neurosurgeon said that he could not answer the permanent disability question without an updated MRI, the LPD ordered her to submit to the test. The officer refused, arguing that the City was trying to dictate her medical treatment. The City dismissed her for disobeying the order, and the Civil Service Commission ruled that the City had just cause to do so.
In upholding the dismissal, the Court noted that the officer had a financial incentive to delay forced retirement because 41-111F provided 100% of her pay while she would receive only 72% of her pay for a disability retirement. The Court went on to state that an MRI was merely a diagnostic test and that, by ordering the test, the LPD was not overruling her desire to treat her injuries with physical therapy rather than surgery. Further, the Court agreed with the Commission that “although the LPD does not have authority to dictate an officer’s medical care, the LPD has the right, in order to properly manage its personnel and budget, reasonably to require certain information necessary to enable it to evaluate
