HR Tip: New I-9 form now available

On Jan. 31, 2020, the U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services published the Form I-9 Federal Register notice announcing a new version of Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, that the Office of Management and Budget approved on Oct. 21, 2019. This new version contains minor changes to the form and its instructions. Changes to the instructions clarify who can act as an authorized representative on behalf of the employer and what documents are acceptable as well as other updates.

It’s a best practice to begin using the form immediately, although the notice provides employers additional time to make necessary updates and adjust their business processes. Employers may continue using the prior version of the form (Rev. 07/17/2017 N) until April 30, 2020. After that date, they can only use the new form with the 10/21/2019 version date. The version date is located in the lower left corner of the form.

The new edition of the form is available in fillable PDF format, print format and in Spanish on USCIS’ I-9 Central website. However, the Spanish form may only be executed by employers in Puerto Rico; employers in the 50 states, Washington, D.C., and other U.S. territories may use the Spanish version of the form as a translation guide only but must complete the English version of the form.

All U.S. employers are required to complete a Form I-9 for every employee hired to verify that the individual is authorized for employment in the United States under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) and for re-verifying current employees with expiring employment authorization documentation. Employers should not complete new forms for existing employees who do not require re-verification.

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

Study: Safety management in the construction industry 2020

SourceDodge Data & Analytics, 2020

Findings: The report examines safety management in construction. Key findings include:

  • Jobsite workers and supervisors dominate the four factors selected by the highest percentage of contractors as essential aspects of a world-class safety program: jobsite worker involvement (84%), strong safety leadership abilities in supervisors (83%), regular safety meetings with jobsite workers and supervisors (82%) and ongoing access to safety training for supervisors and jobsite workers (77%).
  • The most popular safety policies are the site-specific ones, including creating site-specific safety and health plans and training programs for all employees and subcontractors. However, there is room for wider adoption of these measures, especially among small contractors (fewer than 20 employees).
  • While most contractors (66% or more) encourage workers to react to and report hazards onsite, far fewer ask workers for input on safety conditions (50%) or involve workers in safety planning (39%).
  • Toolbox talks remain the most effective way to communicate safety messages and provide information on tools, practices, and materials.
  • Contractors still expect to increase their use of online training in the next few years, but, surprisingly, a lower percentage reported using it than in 2017.

Takeaway: While involving jobsite worksite workers has topped the list of essential aspects of a world-class safety program since 2015, this report shows that strong safety leadership by supervisors and regular safety meetings between jobsite workers and supervisors are also essential. The study reveals more opportunities to engage jobsite workers as well as opportunities to strengthen the training of supervisors.

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

Study: Experiences of healthcare in Australia’s Workers’ Compensation schemes

SourceJournal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, January 2020

Findings: The study aimed to determine how stressful healthcare provider interactions impacted the return to work. The findings were consistent with previous studies – “stressful healthcare provider interactions have a negative association with return to work.” Understanding and respect from providers led to a more trusting relationship and faster return to work, whereas lack of understanding and poor communication were associated with negative outcomes.

Takeaway: Don’t underestimate the value of creating and maintaining strong injured worker/doctor relationships that are based on trust, compassion, and understanding. “…Experiencing stressful interactions with providers was significantly associated with 33 percent lower odds of return to work.”

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

Study: Top 20 most physically demanding jobs

SourceInsurance Providers

Findings: To identify the most physically demanding jobs, researchers analyzed data from the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) and created an index to measure the overall level of physical demands for different jobs based on strength, stamina, coordination, and flexibility requirements. Not surprisingly, 15 of the top 20 jobs were in careers such as roofers, construction, and firefighters. But the #1 spot for the most physically demanding job may surprise you. Among all occupations on this list, dancers require the greatest amount of stamina, flexibility, and coordination.

Takeaway: Don’t get swayed by stereotypes. Not all physically demanding jobs involve manual labor.

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

NSC report addresses how existing technologies can save lives and reduce serious injuries

Although workplace injuries are trending down, workplace fatalities are rising. While a fatality may seem like an impossibility at your workplace, 5,250 workers died on the job in 2018 – on average, more than 100 a week or more than 14 deaths every day. The worst part is that most of these deaths were preventable. Not only is a fatality a tragedy, but it also can have a long-lasting effect on the emotional health, productivity, and attitude of the workforce.

