Workers' Compensation

March 4, 2016

Massachusetts Healthcare Workers Injured More Than Those in Other States

According to the Massachusetts Nursing Association, healthcare workers in the Bay State are being injured at a notably higher rate than those in other states and other industries. The majority of these injuries are occurring because known solutions aren’t being implemented, or are being administered incorrectly. For example, although it is widely known in the industry that patient-handling equipment should be use to move patients from bed to wheelchair – or vice versa – many workers opt not to use the equipment. In some cases, this is a conscious decision, but in many cases, it is a result of inadequate employee training. Contact a Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Lawyer Today.

1,000 Healthcare Worker Injuries Reported Annually in Massachusetts

In a recent presentation by the state’s Department of Public Health (DPH) to the Massachusetts Coalition for the Prevention of Medical Errors, the department said that approximately 21,500 workdays are lost every year due to about 1,000 employee injuries. Despite these staggering numbers, only 44% of MA hospitals have patient-handling policies intended to prevent worker injuries. When asked why, more than 70% of employers said the most significant barrier to implementing such policies is lack of time.

According to Beth Piknick, a past president of the MA Nurses Association, the reluctance of hospitals to implement necessary safety procedures suggests the need for a legislative solution. And Piknick has personal experience, having suffered a career-ending injury over two decades ago. Since then, she has been advocating for improvements in patient-handling practices.

Unsafe Patient-Handling Practices to Blame for Thousands of Injuries

A statewide law requiring safe handling is currently pending before the legislature. The policies in the pending bill follow the recommended guidelines as outlined by DPH in its most recent report. “Implementing these policies and using this equipment will save millions of dollars and more thousands of lost work days for workers injured from unsafe patient handling practices,” Picknick said.

What Other Workplace Hazards Affect Healthcare Workers?

Patient-handling injuries aren’t the only hazards faced by healthcare workers. Nursing aides, orderlies, and attendants have the highest rates of injury, but any healthcare worker has a high risk of on-the-job injury. Potential hazards include:

Biological hazards
Chemical exposure
Drug hazards
Anesthetic gas exposure
Ergonomic hazards
Respiratory hazards
Exposure to bloodborne pathogens
X-ray hazards

In fact, according to OSHA, more workers are injured in the healthcare industry than any other. A total of 653,900 cases of injury and illness were reported by the healthcare and social assistance industry in 2010. That is more than any other other private industry sector, and a whopping 152,000 cases more than manufacturing, the next highest industry sector. Continue reading

January 25, 2016

OSHA’s Removal of ‘Slips, Trips, and Falls’ Rule Leaves Employers on Shaky Ground

by Altman & Altman

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration establishes rules, regulations, and standards that employers must comply with to maintain a safe working environment for employees. In addition to protecting employee safety, OSHA regulations actually help employers in many cases. For example, if an employee is injured but an OSHA investigation reveals that the employer followed all established rules and regulations, these findings will help the employer avoid liability. In a recent and surprising move, OSHA has withdrawn its ‘slips, trips, and falls rule’ from the White House review process in order to review the rule’s benefits and costs. In doing so, OSHA has created a possible dilemma for employers, many of whom are now unsure of how to proceed. Contact a Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Lawyer Today.

How Does Withdrawing This Rule Hurt Employers?

For starters, the rule helped create a safety-net for employers to adhere to. However, the rule also provided some ‘grey areas’ which also served to protect employers. The portion of the slips, trips, and falls rule that pertained to guardrail standards was one such grey area.The standard height of guardrails is set at 42 inches, however, a height of 36 or 37 inches was considered a de minimis violation, which requires no penalty. With the removal of the slips, trips, and falls rule that included this ‘exception’ to the 42-inch rule, employers are now unclear if they have to retrofit all guardrails to the standard height.

The removal of this rule is significant – slips, trips, and falls account for billions of dollars in workers’ comp payments every year. According to Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety’s 2016 Workplace Safety Index, employers spent $15.6 billion on injuries from same level falls and falls to a lower level in 2013, and $2.4 billion on slips, trips, and falls in the same year.

