Category Archives: Government

OSHA Reaches Employer Agreement to Stop Discouraging Employee Accident Reports

Today’s post comes from guest author Jon Gelman from Jon Gelman, LLC – Attorney at Law.

Statistics regarding the reporting of accidents have historically been challenged for accuracy as employees have been fearful about reporting events, and employers have been reluctant for numerous reasons, including the potential of increased insurance costs. Now OSHA has taken a significant step to legitimize the process by seeking an employer accord not to take adverse actions against employees for reporting injuries in the workplace.

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration has signed an accord with BNSF Railway Co., headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas, announcing BNSF’s voluntary revision of several personnel policies that OSHA alleged violated the whistleblower provisions of the Federal Railroad Safety Act and dissuaded workers from reporting on-the-job injuries. FRSA’s Section 20109 protects railroad workers from retaliation for, among other acts, reporting suspected violations of federal laws and regulations related to railroad safety and security, hazardous safety or security conditions, and on-the-job injuries.

“Protecting America’s railroad workers who report on-the-job injuries from retaliation is an essential element in OSHA’s mission. This accord makes significant progress toward ensuring that BNSF employees who report injuries do not suffer any adverse consequences for doing so,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. “It also sets the tone for other railroad employers throughout the U.S. to take steps to ensure that their workers are not harassed, intimidated or terminated, in whole or part, for reporting workplace injuries.”

The major terms of the accord include:

  • Changing BNSF’s disciplinary policy so that injuries no longer play a role in determining the length of an employee’s probation following a record suspension for a serious rule violation. As of Aug. 31, 2012, BNSF has reduced the probations of 136 employees who were serving longer probations because they had been injured on-the-job.
  • Eliminating a policy that Continue reading →

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Reversing A Century Of Progress – Are We Back In Upton Sinclair’s Jungle?

Many workers no longer have paid sick days.

Today’s post comes from guest author Rod Rehm from Rehm, Bennett & Moore.

Health Care Is Just The Beginning

At a time when a flu epidemic is exploding out of control, killing thousands of people, forty-two million Americans have no sick leave. Many of these people are lower paid, often work part time, and continue to work when ill because they can’t stay home to recover without losing their income. I am shocked and dismayed that many hard-working folk are forced to work when sick because staying home is not economically possible. Making matters even worse, these highly vulnerable workers often have no employer-provided health insurance so even serious illnesses go untreated, putting us all at a higher risk for infection from a contagious worker, like a server in a restaurant, for whom taking an unpaid day off is impossible.

…the trend toward low pay, long hours and few benefits is getting stronger.

I fear that if the current trends continue, the lives of the millions of Americans who struggle at low-paying jobs will remain miserable, desperate and be lacking in real hope. It appears that the trend toward low pay, long hours and few benefits is getting stronger. At the turn of the 20th century when Upton Sinclair wrote “The Jungle,” describing immigrants struggling in Chicago, the jobs were more physical, dangerous and just plain disgusting. However, millions of “New Jungle” workers still struggle and suffer today.

Class Warfare

After over 100 years of progress, the American middle and lower classes are under constant attack. The efforts to limit rights of workers are ongoing and supported by big business. Every day I read of measures being introduced in state legislatures to limit access to and decrease the benefits of workers’ compensation. The right to collective bargaining is being attacked as well. Local elections are overrun by anonymous innocent-sounding Super PACs funded by 21st Century versions of robber-barons who are using their wealth and power to squeeze out a few more dollars in profits to add to the tens of billions of dollars already sitting in their bank accounts. These are not job creators, they are their own personal wealth creators. Income equality is at an all-time low in the United States, and the trends are getting worse.

How can this be happening in 21st century America? How can we call ourselves civilized? Can we really allow such maltreatment of workers and disregard public health in what we call an “advanced,” “modern,” and frequently, an “exceptional” county? 

A Path Forward

We are not without hope, though. Crusaders like Senator Elizabeth Warren are working hard to reverse the trends and preserve the American Dream for future generations. But our protectors are few. We cannot assume that someone else is looking out for us. We must engage with government at the local, state and federal levels so that the voices of regular working folk are not drowned out by a cabal of rogue billionaires trying to keep score by increasing their own personal fortunes at the expense of working people. I fear that if we sit by passively, our children will all be working in the New Jungle, America will have lost its middle class, and with it, the American Dream will be a distant memory. The time to act is now. 

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Workplace Violence and Sandy Hook Elementary School

Today’s post comes from guest author Kristina Brown Thompson from The Jernigan Law Firm.

In light of the horrific elementary school shootings in Newtown, Connecticut last week it may be time to re-evaluate workplace violence, which seems to be increasing at an alarming rate. Technically, workplace violence is any act where an employee is abused, threatened, intimidated, or assaulted in the workplace. It can include threats, harassment, and verbal abuse, as well as physical attacks by someone with an assault rifle. 