In its first Work to Zero research report, Safety Technology 2020: Mapping Technology Solutions for Reducing Serious Injuries and Fatalities in the Workplace, the National Safety Council (NSC) looks at 18 different non-roadway, hazardous situations in which workers are most likely to die and provides anywhere from five to eight potential technology solutions for each situation.

The top four hazardous situations and corresponding technologies identified in the report include:

  • Work at height: This includes deaths resulting from falling to a lower level, falling objects, and injury from the sudden arrest of a lifeline. Contributing to these risks are worker behavioral failures, leadership failure, and scaffolding/platform failure. Top technology solutions include mobile anchor points, aerial lifts and platforms, and self-retracting lines.
  • Workplace violence: This includes deaths resulting from intentional physical violence to a colleague, weapon violence, and violence due to robbery. Contributing to these risks are lack of workplace awareness, lack of training or supervision, and lack of security measures. Top technology solutions include real-time response management mobile apps, video cameras, and wearable or mobile-app based panic buttons.
  • Repair and maintenance: This includes deaths resulting from machine energization, being struck by machinery, or being entangled in machinery. Contributing to these risks are lack of training or supervision, fatigue, and machinery malfunction. Top technology solutions include machinery cutoff light curtains, power management systems, and permit to work technologies.
  • Construction and Installation: This includes falls to a lower level, control of energy, and electrocution. Contributing to these risks are leadership failure, lack of training, and lack of workplace awareness. Top technology solutions are VR and digital training, proximity sensors, and fall protection kits.

Other hazardous situations addressed in the report are logging equipment operation, tending a retail establishment, electrical work, emergency response, vehicle-pedestrian interactions, process safety operations, cleaning, loading and unloading, confined space entry, inspections, heavy equipment operation, excavation, machinery operation, and hot work.

Download report.

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

Study: Demand conditions and worker safety: evidence from price shocks in mining

SourceYale Insights

Findings: The study examines the relationship between demand and safety. While it’s often speculated that higher demand could lead to improved profits and more investment in safety, the authors found that it incentivized firms to focus on production over safety. “In economic terms, the opportunity cost of focusing on safety – that is, the potential profits lost – goes up when demand is higher. And that creates a second force counteracting the greater ability to invest in safety.”

The research is based on the mineral mining industry in the US, where accident reporting is carefully monitored and the global price reflects demand. Researchers found that a 1% increase in price led to an increase of .15% in serious injuries and mortality – evidence supporting the opportunity cost hypothesis. Records from the mine inspections provided even starker evidence that high demand leads mines to prioritize production over safety. A 1% increase in price led to a .13% increase in violations of health and safety regulations; many deemed from a negligent or willful act by the employer.

Takeaway: For years, safety and production were viewed as competitors suggesting workers and managers had to choose whether to work safely or get the job done quickly at any cost. Smart employers ingrain safety into production by treating it as an integral part of the systems and processes and this relationship is not compromised when production pressures intensify. If there’s a race to beat the clock, there are no winners – injuries and losses inevitably occur.

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

Things you should know

CSB finalizes rule outlining accidental release reporting requirements

Although the CSB has been in existence for more than 20 years, it never promulgated a rule outlining accidental release reporting requirements as required by its statute. On Feb. 4, 2019, a court ordered the CSB to promulgate the rule within 12 months. Under the proposed rule, the owner or operator of a facility must submit accidental release reports to the Chemical Safety Board within eight hours of the release. The final rule extends by four hours the agency’s proposal of four hours due to several comments CSB received that were generally critical of the shorter timeframe.

NCCI launches Solutions web portal

The National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) launched a new Solutions web portal, which is part of NCCI’s Power Up program and is designed to assist industry stakeholders in decision making.

AmTrust’s 2019 Retail Risk report

In addition to comprehensive data on injury rates, types, and costs in the retail sector, AmTrust’s Retail Risk report offers several tips for retailers on how to make their businesses safer.

