Arizona
Arizona Workers' Compensation Laws: Benefits, Deadlines, and Your Rights
Arizona requires virtually every employer to carry workers' compensation insurance. If you are hurt on the job, you receive medical care and partial wage replacement regardless of who was at fault, and in exchange you generally give up the right to sue your employer in court.
Is workers' comp required in Arizona?
Arizona workers' compensation coverage reaches the state, each county, city, town, municipal corporation and school district, and every person who employs workers regularly employed in the same business or establishment under a contract of hire. There is no payroll threshold and no hours-per-week minimum, so a single regularly employed worker triggers the obligation.
A.R.S. 23-902(A) does carry two qualifiers worth knowing. Domestic servants are excepted, although an exempted employer of domestic servants may come under the chapter voluntarily by complying with its provisions and the commission's rules. And the coverage test is "regularly employed," which the same subsection defines as employment in the employer's usual trade, business, profession or occupation, whether continuous throughout the year or only for a portion of the year.
The program is administered by the Industrial Commission of Arizona (ICA), the state agency that oversees claims, disputes, and insurer compliance. A.R.S. 23-961(A) gives an employer exactly two ways to secure coverage: insuring the payment of compensation with an insurance carrier authorized by the director of the Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions, or furnishing the commission satisfactory proof of financial ability to pay compensation directly, alone or through a workers' compensation pool the commission has approved. Subsection B adds that an employer may not secure compensation by any other mechanism, and that no substitute program may be marketed, offered, or sold as workers' compensation. An employer that fails to carry required coverage can be sued directly by an injured worker, loses the exclusive-remedy protection, and faces additional penalties under A.R.S. 23-901 et seq.
Arizona covers not only traditional employment relationships but also workers in some categories that other states often exclude. If you are unsure whether your employment is covered, the ICA provides guidance and free ombudsman services to help injured workers navigate the system.
Benefits you can receive
Arizona workers' compensation covers a wide range of benefits designed to replace income and restore your health. Medical benefits are paid in full, with no copays, for all treatment that is reasonable, necessary, and causally related to your work injury. There is no dollar cap on medical care while you remain in active treatment.
Wage-replacement benefits for temporary total disability (TTD) are paid at 66 2/3% of your average monthly wage. Arizona calculates the base on your average monthly earnings rather than a weekly figure, and the maximum benefit is set by statute and adjusted periodically.
A waiting period applies to the wage-replacement side. A.R.S. 23-1062(D) provides that compensation is not paid for the first seven days after the injury, that compensation begins on the eighth day if the incapacity extends beyond seven days, and that if the disability continues for one week beyond those first seven days, compensation is computed from the date of the injury. In practical terms, the payback to day one turns on your disability lasting a second full week, not on a shorter day count.
Beyond TTD, the ICA administers the full spectrum of benefit categories: Temporary Partial Disability (TPD) when you can return to limited duty at reduced pay, Permanent Partial Disability (PPD) for lasting impairment rated by schedule or percentage, Permanent Total Disability (PTD) for the most severe injuries, vocational rehabilitation to help you return to work, and death and survivor benefits for fatal injuries. Most claims ultimately resolve through a settlement or a Notice of Claim Status becoming final. For a rough sense of what that settlement could total, try our Arizona workers' comp settlement calculator.
Deadlines: reporting your injury and filing a claim
Arizona runs two separate clocks after a work injury, and missing either one can cost you your benefits.
The first clock is the claim-filing deadline. You must file a written workers' compensation claim with the ICA within 1 year of the date of injury or within 1 year of the date the injury became manifest (important for occupational diseases or conditions that develop gradually). This is a strict deadline. Filing a claim with the ICA is separate from notifying your employer.
The second clock falls on the employer: your employer is required to report your injury to its insurance carrier and to the ICA within 10 days of learning about it. You should notify your employer in writing as soon as possible after any work-related injury, both to protect your rights and to start the employer's reporting obligation. Prompt written notice also protects your claim if there is any later dispute about when or how the injury occurred.
