Tag: Workers Comp

Over a seven-year period Amazon.com Inc. was assessed $329,981 in penalties by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, of which the company paid only $109,864, according to an agency spokeswoman.

“In most cases, a settlement agreement was reached in which Amazon agreed to comply with a cited standard or regulation or to eliminate a recognized hazard identified by OSHA during an inspection,” a spokeswoman wrote in an email to Business Insurance regarding penalties assessed and paid from 2017 to 2023.

Companies have 15 business days to contest OSHA citations and often negotiate with the agency, which can require that they eliminate hazards in exchange for lowered penalties. 

The agency was following up requests for more information following the July 16 publication of a scathing U.S. Senate report that highlighted the company’s injury rates during surge sale days, such as Amazon Prime Day.

An Amazon spokeswoman did not respond to follow-up requests for comment on the outcome of Amazon safety citations, writing in response to the Senate report that “(c)itations are accusations, not proof of wrongdoing, and employers have the ability to contest them – so, we do so when we disagree with the allegations or the recommendations aren’t feasible for our operations.”

Amazon said the Senate report used outdated numbers and failed to use current injury rates that factor in safety improvements.

Brown & Brown Inc. Tuesday reported its second-quarter revenue increased 12.5% to $1.178 billion as it achieved 10% organic growth for the period.

Net income increased 35.2% to $257 million.

The broker’s retail segment saw 9.3% revenue growth to $646 million, with organic revenue growth of 7.3%. 

The programs business grew 15.8% to $359 million, with 15.4% organic growth, and wholesale brokerage notched 14.4% revenue growth to $159 million, with 11% organic growth.

Brown & Brown also said it added $13 million of annual revenue through 10 acquisitions during the quarter.

Speaking on the company’s Tuesday morning earnings call, J. Powell Brown, president and CEO, said the overall changes in rates for most lines were “relatively consistent with the last few quarters.”

Rates in the admitted property/casualty market continued to be up 5% to 10% for most lines, while the downward trend for workers compensation rates remained, with decreases of 5% to 10% in most states with the low level of unemployment. “We expect this trend to continue for the [third] quarter,” Mr. Brown said.

Rate increases for noncatastrophe property moderated, Mr. Brown said, adding, “We continue to see upward pressure on rates and deductibles for properties located in convective storm zones.”

Looking forward, Mr. Brown said, “We think the economy will continue to grow in the second half of the year, at the rate fairly similar to the first half. … Inflation will further moderate as the year progresses.”

On rates, he added, “For the admitted markets, we do not anticipate material changes from the first half of the year. The outliers will continue to be auto, work comp, casualty, any really, really large premium accounts. Casualty pricing will more than likely continue to move higher.”

 

 

Delaware Gov. John Carney on Wednesday signed legislation that revises a law allowing employers to qualify for participation in a workplace safety insurance program entitling them to lower workers compensation premiums.

The governor signed Senate Bill 306, which eliminates a requirement that employers pay $3,161 or more in annual workers comp premiums to qualify for the safety program.

Under the new law, that dollar figure is eliminated, and the workplace safety program is instead offered to employers who qualify for the uniform experience rating plan approved by the state insurance commissioner.

The workplace safety program is designed to incentivize employers who take steps to improve the health and safety of employees. The program establishes testing and inspection procedures to determine whether an employer qualifies for the premium discount.

 

 

A Michigan appeals court wrongly granted summary judgment to a contractor and subcontractor sued for negligence by a worker who was electrocuted on the job, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The high court said the Court of Appeals erred in determining that DTE Electric Co. didn’t owe a duty of care to Shareef El-Jamaly, who sued DTE and Kirco Manix Construction LLC after he was electrocuted when a metal tool he was carrying came into contact with a high-voltage power line owned by DTE.

Mr. El-Jamaly alleged Kirco was liable for the negligence of its subcontractors under a “common work area” doctrine and that DTE was negligent because it was aware of the danger posed by the power line but failed to remediate the issues.

A trial judge denied the defense motions for summary judgment, but the Court of Appeals reversed that decision.

The state Supreme Court said while general contractors are typically not liable for subcontractor negligence, there are exceptions to the rule.

In Shareef El-Jamaly v. Kirco Manix Construction LLC, the high court wrote that there was a “factual discrepancy” over the actual height of the power lines, and whether the defendants took reasonable steps to ensure workers were protected from power line dangers. 

The court also said there were factual disputes over the condition of the power lines at the time of the accident.

The Supreme Court reversed and remanded to the trial court.  

 

A Michigan appeals court wrongly granted summary judgment to a contractor and subcontractor sued for negligence by a worker who was injured on the job, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The high court said the Court of Appeals erred in determining that DTE Electric Co. didn’t owe a duty of care to Shareef El-Jamaly, who sued DTE and Kirco Manix Construction LLC after he was electrocuted when a metal tool he was carrying came into contact with a high-voltage power line owned by DTE.

