WAGE LOSS AFTER SEVERANCE AGREEMENTS? In an unpublished opinion, a panel of the Court of Appeals held that, if an employee commits to retire and has no intention to work again for a different employer, wage loss from an intervening injury is attributable to the retirement decision and not to the injury. Stiven v General Motors Corp (Case No. 294579, December 16, 2010). In the Stiven case, plaintiff executed an irrevocable special attrition plan (SAP) relative to her employment with General Motors. Under the terms of the SAP, plaintiff had to retire from General Motors no later than January 1, 2007. In return, she would receive a lump sum payment of $35,000.00 and a regular pension. On November 29, 2006, plaintiff sustained a work-related injury to her right hand and wrist. She was limited to one-handed work. She was unable to perform her regular job as an electrician, and performed accommodated work until the year-end plant shut down, commencing December 23, 2006. Consistent with the SAP, plaintiff retired on January 1, 2007. Plaintiff subsequently filed an application for workers’ compensation benefits. The Magistrate granted an open award of wage loss benefits. The Workers’ Compensation Appellate Commission (WCAC) affirmed the Magistrate’s ruling. General Motors appealed to the Court of Appeals, arguing that plaintiff was not entitled to wage loss benefits because any wage loss that she incurred was attributable to her decision to retire, not to her disability. The Court of Appeals framed the relevant issue as follows: ""Whether plaintiff, while intending and being required to retire from GM on January 1, 2007, firmly intended to retire from any and all active employment thereafter,and, if she indeed intended to seek post-GM employment,whether her work-related injury prevented her from obtaining such employment, thereby causing wage loss."" The Court of Appeals determined that there was insufficient factual development on that issue and noted that neither the Magistrate nor the WCAC directly answered the question. Therefore, the case was reversed and remanded to the Magistrate for further hearing. In summary, a severance agreement may preclude receipt of workers’ compensation wage loss benefits in retirement if the employer can establish that the employee had a firm intention to never work again for the same or a different employer. 01/13/11