Two million American workers are victims of workplace violence every year. What’s worse is that workplace violence is one of the leading causes of job-related deaths in the United States. Last year, for example, one in every five fatal work injuries was attributed not to accidents but to workplace violence,  and  some employees are at an increased risk for harm. For example, employees who work with the public or who handle money are more at risk (i.e. bank tellers, pizza delivery drivers, or social workers). According to the 2011 Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries by the U.S. Dept. of Labor, robbers were found to be the assailants in almost a third of homicide/workplace violence cases involving men, whereas female workers were more likely to be attacked by a relative (i.e. former spouse or partner) while at work.  

Preventing workplace violence is a challenging task and OSHA advises employers to create a Workplace Violence Prevention Program. Creating a safe perimeter for employees is crucial. Likewise, having an emergency protocol in place should reduce the number of fatalities in an attack, and that’s exactly what happened at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut when the school’s protocol saved the lives of many children.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Report: Poor Health Costs Cost U.S. $576 Billion Yearly

The U.S. loses more GDP to poor health than Sweden’s total GDP

Today’s post comes from guest author Nathan Reckman from Paul McAndrew Law Firm.

The Integrated Benefits Institute (IBI), a nonprofit health and productivity research organization for businesses, recently reported that poor health costs the U.S. economy $576 billion per year. Of this amount:

  • $227 billion is lost due to sick days or reduced productivity due to illness,
  • $232 billion is spent by employers on medical and pharmacy treatments, and
  • $117 billion is spent on workers’ compensation and short- or long-term disability wage replacement.

To give you a sense of the scale of this loss, it is larger than the entire gross domestic product (GDP) of all but the top 20 countries. Our $576 billion loss dues to poor health costs would fall directly behind the GDP of Saudi Arabia (2011 GDP: $577.6 billion) and in front of the Swedes (2011 GDP: $538.2 billion). For comparison, the U.S.’s $15,090 billion GDP was the largest in the world, followed by China at $7,298 billion.

…for every $1 employers invest in improving their employees’ health and wellness they save $3…

Sean Nicholson, Ph.D., quoted in the IBI report, has stated that for every $1 employers invest in improving their employees’ health and wellness they save $3 (quite a good return on their investment!). As wisely pointed out by IBI’s President, Thomas Parry, Ph.D., this report puts employers on notice that their investment in workers’ health and wellness will benefit both the workers and their employers.

This report, in addition to  pointing out the dual benefits posed by increased employer investment in their employees’ health and wellnes, points out one of the important choices facing our country’s healthcare system.

Source for 2011 GDP information: CIA World Factbook

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Cancer Risk, Workplace Carcinogens and a Government Report

Today’s post comes from guest author Rod Rehm from Rehm, Bennett & Moore.

Our law firm recently completed successful litigation involving eight families against various chemical companies. A member of each family got cancer from working at a local plant where industrial solutions were used to make rubber products.

Stating the obvious, cancer is universally bad, regardless of how much money a person has; what their religious or political views are; how old they are; or how/where/why they got cancer. That being said, I think workers especially need to be aware of the dangers and exposures to carcinogens that can occur because of chemicals in the workplace. According to a United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) website, “Carcinogens are agents that can cause cancer. In industry, there are many potential exposures to carcinogens. Generally, workplace exposures are considered to be at higher levels than for public exposures. Material safety data sheets (MSDSs) should always contain an indication of carcinogenic potential.” 

Respected colleague Jon Gelman from New Jersey shares his thoughts on the subject in this blog post at http://workers-compensation.blogspot.com/2012/10/romney-regulation-risk-of-cancer.html. And I thank him for sharing the op-ed resource from a recent Sunday’s edition of The New York Times. 

According to the Times piece, lobbyists associated with the chemical industry want to “shoot the messenger” by limiting or getting rid of the U.S. government’s Report on Carcinogens. Because if workers don’t know about carcinogens in their workplace, they won’t get cancer? Or more accurately, at least they won’t be able to tie that cancer to their workplace? Tell that to the American Cancer Society, whose web site includes a page specific to carcinogens and uses various sources, both national and international, to determine what carcinogens are.

Mr. Gelman also mentions in his blog post that certain lobbyists and politicians want to limit the regulation of these chemicals, which the Times story calls “scientific consensus” for their listing as cancer-causing carcinogens. It’s very challenging for consumers to know what substances, either naturally occurring or made by humans are safe to eat and use. To take that confusion into the workplace by limiting the information available to workers to be as safe as possible in their jobs, especially when long-term consequences like cancer are a possibility, is a shame.