Some findings:

  • Lifting was the top reported injury type, accounting for 22% of claims and the highest total payout at $22 million.
  • The top three injuries with the highest average payouts were falls from ladders or scaffolding with an average $21,000 payout; repetitive motion with a $14,000 average payout; and motor vehicle collision with a $13,900 average payout.
  • Injuries that cause employees to file a lost-time claim resulted in an average of 24 days out of work.
  • Four types of businesses – meat, fish, and poultry retail sales; hardware stores; automobile parts and accessory stores; and beauty and hairstyling salons – were the most dangerous.
  • For men, the average cost of a claim totaled $11,641, while for women it was $7,030.

U-Haul implements nicotine-free workforce policy

Beginning Feb. 1 in 21 states U-Haul will not hire anyone who uses nicotine. The first in the field to implement such a nicotine-free workforce policy, U-Haul will not subject existing employees who smoke to the new rules.

Reducing sale of soda in workplace improved health: study

Researchers from the University of California studied 214 UCSF employees to determine if the school’s ban on the sale of soda positively impacted their health. Half of the participants were randomly selected to help them cut back on consumption, but all were allowed to buy soda elsewhere.

Over the course of the study, nearly 70% of the employees saw their waistlines recede, with all the participants losing an average of 0.8 inches. Additionally, workers who reduced their intake of soda and sugary beverages tended to have lower total cholesterol and improved insulin resistance.

FMCSA increases percentage rate for random drug testing of CMV drivers

Effective Jan. 1, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration doubled its minimum rate for random controlled substances testing to 50% of the average number of commercial motor vehicle driver positions.

State News

California

  • The Labor and Workforce Development Agency has launched a website intended to help employers and workers navigate the state’s recently enacted employment status law, A.B. 5.
  • new study from the Workers’ Compensation Bureau Insurance Rating Bureau (WCIRB), “Physical Medicine Treatments and Their Impact on Opioid Use and Lost Time in California Workers’ Compensation” shows that as physical medicine utilization increases, opioid utilization decreases.

Florida

  • The Workers’ Compensation Research Institute’s (WCRI) report on outcomes found that 16% of workers reported not returning to work for at least a one-month period predominantly due to the injury, and 20% reported no substantial return to work within one year of the injury.

Georgia

  • WCRI’s report on outcomes found that 19 percent of workers had “big problems” getting the services that they or their provider wanted.

Illinois

  • Registration for CompFile, an electronic filing system, is set to go live this week, and the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission is urging attorneys and law firms to comply. More information.

Minnesota

  • Health Commissioner recently authorized a significant expansion of medical cannabis usage to include those with “chronic pain” as well as macular degeneration. Currently, the most common qualifying condition to be eligible for medical cannabis is a diagnosis of “intractable pain.” For more information.

Nebraska

  • The Workers’ Compensation Court has posted changes to its Rules of Procedure, including new rules on filings, fee schedules, reports of injury and lump-sum settlement. For the revised, 99-page Rules of Procedure.

North Carolina

  • The Workers’ Compensation Research Institute’s (WCRI) “CompScope Medical Benchmarks, 20th Edition,” shows that medical payments per claim in the state have decreased year after year since 2014. The authors of the study attribute that to fee schedule changes in hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) and for nonhospital (professional) services.

 

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

Legal Corner

ADA

Construction company pays $100K for firing worker with epilepsy

A Bellingham, Washington company, formerly doing business as Diamond B Constructors, Inc. and its successor, Harris Companies, will pay $100,000 and provide other relief to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). A pipefitter, who also holds a rigger’s certification, was dispatched by her union to work on a project. When she told her supervisor that she has epilepsy, he and other supervisors determined she could not work safely at heights and terminated her. She had not requested accommodations, had no medical restrictions, and her epilepsy was well controlled by medicine.

The law requires employers to make a case-by-case assessment of an employee’s ability to perform the job when safety concerns exist. EEOC Seattle Field Director Nancy Sienko said, “Epilepsy reportedly affects 2.2 million Americans and affects each person differently. It is critical that employers not base job decisions on stereotypes, but instead carefully consider each individual’s abilities.”