Because Arizona's 1-year statute of limitations is among the shortest in the country, injured workers should file their claim with the ICA promptly rather than assuming the employer's report covers them.
Choosing your doctor
Arizona does not give an injured worker a free hand to pick and switch treating physicians. A.R.S. 23-1071(B) is blunt: "No employee may change doctors without the written authorization of the insurance carrier, the commission or the attending physician." Whatever latitude you have in selecting a provider at the outset, a later change runs through one of those three.
A second layer applies if your employer directs your medical care. Under A.R.S. 23-1070(A), a private employer that secures compensation in one of the two ways described in A.R.S. 23-961(A) may, instead of paying premiums for medical, surgical and hospital benefits, provide those benefits to injured employees itself. In that directed-care arrangement the employer or its carrier controls the treatment. A.R.S. 23-1062(B) refers in passing to a carrier, self-insurance pool, or employer "that does not direct care pursuant to section 23-1070," which confirms that both models exist side by side in Arizona.
There is a safety valve when care is being directed. If the treatment being furnished by the employer gives reasonable ground to believe an employee's health, life, or recovery is endangered or impaired by it, A.R.S. 23-1070(E) lets the commission order a change of physicians or other conditions, either on the employee's application or on its own motion, and A.R.S. 23-1070.01 provides an expedited hearing on a change-of-physician request where the delay would cause immediate and irreparable harm or where all parties stipulate. If the employer does not promptly comply with such an order, the employee may elect to have care provided through the special fund under A.R.S. 23-1065.
This matters in practice. The first medical record of your injury can shape how the claim is evaluated, and if you disagree with the treating physician's findings, the route to a different provider is a written authorization or a commission order, not a unilateral switch. Changing doctors without authorization can put your benefits at risk.
Keep detailed records of all medical appointments, diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and any restrictions your doctor places on your ability to work. Those records form the foundation of your claim, especially if a dispute arises over the extent of your disability or the cost of ongoing care.
Can you sue your employer? The exclusive-remedy rule
Arizona workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy for most work injuries. The no-fault bargain means that covered employees receive guaranteed benefits without having to prove the employer was negligent, but they also give up the right to bring a civil lawsuit against their employer for the same injury.
A.R.S. 23-1022(A) states that rule, and it states its exceptions in the same breath. There are four worth knowing.
First, Arizona is unusual in letting an employee opt out of the system in advance. Section 23-1022(A) makes compensation the exclusive remedy "except as provided by section 23-906," and A.R.S. 23-906(A) provides that it is optional with employees to accept compensation under the chapter or to reject its provisions and retain the right to sue the employer as provided by law. The rejection is made by a written notice, signed and dated by the employee and given to the employer in duplicate, and section 23-906(C) requires it to be filed with the employer before the injury. Section 23-906(E) adds an important fallback: if the employer failed to post the required notice or to keep blank rejection forms available, an employee injured during that period is not deemed to have accepted the chapter and may either take compensation or maintain an action against the employer.
Second, an employee may sue where the injury is caused by the employer's wilful misconduct. The test is narrower than it sounds. Section 23-1022(B) defines wilful misconduct as "an act done knowingly and purposely with the direct object of injuring another," and subsection A additionally requires that the act causing the injury be the personal act of the employer, of a partner if the employer is a partnership, or of an elective officer if the employer is a corporation, and that the act indicate a wilful disregard of the life, limb, or bodily safety of employees. Reckless or grossly negligent conduct does not satisfy it. The same subsection applies a parallel test to a co-employee's own wilful misconduct.
Third, you can bring a third-party tort claim against anyone other than your employer who contributed to your injury. A common example is a negligent equipment manufacturer or a careless driver who caused a vehicle accident during your work duties. A third-party recovery may be subject to a lien by the workers' comp insurer.
Fourth, if your employer was uninsured (and therefore not in compliance with A.R.S. 23-901 et seq.), you may sue the employer in civil court and the employer cannot use the exclusive-remedy defense.
