To avoid the direct and indirect costs associated with unsafe workplaces, waste and recycling companies should invest time, effort, and resources in fostering a culture of worker safety.
By Samuel Pond
Waste and recycling
jobs can be dirty and hazardous. Waste and recycling workers put their well-being and lives at risk every time they clock in, as there is no shortage of risks of injury and death awaiting them every day. They are at risk of, among other severe and fatal injuries:
鈥� Lifting and repetitive motion injuries
鈥� Getting struck by their collection trucks or vehicles
鈥� Slipping and falling on slippery or uneven surfaces
鈥� Getting stabbed by sharp objects that pierce trash bags and gloves (and potentially expose them to hazardous materials)
鈥� Injuries caused by heavy machinery, including collection trucks, hydraulic machinery, and conveyor belts inside sorting plants
In my experience practicing workers鈥� compensation law over the past four decades, I have found that few waste and recycling companies prioritize worker safety. They view increased safety costs as costs that hit their bottom lines and reduce their profits. They are wrong.
A safe workplace is beneficial for the bottom lines of waste and recycling companies. Fewer worker injuries and fatalities lead to fewer families losing loved ones. From a business perspective, this means fewer workers鈥� compensation or third-party liability claims, resulting in lower legal bills, fewer insurance premium hikes, and a better reputation among workers, the industry, and the local community.
In other words, waste and recycling companies have much to gain by maintaining safe working conditions at their U.S. facilities.
The Legal Rights of Workers Injured While Working at a Waste and Recycling Facility
Ordinarily, when someone in the U.S. claims they were injured because of the actions of another person or entity in order to prevail in a lawsuit, they must prove that person or entity was at fault. If they do so, they could recover a wide range of damages, including pain and suffering, economic, and punitive damages.
But things are different when a worker is injured while on the job. The U.S. workers鈥� compensation system came about in the early 20th century. As part of a compromise known as the 鈥淕rand Bargain,鈥� workers, in exchange for forgoing their constitutional due process rights to sue their employers for injuries they suffered on the job and have their lawsuit decided by a jury of their peers, agreed to subject themselves to an administrative regime that pays them benefits covering the wages lost and medical expenses they incurred because of their injuries.
Under this system, an injured worker need not prove their employer did anything wrong to receive benefits. They simply must prove that they were injured 鈥渋n the course and scope鈥� of employment. However, injured workers ordinarily will not qualify for workers鈥� compensation if they intentionally injured themselves, were 鈥渉orsing around,鈥� or were under the influence of drugs or alcohol when they were injured. Workers鈥� compensation benefits can include payment of reasonable and necessary medical treatment related to the work injury, lost wages (in the form of a weekly disability rate for the period they cannot perform the tasks they performed at their job), and additional compensation if a worker suffers a permanent loss of a body part.
All 50 U.S. states have workers鈥� compensation laws, but there is only one state that does not require employers to carry workers鈥� compensation insurance: Texas. However, Texas employers risk financial consequences whenever they decline to carry the insurance. If they do not have workers鈥� compensation insurance, an injured worker can sue them directly for negligence.
In some instances, injured workers could sue other parties who were partially or fully at fault for their injuries. A worker injured due to a hydraulic compactor malfunction could sue the compactor manufacturer, as well as the companies that installed, inspected, and maintained it.
Likewise, a worker injured by a vertical baler could do the same. If they recover damages in a lawsuit against a third party, their workers鈥� compensation benefits will likely be offset by the amount of money they recover.
Employer Responsibilities in Maintaining Safe Working Conditions鈥攁nd What Happens if They Do Not
Generally speaking, employers are required by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act to maintain workplaces that are 鈥渇ree from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm.鈥� The OSH Act creates additional legal obligations for employers, including those concerning the identification and control of hazards, provision of safety training, communication with workers about hazards and emergency action plans, ensuring the safety of tools and equipment, and maintaining reports and records of injuries and serious incidents. If employers operate in states that have their own occupational safety and health administration agencies, such as Arizona, California, Maryland, and Virginia, those state agencies may require employers to comply with additional obligations.
When employers violate the OSH Act, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) can issue citations and levy fines. For 鈥渟erious鈥� and 鈥渙ther-than-serious鈥� violations, OSHA can levy fines of up to $16,550 per violation. For 鈥渨illful鈥� violations, it can levy fines of between $11,823 and $165,514 per violation. When employers have repeated violations, particularly serious ones, OSHA may increase the frequency of its inspections or seek a court order requiring the employer to cease operations until the hazards causing the violations are corrected.
Unfortunately, OSHA鈥檚 penalties and fines are rarely a deterrent to large employers. They are not large enough to make a dent in employers鈥� bottom lines, even when a worker loses a life because of an OSHA violation. Additionally, OSHA lacks the personnel to monitor a reasonable number of active worksites adequately. Even if it did, it is doubtful that every OSHA inspector would be well-trained enough to identify all violations and expose employers鈥� attempts to cover them up. If OSHA鈥檚 penalties and fines were actual deterrents, there would likely be half as many workplace injuries across the U.S. because of the strong financial motivation employers would have to avoid them.
OSHA鈥檚 penalties may not deter employers from creating unsafe work environments, but other ramifications may. As I mentioned previously, although employers generally do not need to worry about their injured workers suing them directly, they will face costs if their workers are frequently injured on the job. They can expect increased workers鈥� compensation insurance premiums, including the loss of discounts for having safety policies in place and for safe operations. They may also incur higher legal bills due to the need to defend more workers鈥� compensation claims.
But beyond those costs, employers could receive negative publicity in the form of news reports about workplace accidents or OSHA violations, which would damage their reputation. In addition, workers could quit, and prospective workers could decline job offers, due to the reputation or firsthand knowledge they have from friends and family about unsafe work conditions. Additionally, clients and other organizations may cancel contracts or terminate business relationships because they view unsafe work conditions as indicative of a poorly managed company.
Investing in Safety is Good for Waste and Recycling Companies鈥� Business
To avoid the direct and indirect costs associated with unsafe workplaces, waste and recycling companies should invest time, effort, and resources in fostering a culture of worker safety. These cultures will be driven by a safety director who is empowered to build safety programs that educate workers while also holding themselves and the workers accountable. The money invested in a safety director and their program is the smartest money a waste and recycling company can spend.
A safety director would create and/or improve a safety culture by:
鈥� Assessing potential risks and identifying hazards workers are likely to face
鈥� Developing and updating safety policies, procedures, and protocols
鈥� Building training and education programs to support the emerging culture of safety
鈥� Creating site audit and inspection procedures, developing and implementing emergency response plans, and creating procedures for investigating safety violations and taking corrective actions when they occur
鈥� Developing a way for safety performance to be factored into workers鈥� evaluations
Waste and recycling companies, as for-profit operations, are often motivated by monetary outcomes. There is nothing wrong with that, but that motivation should lead them to strive for a culture of worker safety. Adopting this approach will benefit both workers and bottom lines. | WA
Samuel H. Pond is the managing partner of Pond Lehocky Giordano Inc., the largest workers鈥� compensation and Social Security disability law firm in Pennsylvania, and one of the largest in the U.S. He can be contacted at [email protected].