FMLA

FMLA doesn’t provide protection for employees to evaluate family member’s medical condition

In Schaar v. U.S. Steel Corp., a manager in the customer quality engineering department, who lived in Michigan, was aware of problems with a top customer in Mississippi. When the matter became urgent, he was onsite in Tennessee and was ordered to travel to Mississippi to handle the problem himself. He refused because his wife had a heart condition and wasn’t feeling well and he had to return to Michigan to assess the situation. When he arrived home, he determined his wife did not require medical attention.

Returning to work the next day in Michigan, he was fired for insubordination. The manager sued under the FMLA for both interference and retaliation. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ruled in favor of U.S. Steel on its motion for summary judgment on both claims. The manager never requested FMLA leave or a reduced work schedule to care for his wife.

Distinguishing between providing care to a family member and evaluating a family member’s condition, the court determined he was not providing care and was not entitled to FMLA leave.

Workers’ Compensation

Comp settlement bars claim for disability discrimination – California

In an unpublished decision, Kennedy v. MUFG Union Bank, a bank employee claimed she worked in a hostile work environment and took a medical leave for stress, anxiety, and depression. While she was out, the bank restructured and eliminated her position. Unlike others, she did not receive a severance package.

Her request to return on a reduced work schedule was denied because the position was eliminated, so she filed a comp claim. When it was settled, she resigned voluntarily. She then filed suit based on disability and her race. The court argued there could be no wrongful termination because she was not terminated and that the record demonstrated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the increased supervision.

Employer not liable for fatal accident caused by injured employee – California

While commuting to work, an employee of the City of Los Angeles struck and killed a pedestrian. A chemist who worked in the lab, the employee did not use his car for employment. He did have a neurological condition and had fallen at work, suffering a back sprain. After some time off, he was allowed to return to work with restrictions. About three weeks later he was driving to work and struck and killed a pedestrian. Initially his license was suspended, but it was reinstated and he was not charged.

Two brothers of the deceased argued the city should be held responsible because it knew of his condition and allowed him to return to work prematurely, so the “work-spawned risk endangering the public” exception to the going and coming rule applied. The court disagreed and found the chemist was on his commute to work and the accident was unrelated to his employment.

Exclusive remedy defense in civil suit allowed in spite of comp denial – Florida

In McNair v. Dorsey, an appellate ruled that the employer’s denial of liability for a comp claim did not prevent it from using the exclusive remedy defense in a civil case. The employee worked for James Armstrong’s tree service company and was working with a coworker, Dorsey, when he alleged he suffered injuries. The insurance company found that there was no compensable claim. He then voluntarily dismissed the comp claim and alleged negligence on the part of both Armstrong and Dorsey, arguing the exclusive remedy defense did not apply since his claim had been denied.

While a trial court found in favor of the employer, the appellate court noted an employer can be barred from raising a workers’ compensation exclusivity defense if the employer denies the employee’s claim “by asserting that the injury did not occur in the course and scope of his or her employment.” However, the court noted that the employer is not always foreclosed from claiming immunity to a lawsuit simply because it denied compensability in an earlier proceeding.The factfinder needs to determine if the accident occurred in the course and scope of employment and would have been covered by workers’ comp and protected by exclusive remedy.

Worker who filed comp claim after being fired can bring retaliatory discharge suit – Florida

In Salus v. Island Hospitality Florida Management Inc. a worker reported an injury and later told the employer he was having difficulty getting follow-up treatment. Two weeks later he was fired, allegedly for threatening physical harm to a co-worker, which he denied. He filed suit for retaliatory discharge. The trial court found that reporting an injury was not the same as filing a claim and granted summary judgment to the employer.

The appellate court disagreed. It noted it would not make sense to limit the statute to retaliatory acts that occurred after filing the claim because an employer could easily avoid liability by firing the employee right away. Further the employee’s actions were consistent with a workers’ comp claim that is protected. Since there was a genuine issue of material fact as to the reason for termination, summary judgement was inappropriate.

Health care providers can’t go after comp settlement – Illinois

After an injured employee filed for bankruptcy protection for minimal assets and her pending workers comp claim ($31,000), the state Supreme Court ruled that the proceeds of a workers comp settlement are exempt from claims made by medical providers who treated the injury or illness in re Hernandez. She owed a combined $138,000 to the three medical practices.