Slips, Trips, and Falls Account for 3,500 Serious Injuries Every Year

The slips, trips, and falls rule, which was originally published in 1990, established requirements for personal fall protection systems, among other things. It has since been rewritten twice to adapt to technological advances. The withdrawal of this rule on December 21 may only be a temporary move. OSHA has stated that it will finalize the rule during the current term and re-publish the rule once this has been accomplished. OSHA referred to other rules which have been temporarily withdrawn, updated, and re-published as well. According to the director of consulting services for the National Safety Council in Itasca, Illinois, W.E. Scott, the rule is beneficial in that it incorporates new technologies to protect workers and may reduce the slips, trips, and falls injuries in the council’s 2015 Injury Facts report. The report revealed 3,500 serious injuries and 20 fatalities due to slips, trips, and falls in 2015. Continue reading

January 12, 2016

Explosion at North Andover Dow Chemical Plant Injures Five

by Altman & Altman

On Thursday afternoon, an explosion at the North Andover Dow Chemical facility injured five workers, four critically. State and federal officials are investigating the explosion, which took place in a chemical lab at the plant. As a precautionary measure, the state’s bomb squad will be detonating chemicals that may have injured the workers. In addition, the facility is being secured by emergency personnel to ensure that safety requirements are being followed. The official cause of the explosion is still unknown. Contact a Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Lawyer Today.

Four of the injured workers were hospitalized and one was treated at the scene for minor injuries. According to staff at Lawrence General Hospital, the critically injured workers are suffering from burns and shrapnel injuries. The burns appear to have been caused by a dangerous chemical called trimethylaluminum, a key component in LED lights, of which Dow is a manufacturer. More commonly known as trimethyl aluminum, the colorless liquid is highly flammable and reactive, and it is considered to be an explosion hazard.

No Atmospheric Release of Chemicals

January 6, 2016

Roofing Falls and Workers’ Compensation Benefits – What You Need to Know

by Altman & Altman

Falls from roofs are among the most common construction accidents in the industry. Unfortunately, they are often deadly. In order to reduce the risk of serious injury and death, it is essential that workers receive proper training and that employers provide a safe working environment at all times. Workers’ compensation can help cover medical expenses and lost wages when a worker is injured on-the-job. Contact a Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Attorney Today.

Roofing Falls Among Most Dangerous Construction Accidents

According to OSHA, 100 American workers are killed in roofing falls every year. Most of these are construction workers. That is an average of 34 fatal roofing injuries for every 100,000 construction workers. Beyond those numbers, an additional 150,000 people are injured annually in roofing accidents that require emergency room visits.

Most Roofing Accidents Are Preventable

Roofing falls are typically the result of inadequate employee training, carelessness on the part of the employee or employer, or negligence. Manufacturers, third-party vendors, and employers may be found liable in a roofing accident, depending on the cause. A safety-harness manufacturer may be deemed negligent, for example, if the harness breaks, causing a worker to fall. Sometimes there seems to be a clear cause for the fall initially but upon further investigation other factors can be contributing factors for the accident. Hiring the right law firm who has access to the best experts is often critical to determining liability and maximizing damages.

Who is at Fault?

It is not uncommon for employers to claim that the accident was the injured worker’s fault. However, the right evidence and information can be used to prove otherwise. For example, were OSHA standards adhered to? Was the edge of the roof clearly marked with warning flags? Was a safety monitor on duty to warn workers when they near the edge? Was the worker tied off appropriately? If the worker fell through a hole, was the hole properly covered?

Beyond MA Workers’ Comp

Workers’ Compensation is typically available to workers who have been injured while performing on-the-job duties. However, these benefits are limited. If roofing injuries are due to third-party or employer neglect, the victim will likely be entitled to additional compensation.

Roofing Accident Causes

Roofing falls can occur for a variety of reasons, including flimsy materials, employer or third-party negligence, collapsing ladders or scaffolding, electrical shock, and explosions.

