Many On-the-Job Injuries Result from Defective Machines
Far too many American workers are seriously injured or even killed. Workers’ compensation laws vary from state to state. While these laws often provide significant compensation to injured workers, the “workers comp” system often does not cover all the same damages and/or does not cover them to the same degree that direct personal injury claims and lawsuits can. An experienced personal injury attorney will therefore look carefully at any potential workers’ compensation claim to determine if any elements for compensation may be pursued separately from the work comp claim. Defective machines that cause on-the-job injuries are one significant cause of work-related injuries where products liability personal injury claims may be pursued in tandem with work comp claims.
Work Comp vs. Personal Injury
Workers’ compensation laws generally require employers to purchase insurance or contribute to programs that provide compensation to any employees who may be injured while on the job, regardless of how or why the employee may have been injured. Personal injury claims are more restrictive because they may only be pursued against individuals or companies that were somehow negligent or otherwise liable for injuries. Workers comp settlements are sometimes less generous than personal injury settlements. However, they sometimes provide access to certain types of compensation that personal injury claims do not. The good news is that in instances where workplace injury resulted from some form of negligence, personal injury, and workers’ compensation claims can be pursued simultaneously. (Workers comp will often require some degree of reimbursement from any personal injury settlement.) One example is on-the-job injuries caused by defective machines, vehicles, or other workplace equipment.
How do Workplace Injuries from Defective Machines Occur?
Some on-the-job injuries result from defective machines that simply fail due to problems with their design or manufacture, resulting in injuries to workers who may be nearby when the failure occurs. Another category of injury from defective machines is related to a hazard mitigation procedure called “guarding,” which seeks to minimize risks that the machine may present to workers. Injuries due to machinery and failed machine guarding are one of the top categories for annual casualty numbers, according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
Many workplace machines will present inherent hazards to workers simply due to the nature of their standard functioning — a power saw being used by a carpenter to cut lumber is just as capable of cutting off unwary fingers; a forklift that can quickly move a heavy load to an upper shelf in a warehouse can just as easily injure a worker who may be too close when its forks drop back down. Many other “machine hazards” may exist where the tool is purposefully cutting, bending, shaping, or moving materials exactly how the tool is intended to function.
Why Should Machine Hazards Be Eliminated or Reduced?
The National Safety Council (NSC) is a non-profit organization that promotes safety and health. Workplace safety is one of its primary areas of focus. Within the category of injuries from “machine operation,” the National Safety Council breaks down the types of risk into two major categories — situational risk and systemic risk. Situational risks are inherent to the situation — a forklift can run over a worker, and a band saw can cut off fingers. Systemic risks are preventive and procedural factors that can help eliminate injuries when adequately addressed or cause injuries if ignored. Machine guards — and machine guarding failures — are examples of systemic risks.
How Should Machine Hazards be Eliminated or Reduced?
Machine guards are used to keep workers from putting themselves or parts of their bodies into places where injuries may result from the operation of the machine. Machine guards are one tool in a series of options that the NSC recommends that machine designers and manufacturers consider when producing their equipment:
- The best option is to redesign the machine to eliminate the hazard if possible. Often, however, this simply isn’t possible — a band saw can only cut wood if the wood can be brought into contact with the saw, and if it’s possible for wood to contact the saw, then it’s probably possible for fingers to touch the saw.
- Guarding is the second option recommended by the NSC. Machine guards come in several categories, which we’ll discuss in a moment.
- The third option is warning the user of hazards that cannot be designed out of the machine or guarded against.
- And the fourth option is training policies for the safe operation of the equipment.
What are Machine Guards?
Machine guards are intended to keep workers and their body parts away from machines (or parts of those machines) that may cause them injury. These guards can be as different from one another as the individual hazards that different machines may present. A guard on a table saw there may be physical barriers to prevent hands and fingers from approaching the saw blade. A guard against forklift injuries in a warehouse may be sensors that won’t allow a doorway to open from one part of the warehouse to another if any workers are nearby. Interlocking guards on power equipment may require a worker to hold down separate buttons with each hand to activate the equipment, ensuring that a worker can’t place one hand near the equipment’s dangerous moving parts.
“I’ll be Careful.”
One primary concern with machine guards is designing against workers who may willingly place themselves or other workers at risk by trying to remove or bypass guarding to get the work done more quickly or easily. This becomes especially dangerous when supervisors and/or employers are willing to ignore safety to speed up work. A primary design element of a machine guard is that it will work automatically and consistently whether the worker wants it to or not.
How a Personal Injury Attorney Can Help
Since workplace injury claims related to defective machines will typically have options for both workers’ compensation claims and personal injury claims, it is necessary to carefully evaluate which path — or both paths — should be pursued. There are pros and cons for both the work comp path and the personal injury path depending upon the specific facts of the injury, how and why it occurred, and the long-term consequences to the injured worker. Careful consideration of these options is crucial.
Additionally, an experienced personal injury attorney will have the skills and resources necessary to properly investigate the incident to determine which causes may have been contributed by the designer and manufacturer of the equipment, by the injured worker’s employer or co-workers, or by other possible defendants. All of this must be appropriately conducted before the work comp claim, personal injury claim, or both can be brought to a successful conclusion by negotiation, mediation, arbitration, or trial.
Watch this video from the Pennsylvania State OSHA on how machine guarding increases worker safety:
Sacramento Personal Injury Lawyers
I’m Ed Smith, a Sacramento Personal Injury Attorney. Defective machines at a workplace – including those with inadequately designed or implemented guarding – can cause serious, life-altering injuries. If you or a family member has been injured in a workplace incident involving a piece of machinery or other equipment, please call us at (916) 921-6400 or (800) 404-5400 for free, friendly advice. Or contact us through our online contact form.
I am pleased to be a member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum and the National Association of Distinguished Counsel.
Feel free to view some of our past client verdicts and settlements here, and you can read our client reviews on Yelp, Avvo, & Google.
Image Attribution: Image by Brian Odwar from Pixabay
gm [cs 1332] cha