If you were hurt at work in Arizona
Taking the right steps after a work injury protects both your health and your legal rights.
Notify your employer in writing as soon as possible. Even if you feel the injury is minor, a written record establishes the date and circumstances and triggers your employer's 10-day reporting obligation to the ICA and insurer.
Get medical care right away. Find out whether your employer directs care under A.R.S. 23-1070, and do not change doctors without written authorization from the insurance carrier, the ICA, or your attending physician, which A.R.S. 23-1071(B) requires. Follow your doctor's treatment plan and keep all records.
File your written claim with the ICA before the 1-year deadline. Do not wait to see how the injury develops; filing preserves your rights even if the full extent of harm is not yet clear.
Keep copies of everything: your written notice to the employer, the ICA claim form, all medical records, correspondence from the insurer, and any documentation of missed work and lost wages.
If your claim is denied, disputed, or cut off, contact the ICA ombudsman or get a free case evaluation from an Arizona workers' comp lawyer on contesting the insurer's decision (attorney advertising). Attorneys who handle workers' comp cases commonly work on contingency, meaning you pay nothing upfront.
For background on how Arizona's statutes of limitations work more broadly, see the Arizona statute of limitations page.
This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Workers' compensation rules vary by state and change, and benefit amounts and deadlines depend on the specific facts. For advice about a specific claim, consult a licensed workers' compensation attorney in Arizona.
Related pages:
More Arizona Laws
- Arizona At-Will Employment Laws
- Arizona Car Accident Laws
- Arizona Final Paycheck Laws
- Arizona Slip and Fall Laws
- Arizona Statute of Limitations
Frequently Asked Questions
Is workers' comp required in Arizona?
Yes, for essentially every employer with a regularly employed worker. A.R.S. 23-902(A) subjects the state, counties, cities, towns, municipal corporations, school districts, and every person who employs workers regularly employed in the same business or establishment under a contract of hire, except domestic servants, whose employers may opt in voluntarily. A.R.S. 23-961(A) allows only two ways to secure coverage: insurance from a carrier authorized by the director of the Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions, or proof to the commission of financial ability to pay compensation directly, alone or through a commission-approved workers' compensation pool. Subsection B bars securing compensation by any other mechanism. An employer that fails to comply loses the exclusive-remedy protection and can be sued directly by an injured worker.
How long does workers' comp last in Arizona?
Medical benefits continue as long as treatment is reasonable and necessary for your work injury. Wage-replacement benefits for temporary total disability continue while you are unable to work, subject to ICA review. Permanent disability benefits are calculated based on the degree of impairment and can continue long-term. The ICA reviews the status of claims at intervals and either closes them or continues benefits based on medical evidence.
How much does workers' comp pay in Arizona?
Temporary total disability benefits are paid at 66 2/3% of your average monthly wage, subject to a maximum set by statute. Arizona calculates benefits on a monthly basis rather than a weekly figure. Under A.R.S. 23-1062(D) no compensation is paid for the first seven days after the injury, compensation begins on the eighth day if the incapacity extends beyond seven days, and if the disability continues for one week beyond those first seven days, compensation is computed from the date of injury. Because the maximum is periodically updated, check with the ICA or your claims administrator for the current figure.
Can I be fired while on workers' comp in Arizona?
Arizona has an explicit statutory protection. Under the Arizona Employment Protection Act, A.R.S. 23-1501(A)(3)(c)(iii), an employee has a claim against an employer that terminated the employment relationship in retaliation for the exercise of rights under the workers' compensation statutes in chapter 6 of title 23. That is a statutory wrongful-termination claim under section 23-1501 rather than a free-floating common-law public policy tort, and section 23-1501 also governs which remedies are available. Federal laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act may add protections if your injury constitutes a disability. Consult an employment or workers' comp attorney if you believe you were terminated in retaliation.
Can I choose my own doctor in Arizona?