Employers Must Provide a Safe Working Environment

Employers must take proper measures to ensure the safety of their workers. These include providing necessary equipment and materials, such as safety harnesses, lifts, railings, flags, and other safety gear. The employer is also responsible for ensuring that all equipment is in good working order and that working conditions and equipment are routinely inspected.

Common Roofing Accident Injuries

Common injuries from roofing accidents include sprains and broken bones, brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, paralysis, and even death. Injuries sustained in roofing accidents can result in overwhelming medical expenses, lost wages, chronic pain, and emotional trauma. Continue reading

December 9, 2015

Emotional Injuries – Are They Covered by Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation?

by Altman & Altman

Most Massachusetts workplace injuries are covered by workers’ compensation benefits. On-the-job accidents, such as chemical burns, falls from high places, inhalation of toxic fumes, being struck by an object, and work-vehicle accidents can result in serious physical injuries and even death. But what about emotional injuries? In Massachusetts, mental and emotional injuries are typically covered by workers’ compensation if they result from eligible workplace events. Contact a Boston Workers’ Compensation Lawyer Today.

A recent MA workers’ comp claim filed by a Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department employee highlights a notable exception in the Massachusetts workers’ comp statute. Joseph Upton, a jail officer who started working at the sheriff’s department in 1991, was terminated after a jail assault investigation revealed that he had filed false reports about the incident. However, upon following a grievance, his job was reinstated in 2001. Upton was scheduled to receive back pay, minus any unemployment benefits he received while not working. Although the sheriff’s department appealed the award of back pay, the MA Supreme Court upheld the award in 2008.

Upon reinstatement, Upton was required to submit a signed document that detailed his unemployment earnings while off work. However, after learning that the jail officer may have underreported outside earnings, the sheriff’s department requested that Upton meet with investigators to discuss his signed statement. Immediately following the meeting, Upton went to the hospital, complaining of chest pains and shortness of breath. Shortly after, Upton filed a workers’ comp claim, requesting benefits for emotional injuries suffered as a result of the stressful investigation.

Injuries Resulting from ‘Personnel Action’ are Not Covered

Upton’s claim for benefits was denied by the administrative law judge because his disability was the result of a “bona fide personnel action.” Chapter 152 of the Massachusetts workers’ comp statute specifically states, “No mental or emotional disability arising principally out of a bona fide, personnel action including a transfer, promotion, demotion, or termination except such action which is the intentional infliction of emotional harm shall be deemed to be a personal injury within the meaning of this chapter.” As Upton’s meeting with investigators was deemed a “personnel action,” his injuries weren’t eligible for benefits. This case serves as a reminder that Massachusetts employees are not eligible to receive workers’ comp benefits for injuries that occurred due to a normal personnel action, including investigative procedures. This is even true for physical injuries, such as chest pains or shortness of breath. Continue reading

December 8, 2015

Preventing Slip and Fall Accidents in Boston Restaurants and Food Service Jobs

by Altman & Altman

Restaurant, food service, and food manufacturing workers have a higher risk of slip and fall accidents than workers in most other occupations. In fact, according to Liberty Mutual’s Workplace Safety Index, 45% of workers’ compensation claims in restaurants are due to falls. Many factors contribute to the high risk, including spills, improper footwear, tripping over flooring material, dim lighting, and walkway obstructions. Although adequate housekeeping can significantly reduce slip and fall accidents, the fast-paced, chaotic nature of many restaurant kitchens can make it difficult to keep floors clean, dry, and clear at all times. If you work in the restaurant or food service industry, the tips below can help keep you on your feet. Contact a Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Lawyer Today.

Safety Tips

Floor Mats: In addition to clean, dry floors, well-maintained mats are an essential component of any commercial kitchen. As they are frequently subjected to spills, high traffic, and cleaning products, food service mats need to be replaced often. It’s also important to get the right mat for the job. The mats used in industrial plants are designed to provide foot comfort and traction, and not much more. Food service mats, however, should provide additional slip and fall protection against substances such as ice, grease, and oil. Each mat should also be well suited to its area of use. For example, mats in high traffic areas should be low profile or have a ramp to prevent tripping over edges. Thick mats with holes, on the other hand, are good for allowing spills to drain onto the floor underneath.

