In late March 2020, William “Bill” Bolds was one of the first Philly cops to fall ill with COVID. Six feet, eight inches tall, and 300lbs, 53-year-old Bolds spent 20 days in an induced coma. “I am not the type of guy that scares easily,” said Bolds to the local press at the time. “But when they said ventilator, I was very, very scared. I just did not want to go on a vent. I knew a vent was bad news.”
Bolds filed petitions in April 2022, arguing that the City of Philadelphia had improperly stopped payments that he claimed were workers’ compensation benefits. His case stemmed from a May 2020 COVID-19 diagnosis, which he alleged he contracted while on duty. After reporting his illness, the city categorized his absence as e-time, a designation that allowed employees to receive full salary without depleting sick or vacation time. However, in March 2022, the city ended these payments, prompting Bolds to file for reinstatement of benefits and penalties against the city.
The city denied liability for Bolds’ illness as a work-related injury and issued a Notice of Workers’ Compensation Denial in January 2022, asserting that there was no evidence that his COVID-19 diagnosis was caused by his work as a police officer.
Bolds testified that he had notified his supervisor about his belief that he contracted COVID-19 at work, in a series of city-wide drug raids in March. However, the city’s risk management deputy finance director, Barry Scott, stated that employees were required to submit a COPA-II form to report work-related injuries, which Bolds never completed. Scott also testified that e-time was introduced during the pandemic to ensure that employees who contracted COVID-19 could maintain financial stability regardless of whether the illness was work-related.
Additionally, the city presented testimony from Lieutenant Donald Lowenthal, an infection control officer, who explained that all officers who were out with COVID-19 were classified under e-time, irrespective of how they contracted the virus.
The Workers’ Compensation Judge ruled in favor of the city, finding that e-time payments were not workers’ compensation benefits but rather a temporary measure implemented during the pandemic. The judge also found that Bolds failed to properly notify the city of a work-related injury under the legal requirements.
The Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board upheld the judge’s decision, and the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania has now affirmed it as well. The court ruled that the intent of payments, rather than the fact that payments were made, determines whether they qualify as workers’ compensation. In this case, the evidence showed that e-time was not meant to acknowledge work-related injuries, but was instead a general emergency leave category used during the pandemic.
The court also noted that Bolds never formally requested to transition from e-time to injured on duty benefits until after his payments stopped, further weakening his claim. Additionally, it pointed out that the city did not violate the Workers’ Compensation Act since it had issued a denial of liability and had never formally accepted Bolds’ illness as work-related.
With this ruling, Bolds is not entitled to the reinstatement of workers’ compensation benefits, and the city is not required to continue payments for his COVID-19-related absence. The decision highlights the importance of following proper procedures for reporting workplace injuries and underscores that not all employer-provided leave benefits are equivalent to workers’ compensation.