Not without limits. A.R.S. 23-1071(B) provides that no employee may change doctors without the written authorization of the insurance carrier, the commission, or the attending physician. Separately, if your employer directs your care under A.R.S. 23-1070(A), the employer or its carrier controls the treatment; in that situation a change of physician comes through a commission order under A.R.S. 23-1070(E), with an expedited hearing available under A.R.S. 23-1070.01. Do not switch providers on your own without authorization.
How long do I have to file a workers' comp claim in Arizona?
You must file a written claim with the ICA within 1 year of the date of injury or within 1 year of the date the injury became manifest (for occupational diseases or gradually developing conditions). Arizona's 1-year deadline is among the shortest in the country, so file as soon as possible rather than waiting.
Can I sue my employer after a work injury in Arizona?
Usually no, but A.R.S. 23-1022(A) carries real exceptions. You may sue if you rejected the workers' compensation system in advance by written notice under A.R.S. 23-906, or if your employer failed to post the required notice or keep rejection forms available, under A.R.S. 23-906(E). You may also sue where the injury was caused by the employer's wilful misconduct, meaning an act done knowingly and purposely with the direct object of injuring another that was the personal act of the employer, a partner, or an elective corporate officer and indicated wilful disregard of life, limb, or bodily safety. Finally, you may sue an employer that failed to carry required coverage, and you may bring a separate third-party tort claim against anyone other than your employer who contributed to your injury.
Updates
Corrected Arizona coverage, insurance, medical-care, retaliation, exclusive-remedy and waiting-period rules against the current Arizona Revised Statutes: removed the defunct State Compensation Fund, added the domestic-servant exception, corrected the retroactive-benefit threshold to a second full week, replaced the unqualified right to choose your own doctor with the written-authorization and directed-care rules, and added Arizona's statutory anti-retaliation protection and the pre-injury rejection exception to exclusive remedy.
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 23 (Labor), Chapter 6 (WORKERS' COMPENSATION), Article 7 (Right to Compensation)
§ 23-1021Right of employee to compensationIn force
Every employee coming within the provisions of this chapter who is injured, and the dependents of every such employee who is killed by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, wherever the injury occurred, unless the injury was purposely self-inflicted, shall be entitled to receive and shall be paid such compensation for loss sustained on account of the injury or death, such medical, nurse and hospital services and medicines, and such amount of funeral expenses in the event of death, as are provided by this chapter.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-07 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
§ 23-1022Compensation as exclusive remedy for employees; definition; exceptions; public agency employeesIn force
A. The right to recover compensation pursuant to this chapter for injuries sustained by an employee or for the death of an employee is the exclusive remedy against the employer or any co-employee acting in the scope of his employment, and against the employer's workers' compensation insurance carrier or administrative service representative, except as provided by section 23-906, and except that if the injury is caused by the employer's wilful misconduct, or in the case of a co-employee by the co-employee's wilful misconduct, and the act causing the injury is the personal act of the employer, or in the case of a co-employee the personal act of the co-employee, or if the employer is a partnership, on the part of a partner, or if a corporation, on the part of an elective officer of the corporation, and the act indicates a wilful disregard of the life, limb or bodily safety of employees, the injured employee may either claim compensation or maintain an action at law for damages against the person or entity alleged to have engaged in the wilful misconduct. B.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 94 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Ford v. Revlon, Inc. (Arizona Supreme Court 1987, 153 Ariz. 38)“…bject of injuring" the employee. Ariz. Const. art. 18, § 8; A.R.S. § 23-1022. The trial evidence does not warrant an…”
- Swichtenberg v. Brimer (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1991, 171 Ariz. 77)“…was not his employee estop him from claiming immunity under A.R.S. § 23-1022(A) as Swichtenberg's employer; (2) do g…”
- Serna v. Statewide Contractors, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1967, 6 Ariz. App. 12)“…of the employer’s willful misconduct within the meaning of A.R.S. § 23-1022 and that plaintiffs were therefore exem…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 23 (Labor), Chapter 6 (WORKERS' COMPENSATION), Article 4 (Providing for Compensation)