Footwear: Proper footwear is essential for food service and restaurant workers. Slip and fall accidents make up nearly half of all workers’ compensation claims in the food service industry. Considering that the food service environment typically consists of slippery floors, hot surfaces, boiling liquids, and knives, shoes with excellent traction and support are vital to the safety of all employees. The two most important components of a safe shoe are the quality of the materials and the design of the sole. Soft, durable materials are best, and tread patterns should not run in the direction of travel as this may accentuate forward motion.

High Cost of Slip and Fall Injuries: According to the National Safety Council, the average slip and fall injury costs up to $28,000. These calculations include medical expenses, workers’ compensation benefits, paperwork, lost wages, and an increase in insurance premiums. Tens of thousands of restaurant workers are treated in hospital emergency rooms for slip and fall injuries every year. The majority of the accidents are blamed on wet or greasy floors. Continue reading

November 23, 2015

On-the-Job Scarring Victims May Soon Be Eligible for Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Benefits

by Altman & Altman

In Massachusetts, when a worker is injured on-the-job, he or she is generally eligible for workers’ compensation benefits. Workers’ compensation is an insurance program designed to replace lost wages and cover the cost of medical expenses when an individual is injured in the course of employment. Certain medical costs may not be covered, depending on the worker’s jurisdiction. In Massachusetts, for example, workers are not eligible to receive benefits for scarring injuries to the arms, legs, and torso. However, due to a recent case involving a metal worker that was severely burned after falling into a vat of chemicals, this may soon change. Contact a Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Attorney Today.

Sylbert Stewart, a 56-year-old Lowell resident, suffered second and third degree burns on both legs and feet while working at a factory in Belmont. Today, Stewart is permanently scarred and in constant pain. His injuries resulted in a 40% decrease in earnings, and he has received no compensation for the scarring injuries. In Massachusetts, disfiguring injuries must occur on the face, hands, and neck in order for the worker to be eligible for workers’ compensation benefits. However, recent advocacy from the Massachusetts Coalition for Occupational Safety & Health members and allies may have had enough of an impact to change this requirement. In late October, a Senate bill was approved 36 to 1 that would allow scarring victims to receive compensation for their injuries, regardless of where on the body the injuries occurred. The bill, which was sponsored by Senator Sal DiDomenico and Representative Sean Garballey, would remove the face, hands, and neck requirement and would increase the victim’s compensation to 22.5 times the average weekly wage in Massachusetts. Continue reading

October 28, 2015

OSHA’s Severe Violator Enforcement Program – Goal is to Hold Most Severe Violators Accountable

by Altman & Altman

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) enforces workplace safety regulations across the country. It is the employer’s responsibility to adhere to these regulations, but they don’t always take heed. Unfortunately, when employers violate these regulations, workers can get seriously injured and even die. An employee injured on-the-job is generally entitled to compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, and other associated costs.

Although employees may be eligible for Massachusetts workers’ compensation benefits if they are injured at work, the main goal is to prevent injuries from happening in the first place. Employees often trust in, and rely on, OSHA to keep a close eye on their work environments. However, this is simply not always possible. OSHA does not have the funding to look into every accident or violation claim. To prevent major violations from slipping through the cracks, the agency implemented its Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP) to protect employees from exceptionally dangerous work hazards.

SVEP was created to replace OSHA’s Enhanced Enforcement Program (EEP), which had proven quite ineffective. The goal with SVEP is to hold the most severe violators accountable. Possibly due to the failure of EEP, this new program has been receiving criticism from some stakeholders who claim that it continues to overlook the worst violators while simultaneously placing employers on the list that shouldn’t be on there. However, the 2013 self-review of SVEP found the program to be effective.

