Purchase this story for only $7.99!
Add to CartFor access to all our articles, check out our subscription options.
Mar 19-20, 2026
Register today! 2026 conference topics: DWC Update AI with a Claims Focus Medical and Legal Et …
Mar 19, 2026
Mar 25, 2026
Career Services at California Lutheran University presents the Career & Intern Expo 2026, which wi …
One Comment
Log in to post a comment
Ernest Buongiorno Sep 8, 2021 a 9:08 am PDT
I Am in total agreement with Mr. Goldman on this. Many injured workers may be inmunocompromised, therefore increasing the risk of developing a serious condition as a result of contracting the virus ( whether vaccinated or not). Which by the way, if defendants insist on a live hearing, may be a compensable consequence to the industrial injury. We all know how cramped space is in the board’s courtrooms, at least in Van Nuys. To have at minimum 6 individuals ( where an interpreter is needed within close proximity to the applicant) in that enclosed environment with less than adequate ventilation, is just irresponsible. In addition to compromising the safety of all personnel within the building itself. I understand why some counsel are in favor of live hearings. However, there should be an option in place for those of us who oppose, such as a petition to object to a live hearing and request for virtual access.
Continuing virtual Trials at this point in the endemic just makes sense. It’s not about driving or parking. It’s about health, safety and welfare for all those involved in the system.