Section 21 of the statute provides that any payment, award or decision under the Workers’ Compensation Act is unequivocally free from claims to satisfy debt; however, the health care providers argued that amendments in 2005 provide an exception to the exemption. The court disagreed, noting there was “no ambiguity whatsoever in this provision.”

Employer does not have to pay for rehab after injury is resolved – Minnesota

In Ewing v. Print Craft Inc., an employee sprained his ankle and there was medical disagreement as to whether he developed complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). His primary care provider and podiatrist found he had, but doctors at the Mayo Clinic disagreed and said the injury was resolved. He met with a rehabilitation consultant who prepared a rehabilitation plan and submitted it to the Department of Labor and Industry and also provided medical management services to address Ewing’s reported symptoms.

Although the insurance company notified her that they were requiring an IME and would not pay for any further services, the consultant continued to provide services. The IME found that the employee had suffered an ankle sprain and did not have CRPS. A compensation judge held the injury was resolved on the date provided by the Mayo Clinic. The consultant appealed and the WC Court of Appeals overturned, noting the print company needed to provide notice and show good cause to terminate the rehabilitation plan.

The Supreme Court reversed, noting an employer’s liability ends when the worker is no longer disabled.

Worker who intentionally shot self with nail gun denied comp – Nebraska

In Eddy v. Builders Supply Co. Inc., an employee said a nail gun misfired and caused a three-quarter-inch nail to become embedded in her right temple. There were no witnesses. While co-workers testified that guns had misfired in the past, the company presented evidence regarding her personal life and a possible suicide note. The compensation court found that the employee shot herself intentionally and the Supreme Court agreed.

Misrepresentations about job search nix benefits – New York

In Matter of Calabrese v. Fortini Inc., an appellate court upheld a finding that a worker had made misrepresentations about his efforts to find a new job, thereby forfeiting his entitlement to benefits. The employer’s investigator contacted several of the employers identified by the worker and found he had not submitted an application, applied for a job that did not exist, or the contact did not exist.

Although the appellate court acknowledged that this evidence was hearsay, it was sufficiently reliable and provided substantial evidence to support the Workers’ Compensation Board finding that the worker had made false representations to obtain benefits.

Award of benefits for unwitnessed and unexplained fall upheld – New York

In Matter of Docking v. Lapp Insulators LLC, a truckdriver was loading a cart when he apparently fell and was found unconscious and bleeding by co-workers. When he regained consciousness, he had no memory of what happened. Under state law, there is a presumption of compensability for accidents occurring during the course of employment, which are unwitnessed or unexplained, and he was awarded benefits by a compensation law judge.

Upon appeal, a state appellate court noted to rebut the presumption, it is the employer’s burden “to provide substantial evidence that the accident was not work-related.” While the employer presented medical testimony that the fall and resulting brain injury were caused by a preexisting cardiovascular condition, the Emergency Room doctor testified that there were no signs of heart damage or atrial fibrillation. The possibility of a preexisting, idiopathic condition was not enough to overturn the decision.

Assaulted bus driver not fully disabled by PTSD and morbid obesity – New York

In Matter of the Claim of Robert Rapaglia v. New York City Transit Authority, the Supreme Court Appellate Division affirmed a Workers Compensation Board decision that the driver had a 60% loss of earning capacity but was not fully disabled. The bus driver argued that the board failed to consider his obesity and limited education and work experience in calculating his percentage of lost wage-earning capacity.

The court noted that in rating the severity of a medical impairment due to PTSD or other causally-related psychiatric conditions, “the evaluation should include the impact of the psychiatric impairment on functional ability, including activities of daily living.” While there was conflicting medical testimony, the court found the Board had not erred in finding that he could not drive a bus, but was capable of other work, nor could it conclude that his obesity was causally related to the workplace injury.

Employer may have to pay for expensive compound cream – Pennsylvania

In Workers’ First Pharmacy Services LLC v. Bureau of Workers’ Compensation Fee Review Hearing Office (Gallagher Bassett Services), the Commonwealth Court ruled that a pharmacy did not prematurely file a fee review petition to challenge an employer’s refusal to pay for a compound cream that had been prescribed to an injured employee. The employee had injured her shoulder and the comp claim was accepted. Her physician prescribed a compound cream, which the pharmacy dispensed and billed the employer $4,870.