In order for an employer to be placed on the SVEP list, several criteria must be met. For starters, a) the violations have to be deliberate or repetitive, or failure to resolve the violations must result in hospitalization of at least three employees, or the death of one or more employees, b) there must be at least two serious injuries, such as falls or amputations, that resulted from the employer’s failure to comply with regulations, c) or there must be at least three violations and failure to correct the discharge of harmful chemicals. Continue reading

October 23, 2015

Heavy Boxes Fall from Big Lots’ Shelves and Seriously Injure Employee

by Altman & Altman

Discount retailer Big Lots Stores Inc. is facing $66,000 in fines from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) after an employee was injured at a store location in Danvers, Massachusetts. The store’s assistant manager wound up in the hospital after being struck by several falling boxes of patio furniture and other items. The boxes, which were being kept in the store’s rear stockroom, weighed up to 53 pounds each. If you’ve been injured at work, call a Boston Workers’ Compensation Attorney.

Danvers’ Big Lots Store Cited for Cluttered Aisles and Improperly Stacked Boxes

Following an investigation by OSHA, it was determined that the accident was a result of negligence. Boxes were stacked high throughout the storeroom and many were haphazardly placed in an unstable condition. The aisles of the storeroom presented another problem. They were cluttered with an array of items, including broken wooden pallets, boxes of stock, and pieces of cardboard. Conditions like these are dangerous for multiple reasons. The most obvious issue with clogged walkways is the inability to quickly exit the building in the event of an emergency, such as a fire. Additionally, employees can trip and fall in such conditions, leading to broken bones, sprains, and many other injuries.

In response to the store’s conditions, and the injuries suffered as a result, Big Lots Stores Inc. received citations for two repeated violations. OSHA had cited the company previously in 2014 for similar issues at store locations in Warner Robins, Georgia, and West Babylon, New York. The subsequent citation was issued on October 2, 2015, and Big Lots Stores Inc. must respond appropriately within 15 days. To fulfill this requirement, the discount retailer must comply with the demands issued in the citation, request a conference with OSHA, or contest the citation and any associated penalties. Continue reading

October 2, 2015

Recently Promoted MA Worker Denied Workers’ Comp Benefits Based on Higher Wage

by Altman & Altman

In a recent and unprecedented MA workers’ compensation case, a hospital employee was injured at work after learning of an upcoming promotion, but cannot receive benefits based on the higher wage. According to an administrative judge, the employee’s promotion was an absolute certainty, and the worker’s comp benefits should be calculated based on the new wage. However, the Department of Industrial Accidents (DIA) reviewing board appealed that decision, stating that, “It is the position held at the time of the accident which governs, not some prospective plan in the future which may or may not come to fruition.”

Massachusetts Workers’ Comp Benefits Traditionally Based on Prior 52 Weeks Average Weekly Wage

The DIA’s decision has prompted a further investigation into the workers’ comp statute and how it addresses such out-of-the-ordinary circumstances. Provisions within the statute allow a hearing judge to deviate from using the employee’s prior 52 weeks in average weekly wage (AWW) calculations when unusual circumstances are present. Unfortunately for this employee, the DIA does not consider this situation to warrant deviation from the traditional rules. According to Administrative Law Judge, William Harpin, “The definition of AWW [cannot] be stretched so far as to cover wages that have yet to be earned in a position not yet held.”

Vikki Harris, a Radiology Service Representative at Partners Healthcare System, had been earning an AWW of $703.56 for approximately one year when she learned of her upcoming promotion to Patient Service Representative. Her new AWW was scheduled to be $730, which was similar to other workers in that position. Less than one week before her scheduled promotion, Harris slipped on a wet floor and fractured her kneecap. The fracture left Harris completely incapacitated and unable to work for months. Although Harris is no longer completely incapacitated, she is still physically unable to go back to work. In this particular case, the employee’s injury prevented her from earning a higher paycheck, but that hasn’t changed the outcome of the ruling.

Under §51 of the MA worker’s compensation statute, a worker’s AWW can be increased if he or she can prove that age or acquisition of skills would have most likely led to a higher AWW on the open labor market. However, according to the DIA, this particular case does not qualify under §51. “A simple promotion well into a career does not qualify as a likely wage increase under this statute,” said Harpin. Additionally, since the initial judge had already determined that Harris was entitled to the higher AWW, he never addressed whether or not §51 applied. Had Harris cross-appealed on such grounds, the outcome may have been different. Continue reading