§ 23-961Methods of securing compensation by employers; deficit premium; civil penaltyIn force
A. Employers shall secure workers' compensation to their employees in one of the following ways: 1. By insuring and keeping insured the payment of such compensation with an insurance carrier authorized by the director of the department of insurance and financial institutions to write workers' compensation insurance in this state. 2. By furnishing to the commission satisfactory proof of financial ability to pay the compensation directly or through a workers' compensation pool approved by the commission in the amount and manner and when due as provided in this chapter. The requirements of this paragraph may be satisfied by furnishing to the commission satisfactory proof that the employer is a member of a workers' compensation pool approved by the commission pursuant to section 23-961.01.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 37 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State Compensation Fund v. Symington (Arizona Supreme Court 1993, 174 Ariz. 188)“…state treasurer before conducting any business in Arizona. A.R.S. § 23-961(C). The Fund and all private carriers a…”
- Industrial Commission v. Old Republic Insurance (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2009, 223 Ariz. 75)“…d the reduced premium charged for a deductible policy under A.R.S. § 23-961(J) (Supp. 2008). In its cross-appeal, L…”
- Climate Control, Inc. v. Hill (Arizona Supreme Court 1959, 86 Ariz. 180)“…tion, or (3) by qualifying as a self-insurer. Subsection A, A.R.S. § 23-961. The corporate appellees named in appel…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 23 (Labor), Chapter 6 (WORKERS' COMPENSATION), Article 9 (Payment of Compensation)
§ 23-1062Medical, surgical, hospital benefits; translation services; travel expenses; commencement of compensation; method of compensationIn force
A. Promptly, on notice to the employer, every injured employee shall receive medical, surgical and hospital benefits or other treatment, nursing, medicine, surgical supplies, crutches and other apparatus, including artificial members, reasonably required at the time of the injury, and during the period of disability. Such benefits shall be termed "medical, surgical and hospital benefits". B. Medical, surgical and hospital benefits include translation services, if needed. A carrier, self-insurance pool or employer that does not direct care pursuant to section 23-1070 may choose the translator if the translator is certified by an outside agency and is not an employee of the carrier, self-insurance pool or employer. If the carrier, self-insurance pool or employer is unable to locate a certified translator for the particular language or dialect needed, the parties may agree on a translator who is not a certified translator. C. Compensation for medical, surgical and hospital benefits shall include reimbursement for reasonable travel expenses if the employee must travel more than twenty-five miles from the employee's place of residence to obtain medical care for the injury. D.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 60 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Terry Grantham Co. v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1987, 154 Ariz. 180)“…nting “medical, surgical and hospital benefits” pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-1062(A). We must determine two issues: (1) w…”
- Home Insurance Company v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1975, 23 Ariz. App. 90)“…cal benefits by the carrier originates in the provisions of A.R.S. § 23-1062 A, which requires the payment of such b…”
- Linda Bell v. Ica/ Maricopa Cty/ Pinnacle Risk (Arizona Supreme Court 2015, 236 Ariz. 478)“…As part of Arizona’s workers’ compensation statutes, A.R.S. § 23-1062(B) directs when an injured employee bec…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 23-1070Medical, surgical and hospital benefits provided by employer; pilot programIn force
A. An employer, other than this state or a political subdivision of this state, who secures compensation to his employees in the manner provided in section 23-961, subsection A, paragraph 1 or 2, alone or jointly with other employers, in lieu of making premium payments for medical, surgical and hospital benefits, may provide such benefits to injured employees and may collect one-half of the cost thereof from his employees, not to exceed one dollar per month from any employee, which may be deducted from the wages of the employee. B. An employer electing to provide such benefits shall notify his insurance carrier and the commission of the election and render a detailed statement of the arrangements made therefor to the commission. C. An employer who maintains a hospital for his employees or who contracts with a physician for the hospital care of injured employees, on or before January 30 each year, shall make a verified written report to the commission for the preceding year showing the total amount of hospital fees collected and showing separately the amount contributed by the employees and the amount contributed by the employers.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 14 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2016
