28 C.F.R. § 301.204

Continuation of lost-time wages

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Once approved, the inmate shall receive lost-time wages until the inmate:

(1) Is released;

(2) Is transferred to another institution for reasons unrelated to the work injury;

(3) Returns to the pre-injury work assignment;

(4) Is reassigned to another work area or program for reasons unrelated to the sustained work injury, or is placed into Disciplinary Segregation; or,

(5) Refuses to return to a regular work assignment or to a lighter duty work assignment after medical certification of fitness for such duty.

(b) An inmate medically certified as fit for return to work shall sustain no monetary loss due to a required change in work assignment. Where there is no light duty or regular work assignment available at the same rate of pay as the inmate's pre-injury work assignment, the difference shall be paid in lost-time wages. Lost-time wages are paid until a light duty or regular work assignment at the same pay rate as the inmate's pre-injury work assignment is available.

[55 FR 9296, Mar. 12, 1990. Redesignated at 59 FR 2667, Jan. 18, 1994]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2014–2014 · leading case: Craig Cesal v. Fed. Prison Indus., In (7th Cir. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Craig Cesal v. Fed. Prison Indus., In (7th Cir. 2014). · cites it 3× “Cesal then sued under the Inmate Accident Compensation Act and its regulations, see 28 C.F.R. § 301.204 (b), alleging that Greenville’s prison administrators should not have denied his application for lost‐time wages, and requesting lost‐time wages until a light‐duty work…”

Cesal v. Fed. Prison Indus., Inc., 560 F. App'x 585 (7th Cir. 2014). · cites it 3× “Cesal then sued under the Inmate Accident Compensation Act and its regulations, see 28 C.F.R. § 301.204 (b), alleging that Greenville’s prison administrators should not have denied his application for lost-time wages, and requesting lost-time wages until a light-duty work…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.