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act Now Covers Many Types Of Cancer

Today as we reflect on the tragic events which took place 11 years ago, we are relieved to learn of the news that the Federal Government is finally  acknowledging what we, as representatives of many of these injured workers have suspected for many years-  that exposure to the toxins around Ground Zero can cause cancer.  We pray for all those who are sick and have died and for those who will continue to become ill as a result of this horrible attack.

The following article from NBC New York written by Brynn Gingras and Greg Cergol details the new coverage that those suffering from cancer are entitled to receive: 

The federal government will now officially add dozens of cancers to the list of illnesses linked to the Sept. 11 attacks, making those who lived or worked near ground zero and later became sick eligible for financial payments, authorities said Monday.

Fourteen categories of cancers, a total of 50, will be added to the illnesses covered in the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health announced.

The Zadroga Act — named after NYPD Detective James Zadroga, who died at 34 after working at ground zero — passed into law two years ago. Despite the hundreds of sick responders, the act did not cover cancer because of a supposed lack of scientific evidence linking cancer to ground zero toxins.

“We have urged from the very beginning that the decision whether or not to include cancer be based on science,” said Mayor Bloomberg in a statement, adding that the decision “will continue to ensure that those who have become ill due to the heinous attacks on 9/11 get the medical care they need and deserve.”

Eighteen-year FDNY veteran Jeff Stroehlein spent several weeks working at ground zero, and is certain the brain cancer he has been fighting for a year is linked to his work there. The father of three welcomes the financial help the federal government will now be offering first responders with cancer, but says it should have arrived much earlier.

“The fact is, the government has turned their back for 11 years now,” he said. “I saw no politicians digging on the pile. If you saw a politician that was sick or on the pile, or their kid was sick or on the pile, this would have been solved months ago.”

Two more scientific studies are expected to be released shortly, which will determine whether more cancers should be added to the list, Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand said in a statement.

“Today’s announcement is a huge step forward that will provide justice and support to so many who are now suffering from cancer and other illnesses,” they said.

About 400 residents and rescue workers have died from cancer since 9/11, according to the New York Post.

With cancer included in the program more victims are likely to seek compensation, which could cause individual awards to be reduced as officials divide up the $2.77 billion fund.

“They’re going to add cancers, but are they going to add more money to the fund?” Thomas “T.J.” Gilmartin, who suffers from lung disease and sleep apnea, said to the Post. “It’s crazy. Every time, we gotta fight. It’s two years since Obama signed that bill, and nobody’s got 10 cents.”

Stroehlein is now cancer-free and feeling well. But at 48, after being forced to give up a job he loved and facing an uncertain future, he’s focusing on speaking to lawmakers for his lost comrades, many of whom lost their life savings in their fight to survive after 9/11.

He’s also troubled by the uncertainty future first responders may face.

“Do you want to give up your life for a government that turned around and didn’t support you?”

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Death On The Job – AFL-CIO’s Releases Its 21st Annual Report

Death on the Job ReportThe AFL-CIO has released its 2012 report on worker fatalities which also examines the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA’s) role in ensuring safe workplaces. The AFL-CIO has been producing this report for 21 years, and we hope they continue to do so.

Since Congress passed the Occupational Safety and Health Act in 1970, workplace safety and health conditions have improved. But too many workers remain at serious risk of injury, illness or death.

In 2010, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 4,690 workers were killed on the job—an average of 13 workers every day—and an estimated 50,000 died from occupational diseases. Workers suffer an additional 7.6 million to 11.4 million job injuries and illnesses each year. The cost of job injuries and illnesses is enormous— Continue reading →

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.

Asking Congress To Make Our Laws More Fair To Injured Workers

US Capitol buildingDuring our trip to Washington D.C. last week, we spoke to elected officials about a few laws that impact injured workers. One of the laws is a proposed amendment to The Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA), the law the provides medical benefits and wage replacement to injured Federal employees. It is the federal version of the otherwise state-based workers’ compensation system. The amendment is being proposed as part of S. 1789, the Postal Service Reform Act (PSRA).

We wanted to share some highlights of why the proposed changes are harmful to injured workers. The most damaging parts of the legislation are discussed below:

  1. Conversion of entitlement at retirement age 
    §302 of the bill would reduce the compensation rate to 50% of wages (for employees on total disability) and to 50% of wage-earning capacity loss (for employees receiving partial disability) once any of those employees have reached retirement age.This proposal would reduce by up to 1/3 (from 75% or 66-2/3% of wage loss to 50% of wage loss) the compensation for disabled employees who have reached retirement age. Given that many people (including members of the House and Senate and their staffs, all of whom are covered by FECA) work the traditional retirement age, this is unfair and raises issues of age discrimination. Reduction to 50% of wages is drastic, and Continue reading →

Prior results do not guarantee outcomes.
Attorney Advertising.