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Arizona Public Service Co. v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1976, 27 Ariz. App. 369)“…ed by a self-insured employer pursuant to the provisions of A. R.S. § 23-1070; and, (3) procedural questions concerni…”
- Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1977, 115 Ariz. 184)“…a qualified *185 self-insured employer under ARS § 23-1070. Perez received immediate and continuin…”
- Yanochik v. Industrial Commission of Arizona (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1974, 22 Ariz. App. 503)“…nd that therefore petitioner must bear the cost of surgery, A.R.S. § 23-1070(E) (Supp. 1974) must be examined. Pursu…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 23-1065Special fund; purposes; investment committeeIn force
A. The industrial commission may direct the payment into the state treasury of not to exceed one percent of all premiums received by private insurance carriers during the immediately preceding calendar year. The same percentage shall be assessed against self-insurers based on the total cost to the self-insured employer as provided in section 23-961, subsection G. Such assessments shall be computed on the same premium basis as provided for in section 23-961, subsections G, H, J, K and L and shall be no more than is necessary to keep the special fund actuarially sound. Such payments shall be placed in a special fund within the administrative fund to provide, at the discretion of the commission, such additional awards as may be necessary to enable injured employees to accept the benefits of any law of this state or of the United States, or both jointly, for promotion of vocational rehabilitation of persons with disabilities in industry. B.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 54 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Home Insurance Company v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1975, 23 Ariz. App. 90)“…At that time, and at all times pertinent to this opinion, A.R.S. § 23-1065 A (2) required the Commission to pay fr…”
- Special Fund Division v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1994, 182 Ariz. 341)“…ause carrier faded to comply with the notice requirement in A.R.S. section 23-1065, subd. D. Under section 23-1065, subd.…”
- Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1995, 182 Ariz. 405)“…xisting impairment during the continued employment, satisfy AR.S. section 23-1065(0(2)? That provision restricts apportio…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 23-1070.01Request for early hearing; stipulation; action of commissionIn force
A. If a request for hearing filed in connection with a change of physician under section 23-1070 alleges, by affidavit, that immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage will result if the hearing is not held before the times otherwise prescribed by article 3 of this chapter or if all interested parties, in person or by counsel, stipulate in the request for hearing that the hearing should be held before the times otherwise prescribed by article 3 of this chapter, the commission shall: 1. Immediately issue a notice to all parties setting a hearing date not more than fifteen days later. 2. Require that the administrative law judge, who shall not be subject to the notice or affidavit for change prescribed by section 23-941, subsection I or J, determine the matter and make an award, if any, within five days after completion of the hearing. B. All other procedures prescribed for subsequent actions with regard to the hearing or award shall be as otherwise prescribed by law.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1977, 115 Ariz. 184)“…ce carrier, the commission or the attending physician,” and ARS § 23-1070.01 prescribes procedure for requesting ear…”
- Rendon v. Anixter intl/indemnity (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2024)“…lease to the person against whom the lien is claimed”); and A.R.S. § 23-1070.01(A)(1) (ICA shall “[i]mmediately issue a…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 23-1071Notice by employees with disabilities of absence from locality or state; failure to give notice; change of doctorIn force
A. No employee may leave the state of Arizona for a period exceeding two weeks while the necessity of having medical treatment continues, without the written approval of the commission. Any employee leaving the state of Arizona for a period exceeding two weeks without such approval will forfeit the employee's right to compensation during such time, as well as the employee's right to reimbursement for the employee's medical expenses, and any aggravation of the employee's disability, by reason of the violation of this section, will not be compensated. If an administrative law judge approves an employee's request to leave this state after the request for written approval was initially denied by the commission, the employee is entitled to any forfeited compensation and medical benefits from the date the employee first requested the written approval. B. No employee may change doctors without the written authorization of the insurance carrier, the commission or the attending physician.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 26 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2016