The employer refused to pay, and the pharmacy filed a fee review application, which the employer argued was premature because it had not been established that the cream was related to the work injury. However, the pharmacy argued that company waived its right to challenge the cream as unrelated because it did not seek a Utilization Review (UR).

After several appeals, the Commonwealth Court ruled that employers or insurers must make payments to providers for treatment within 30 days unless there is a dispute as to the reasonableness or necessity of the treatment, in which case the payer may seek a UR. The court vacated the decision and remanded for a fee review determination.

Widow and children to receive death benefits for fatal workplace stabbing – Pennsylvania

In JBS Holdings USA Inc. v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board, a worker was stabbed to death by a co-worker. While the company argued that the murder was related to a “personal animus” and not work-related, the court ruled there was no evidence of personal animosity. The ruling was upheld upon appeal.

Temporary worker who experienced horrific injuries fails to win tort lawsuit – Tennessee

In Henry v. CMBB LLC, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held in a 2-1 decision that the employee’s intentional tort lawsuit was barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the Tennessee Workers Compensation Act. The temporary worker was assigned to work at a manufacturing facility and operated a 200-ton metal press, which contains a light curtain that prevents it from cycling when it detects a worker nearby. An operator had reported that the curtain was not working properly and one was on order, but the press remained in service.

The temp worker was operating the press when the machine cycled, crushing her arms, both of which were amputated below the elbow. She and her husband filed a lawsuit arguing the company intended to injure her because it was well aware of the danger but continued to operate the machine. The courts, however, noted that even if the employer was aware of the potential for injury, it does not mean the employer intended to injure the worker. Precedent has held that even egregious safety violations fail to show actual intent to injure and the exclusive remedy provision prevails. In Tennessee, the intentional tort exception is quite narrow.

Two years apart, injuries can stem from same accident – Virginia

In Merck & Co. v. Vincent, a worker injured his neck and arm in 2009. In 2011, he became dizzy and fell as a result of pain medication, seriously injuring his knee. The Court of Appeals upheld the Workers’ Compensation Commission ruling that the injuries arose from “the same accident” for purposes of determining whether he was permanently and totally disabled. The Virginia statute provides for an award of permanent total disability benefits to a worker who has suffered the functional loss of two limbs “in the same accident.”

The court noted the “compensable consequence” doctrine, which says that if an injury arises out of and in the course of employment, “every natural consequence that flows from the injury likewise arises out of the employment unless it is the result of an independent intervening cause attributable to claimant’s own intentional conduct.”

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

 

OSHA watch

Citation penalties increase for inflation

Effective January 15, the DOL increased civil penalty amounts for violations to adjust for inflation by 1.01764%. Here are the new maximum penalties:

Type of Violation Penalty Minimum Penalty Maximum
Serious $964 per violation $13,494 per violation
Other-than-Serious $0 per violation $13,494 per violation
Willful or Repeated $9,639 per violation $134,937 per violation
Posting Requirements $0 per violation $13,494 per violation
Failure to Abate N/A $13,494 per day unabated beyond the abatement date (generally limited to 30 days)

Coronavirus resource

An online resource on a new coronavirus outbreak that includes a link to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention interim guidance, quick facts about the outbreak, and information on preventing exposures is available.

Letter of interpretation addresses headphones in workplace

Although there is no specific regulation that prohibits the use of headphones on a construction site or any other workplace, there are permissible noise exposure limits under the Hearing Protection standard and employers must protect employees subject to sound levels exceeding these limits. While the letter acknowledges that some manufacturers promote their products as “OSHA-approved” or “OSHA-compliant,” these are misleading as the agency does not register, certify, approve, or otherwise endorse commercial or private sector entities, products, or services. It further cautions that the use of headphones may produce a safety hazard by masking environmental sounds that need to be heard and it is the employer’s responsibility to protect workers from such hazards.

Earthquake safety resource

A new Earthquake Hazard Alert focuses on keeping emergency response workers safe.