Mr. El-Jamaly alleged Kirco was liable for the negligence of its subcontractors under a “common work area” doctrine and that DTE was negligent because it was aware of the danger posed by the power line but failed to remediate the issues.

A trial judge denied the defense motions for summary judgment, but the Court of Appeals reversed that decision.

The state Supreme Court said while general contractors are typically not liable for subcontractor negligence, there are exceptions to the rule.

In Shareef El-Jamaly v. Kirco Manix Construction LLC, the high court wrote that there was a “factual discrepancy” over the actual height of the power lines, and whether the defendants took reasonable steps to ensure workers were protected from power line dangers. 

The court also said there were factual disputes over the condition of the power lines at the time of the accident.

The Supreme Court reversed and remanded to the trial court.  

 

 

 

 

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration said Friday that it cited a Florida construction contractor for the second time in five years for endangering employees who perform work at great heights. 

OSHA cited Winter Haven-based Carpenter Contractors of America Inc. for one “willful-serious” violation and proposed $161,323 in penalties after inspectors found the company failed to provide required fall protection equipment to employees at a job site in Ave Maria, Florida, in January.

The workers were observed during the inspection securing roof trusses and facia 32 feet off the ground.

Carpenter Contractors has 15 business days to contest the citation and proposed penalties.

 

A court in Pennsylvania on Friday awarded death benefits to the spouse of a chief emergency medical technician who died of a heart attack while working at a charity event for his employer, which had denied benefits over the man’s preexisting heart condition.

In previous rulings, a state Workers’ Compensation Judge and the state’s Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board gave greater credibility to the claimant’s expert witness, a doctor who “acknowledged Decedent’s coronary artery disease, and numerous contributing medical conditions… (and) opined that patients with coronary artery disease are at a substantially higher risk of cardiac events during times of emotional or physical stress,” according to Prospect Medical Holdings Inc. v. R.C. Reeder, Decedent, c/o K. Reeder Carr, filed in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.

In assessing the EMT’s work on the day he died, the doctor said that the “physical stress

of (his) climb up the steps at the stadium with approximately 50 to 60 pounds of medical equipment, coupled with the emotional stress of managing an understaffed department and working overtime hours, substantially contributed to (his) heart attack, which caused his death.”

The judge found the expert testimony of the employer’s doctor lacking such context, relying on the man’s preexisting medical condition as a basis for denying the claim, opining that stress-related heart attacks are “extremely rare” and that “nothing related to his work was associated with or contributed to his sudden heart attack.”

The board affirmed this ruling, as did the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, writing that the judge’s assessment was “supported by competent and unequivocal medical testimony.”

 

 

Pennsylvania lawmakers on Wednesday introduced legislation that would allow employers to take adverse actions against employees who work in safety-sensitive positions who also possess a medical marijuana card.  

Under Senate Bill 1290, employees would no longer be permitted to work in safety-sensitive jobs whose duties include working at great heights or in confined spaces if they are found to be under the influence of marijuana, regardless of whether they hold a valid medical marijuana card.

A worker who is a medical marijuana patient may be prohibited by an employer from performing any tasks the employer deems life-threatening, and the prohibition would not be considered an adverse employment decision, even if the decision results in financial harm to the employee, the bill states.

The bill also permits employers to require employees or job applicants to submit to a drug test for marijuana while working in, or applying for, safety-sensitive positions.

The measure would also allow employers to require an employee or job applicant to disclose and produce a valid, state-issued medical marijuana card if the worker’s position is safety sensitive; medical marijuana patient status is currently protected health information in Pennsylvania.

The bill was referred to the Senate Law and Justice Committee. 

 

 

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration said Thursday that a Wisconsin global ink and coatings manufacturer has agreed to pay $110,000 to resolve a citation over a worker’s burn injuries.

OSHA said it originally proposed a $183,207 penalty against Wikoff Color Corp. and cited the company for multiple safety violations after a worker was burned in a flash fire while using a mixing vessel at the company’s Lisbon manufacturing facility in January.

The company agreed to pay the lower penalty following an informal conference with OSHA. It also agreed to abate the 12 violations.

Investigators found that the flash fire occurred as the worker manually added combustible powder ingredients to the industrial mixing vessel, according to OSHA. The incident caused the worker to sustain first- and second-degree burns.

OSHA cited Wikoff for multiple violations of Process Safety Management requirements related to the safe handling of highly hazardous chemicals.

Wikoff also failed to provide employees with effective training on the hazards of flammable liquids and combustible dust, OSHA said.