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Franco v. Industrial Commission of Arizona (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1981, 130 Ariz. 37)“…nefits continues unless forfeited or suspended, pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 23-1071, -1026(E), -1027, -1028, and -1047(D) o…”
- Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1977, 115 Ariz. 184)“…tment as provided in this chapter. [Emphasis added.] ARS § 23-1071(B) provides that “No employee may chang…”
- Waxler v. Industrial Commission (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1977, 116 Ariz. 213)“…nd compensation benefits were suspended, in accordance with A.R.S. § 23-1071. Petitioner now challenges the propriet…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 23 (Labor), Chapter 6 (WORKERS' COMPENSATION), Article 1 (Scope of Workers' Compensation)
§ 23-901DefinitionsIn force
In this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires: 1. "Award" means the finding or decision of an administrative law judge or the commission as to the amount of compensation or benefit due an injured employee or the dependents of a deceased employee. 2. "Client" means an individual, association, company, firm, partnership, corporation or any other legally recognized entity that is subject to this chapter and that enters into a professional employer agreement with a professional employer organization. 3. "Co-employee" means every person employed by an injured employee's employer. 4. "Commission" means the industrial commission of Arizona. 5. "Compensation" means the compensation and benefits provided by this chapter. 6. "Employee", "workman", "worker" and "operative" means: (a) Every person in the service of this state or a county, city, town, municipal corporation or school district, including regular members of lawfully constituted police and fire departments of cities and towns, whether by election, appointment or contract of hire.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 173 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mail Boxes v. Industrial Commission (Arizona Supreme Court 1995, 181 Ariz. 119)“…y benefits. We granted review. ANALYSIS Under A.R.S. § 23-901(5)(i), compensation for a sole propriet…”
- Ford v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona (Arizona Supreme Court 1985, 145 Ariz. 509)“…fits under the Arizona Workers’ Compensation Act (the Act), A.R.S. § 23-901 et seq. The Act is constitutionally man…”
- Curran v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF ARIZONA (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1988, 156 Ariz. 434)“…policy did not cover the petitioner personally, relying on A.R.S. § 23-901(5)(i). Furthermore, he concluded that F…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 23-902Employers subject to chapter; exceptionsIn force
A. Employers subject to this chapter are the state, each county, city, town, municipal corporation and school district and every person who employs any workers or operatives regularly employed in the same business or establishment under contract of hire, including covered employees pursuant to a professional employer agreement, except domestic servants. Exempted employers of domestic servants may come under this chapter by complying with its provisions and the rules of the commission. For the purposes of this subsection, "regularly employed" includes all employments, whether continuous throughout the year, or for only a portion of the year, in the usual trade, business, profession or occupation of an employer. B.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 91 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Young v. Environmental Air Products, Inc. (Arizona Supreme Court 1983, 136 Ariz. 158)“…eration of law (a “statutory employer” 1 under A.R.S. § 23-902(B)), and was, therefore, entitled to th…”
- Word v. Motorola, Inc. (Arizona Supreme Court 1983, 135 Ariz. 517)“…f’s “employer” by operation of law. The defense is based on A.R.S. § 23-902(B), which reads as follows: When…”
- Anton v. Industrial Commission of Arizona (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1984, 141 Ariz. 566)“…and inferences permitted by the facts in the record: A.R.S. §§ 23-902(A) and (C) state: A. Employers s…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 23-906Liability under chapter or under common law of employer securing compensation; carriers; service representatives; right of employee to make election; procedure for making electionIn force