Recent fines and awards

California

  • In Nolte Sheet Metal Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board, the Court of Appeals, 5th District in Fresno unanimously affirmed citations for four serious violations, although the file prepared by the Cal/OSHA office on the day of the inspection was later taken during a car burglary. The company had argued it did not consent to an inspection, the lack of the original inspection file amounted to spoliation and denied the company due process, and the violations were improperly classified as serious.

Georgia

  • In Packers Sanitation Services Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta unanimously upheld an administrative law judge’s finding that the company failed to protect its employees from dangerous machinery.

Florida

  • The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit has found a Jacksonville-based roofing contractor, Travis Slaughter owner of Great White Construction Inc. and Florida Roofing Experts Inc, in contempt for failing to pay $2,202,049 in penalties. The court ordered the companies and Slaughter to pay the outstanding penalties of $2,202,049 plus interest and fees, and required them to certify that they had corrected the violations within 10 days of the court’s order. If the companies and Slaughter fail to comply, they face coercive sanctions, including incarceration and other relief the court deems proper.
  • In addition to the above, Florida Roofing Experts Inc. was cited for failing to protect workers from falls at two work sites in Fleming Island and one in Middleburg. Roofing Experts Inc. faces penalties totaling $1,007,717.
  • Inspected under the Regional Emphasis Program for Falls in Construction, CJM Roofing Inc., based in West Palm, was cited for exposing employees to fall and other hazards at three residential worksites in Royal Palm Beach and Port St. Lucie. The contractor faces penalties totaling $291,724.
  • An employee of Shooting Gallery Range Inc. in Orlando will receive $30,000 in back pay and compensatory damages under a whistleblower settlement. The employee alleged he was fired for reporting safety concerns relating to lead exposure.

Illinois

  • Goose Lake Construction Inc. was cited after an employee suffered serious injuries when an unprotected trench collapsed, burying him up to his waist at a Glencoe, worksite. Proposed penalties are $233,377.

Massachusetts

  • National retailer, Target Corp., was cited for emergency exit access hazards at stores in Danvers and Framingham and faces a total of $227,304 in penalties.

Pennsylvania

  • Webb Contractor Corp. was cited for exposing employees to fall hazards at three separate worksites in the Lehigh Valley area. Inspected after a compliance officer observed employees performing residential roofing work without protection, the roofing contractor, based in Bala Cynwyd, faces $605,371 in penalties.
  • Metarko Excavating LLC was cited for exposing employees to trenching hazards at a Cranberry Township worksite. The company faces $59,311 in penalties.
  • Philadelphia Energy Solutions was cited for serious violations of safety and health hazards related to process safety management (PSM) following a fire and subsequent explosions at the company’s Girard Point Refinery Complex in Philadelphia. The company faces $132,600 in penalties.

Wisconsin

  • Milwaukee Valve Company Inc., based in Prairie du Sac, was cited for exposing employees to lead and copper dust at rates higher than the permissible exposure levels. Proposed penalties are $171,628.

For additional information.

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com

HR Tip: Retaliation continues to top EEOC workplace discrimination charges

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received 72,675 charges of workplace discrimination in fiscal year 2019, which ended Sept. 30, 2019. Retaliation continues to be the most frequently filed charge filed with the agency, followed by disability, race and sex. The agency also received 7,514 sexual harassment charges – 10.3 percent of all charges, slightly down from FY 2018. Specifically, the charge numbers show the following breakdowns by bases alleged, in descending order:

  • Retaliation: 39,110 (53.8 percent of all charges filed)
  • Disability: 24,238 (33.4 percent)
  • Race: 23,976 (33.0 percent)
  • Sex: 23,532 (32.4 percent)
  • Age: 15,573 (21.4 percent)
  • National Origin: 7,009 (9.6 percent)
  • Color: 3,415 (4.7 percent)
  • Religion: 2,725 (3.7 percent)
  • Equal Pay Act: 1,117 (1.5 percent)
  • Genetic Information: 209 (0.3 percent)

These percentages add up to more than 100% because some charges allege multiple bases.

For a detailed breakdown by state.

For Cutting-Edge Strategies on Managing Risks and Slashing Insurance Costs visit www.StopBeingFrustrated.com