Court Recognizes Bank Programmer as Work-Related Injury Victim After Intensive Typing Led to Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
The Labor Court in Beersheba recently recognized a programmer employed by Bank Leumi as a work injury victim after she developed carpal tunnel syndrome as a result of intensive typing. The plaintiff, 53, has worked for about three decades at the bank’s computer center. Her work is carried out through continuous, rapid typing and includes writing thousands of lines every day, meaning about 7 to 8 hours a day with her hands on the keyboard.
At some point she was diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), a nerve injury in the wrist that can cause, among other things, pain, numbness, weakness, or a feeling of tingling in the fingers. Following the diagnosis, she asked to be recognized as a work injury victim. In December 2021, the National Insurance Institute rejected her request on the grounds that no causal link had been proven between her working conditions and the illness, and she filed a claim with the court. Unusually, the proceedings only concluded about 4.5 years later, after the court appointed no fewer than three different experts, who disagreed on the question of causation. The first expert completely ruled out any connection between typing and CTS. The second found it appropriate to recognize the plaintiff’s illness only as a workplace accident, and the one who decided the matter was the third expert. He recognized a direct link between the work of typists and the development of CTS, and concluded that the programmer’s work pattern, based on the data presented to him and the accepted medical literature, was what was “responsible for the development of the syndrome.”
The programmer asked that his opinion be adopted, but the National Insurance Institute objected on the grounds that the more modern position denies the existence of a causal link, and that it should therefore be preferred over the outdated school of thought. However, Judge Ido Ben-Zur said that, in light of the principle that doubt in a social security proceeding operates in favor of the insured, he finds it appropriate to adopt the third expert’s opinion and recognize the plaintiff as a work injury victim. He clarified that even if the National Insurance Institute’s argument is accepted, according to which the pendulum has swung in recent years toward denying a causal link between typing and CTS, there is still, alongside this stricter approach, a more lenient medical view supporting such a link, which is recognized in the medical literature and among experts, and it is therefore legitimate to rule accordingly. He warned of the need to adopt one of the approaches in order to promote legal certainty: “In light of developments in the medical literature on this issue, the Institute would do well to examine the current medical literature, formulate its medical position and publish appropriate guidelines. Such guidelines are needed first and foremost in order to guide the Institute’s employees when examining claims of this type according to uniform and equal criteria. In addition, it appears that such guidelines may also help in deciding claims filed with the courts.”
As a result, the programmer was recognized as a work injury victim, and she was awarded 5,000 shekels in legal costs. • To read the full ruling, click here • The article is in cooperation with the Israeli legal website PsakDin • Counsel for the plaintiff: Attorney Yaakov Lihiani • Counsel for the defendant: Attorney Yelena Chukler • Attorney Gideon Fener handles National Insurance Institute matters • The author did not represent either side in the case • The PsakDin editorial team took part in preparing the article • Ynet is a partner on the PsakDin website