A. Employers who comply with the provisions of section 23-961 or 23-962 as to securing compensation, and the employers' workers' compensation insurance carriers or administrative service representatives, shall not be liable for damages at common law or by statute, except as provided in this section, for injury or death of an employee wherever occurring, but it shall be optional with employees to accept compensation as provided by this chapter or to reject the provisions of this chapter and retain the right to sue the employer as provided by law. B. The employee's election to reject the provisions of this chapter shall be made by a notice in writing, signed and dated by him and given to his employer, in duplicate in substantially the following form: To (name of employer): You are hereby notified that the undersigned elects to reject the terms, conditions and provisions of the law for the payment of compensation, as provided by the compulsory compensation law of the state of Arizona, and acts amendatory thereto. C.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 76 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Galloway v. Vanderpool (Arizona Supreme Court 2003, 205 Ariz. 252)“…rejected compensation prior to being injured. A.R.S. § 23-906.C (1995) (workers conclusively pre…”
- Unique Equipment Co. v. TRW Vehicle Safety Systems, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1999, 197 Ariz. 50)“…in the right to sue the employer as provided by law. A.R.S. § 23-906 (1995); see also A.R.S. §…”
- Franks v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1985, 149 Ariz. 291)“…y of an unscrupulous insurance carrier. BAD FAITH CLAIM A.R.S. § 23-906(A) exempts employers and compensation i…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 23 (Labor), Chapter 9 (EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION ACT), Article 1 (General Provisions)
§ 23-1501Severability of employment relationships; protection from retaliatory discharges; exclusivity of statutory remedies in employmentIn forcecited in 6 of our articles
A. The public policy of this state is that: 1. The employment relationship is contractual in nature. 2. The employment relationship is severable at the pleasure of either the employee or the employer unless both the employee and the employer have signed a written contract to the contrary setting forth that the employment relationship shall remain in effect for a specified duration of time or otherwise expressly restricting the right of either party to terminate the employment relationship. Both the employee and the employer must sign this written contract, or this written contract must be set forth in the employment handbook or manual or any similar document distributed to the employee, if that document expresses the intent that it is a contract of employment, or this written contract must be set forth in a writing signed by the party to be charged. Partial performance of employment shall not be deemed sufficient to eliminate the requirements set forth in this paragraph.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-09 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 159 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Cronin v. Sheldon (Arizona Supreme Court 1999, 195 Ariz. 531)“…remedies provision of the Employment Protection Act (EPA), A.R.S. § 23-1501(3)(b)(i) (Supp.1998). The state legisla…”
- Logan v. Forever Living Products International, Inc. (Arizona Supreme Court 2002, 203 Ariz. 191)“…s a condition of employment as protected by § 23-202.” A.R.S. § 23-1501(3)(c)(viii). This 3…”
- Galati v. America West Airlines, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2003, 205 Ariz. 290)“…the case, finding that Galati’s action did not comply with A.R.S. § 23-1501 in that he alleged that he was terminat…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Arizona Workplace Recording Laws: Employee and Employer Rights, Arizona At-Will Employment Laws: Exceptions and Your Rights, Arizona Whistleblower Laws: Protections and How to Report
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Industrial Commission of Arizona (ICA) — official workers' comp agency(azica.gov).gov
- Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 23 (Workers' Compensation), A.R.S. 23-901 et seq.(azleg.gov).gov
- A.R.S. 23-902 : Employers subject to chapter; domestic servant exception; 'regularly employed' defined(azleg.gov)
- A.R.S. 23-961 : Methods of securing workers’ compensation by employers(azleg.gov)
- A.R.S. 23-1062 : Medical benefits; commencement of compensation; seven-day waiting period(azleg.gov)
- A.R.S. 23-906 : Employee election to reject the chapter and sue the employer; employer posting duty(azleg.gov)
- A.R.S. 23-1022 : Compensation as exclusive remedy; wilful misconduct exception(azleg.gov)
- A.R.S. 23-1070 : Medical, surgical and hospital benefits provided by employer (directed care)(azleg.gov)
- A.R.S. 23-1070.01 : Request for early hearing on a change of physician(azleg.gov)
- A.R.S. 23-1071 : Change of doctor requires written authorization(azleg.gov)
- A.R.S. 23-1501 : Arizona Employment Protection Act; retaliation for exercising workers’ compensation rights(azleg.gov)
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.