recently, I had come across an article where osha is behind and is reducing their fines (or something like that).
Does anybody recall seeing it here or online?
My wife’s company is dealing with a fine where both parties(one injuried and one causinf the injury) were trained and found to be both at fault, but OSHA is trying to fine the company for, basically, because they can.
Any input is appreciated.
-Brian
Listeners write in about removing masonry chimneys and ask about blocked ridge vents, deal-breakers with fixer-uppers, and flashing ledgers that are spaced from the wall.
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.
Start Free Trial NowGet instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.
Start Free Trial Now
Replies
I din't see that article, but they seem to fine everybody when someone is hurt, justified or not.
I had back in 2000 3 trusses from a crane fall on me, you guessed it the crane company was fined and so was my boss. It actually was the cranes fault, they got a 10kfine and my boss recieved a 1800 fine for not training me. Made no sense, was advised to let it go, and they reduced the fine to 1k.
In actuallity, it really isn't "worth" them fighting it just because of the their lawyer fees. The damage comes some day when they might need it. But, it's is also the principle of it.
The real danger could be in, is that the injuried(minor) employee has grounds for additional damages because of the fine. She's not filing now, but she has either 2 or 3 years to file the claim. This doesn't just cost a litlle when you have workers comp on 175 employees.
In the eyes of many companies, it doesn't matter if the company isn't at fault and the employees were/are trained. Because, when money is paid out it, blame has to go somewhere. I.E, my wife, the safety manager.
I know about the cost, the problem is I don't know if an employee can sue for more than the comp. In exchange for just paying a hospital bill and weekly benefits promptly, employees have very little right to sue, at least in NY where I live.
Yes, they can sue if the company is found at fault. A governmental agency wouyld probably bring enough credibilty to innitate a suit. Then, it go to court or settle. A least they can in calif.
During the investigation of the previous mentioned incident, my wife found that both were at fault, the certified driver and the pedestrian. The pedestrian was an employee and also a certified driver. They both had been retrained or recertified within the last 6 months and had recently participated in a "safety tailgate meeting". Nor, had either of them ever been written up for safety violations. The Corporate safety director also agreed with the findings.
The driver should have been more careful, but the pedesrtian should have not been where she was, nor she should she had walked out from a blind spot.
But that doesn't stop others from forming their opinion. All opinions ca be tristed for other's conviences
The idea behind comp is for the worker to get teatment and reimbursement for lost wages and in turn they give up their right to sue. So far so good, the rub is that any lawyer will claim gross negligence and sue you under your liability policy. Been there and had it done to me.
i UNDERSTAND THAT IS A HIGH BAR TO OVERCOME, AT LEAST IN ny(sorry)