Equipment and Machine Malfunction

Archive for the ‘Equipment and Machine Malfunction’ Category

Ring on Your Finger? Take It Off! Ring Avulsion Is Real (Losing a Finger Because of a Ring)

November 18th, 2010 by admin

If you search for the term “ring avulsion” you’ll find lots of gory images of lost fingers and mangled hands, all due to the dangers of wearing a ring while on the job, working on the car or around the house, etc. There are also lots of medio-technical papers which aren’t inviting to the average reader since they’re filled with lots of medical jargon (and sometimes require a paid subscription).

New Article Explains Danger of Wearing a Ring

However, it was only this week that an excellent overview of the dangers of wearing rings while doing certain tasks was published online. If you want to know more about ring avulsion, check out CED Investigative Technologies’ latest article, “Ring Avulsion: the Danger of Wearing a Ring!Engineering Experts in Railroad Claims and Litigation Meet the Expert: Grant Bevill, Ph.D.”

This article is worth your time to read, whether you are a worker or a boss, and whether or not you work in the railroad industry, work construction, do mill work or mining, or any other type of thing that brings your hands into contact with heavy tools, electrical appliances, and the like.

Leave the Wedding Band at Home or in Your Pocket

Simply put, that wedding band or class ring may have sentimental value but you need to weigh that against permanent injury to your hand – including losing that ring finger.

And, if your wife or husband is disturbed about you leaving that ring off your finger (since the wedding band does mark you as mated in our society), then pull up those images that pop up when the phrase “ring avulsion” is searched. Only, don’t do this right before dinner.

Posted in Construction Injuries, Electrocution, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Job Site Injury, Longshoremen & Maritime, Mill Accidents, Railroad Workers (FELA), Serious Personal Injury, Work Related, Workers’ Compensation | No Comments »

Notre Dame v Declan Sullivan: The Realities of Indiana Law Today

November 9th, 2010 by admin

ESPN looked to our own Kenneth J. Allen for his expertise this week in its coverage of the tragic death of Declan Sullivan, 20, who died while on the job as a Notre Dame football videographer. Sullivan perished after falling from a scaffold while he was taping football practice. Fifty-one mile per hour (51 mph) winds have been blamed for causing Declan’s death.

Citing Kenneth J. Allen as a “highly successful trial lawyer in Valparaiso,” ESPN provided its listeners and readers with his expertise regarding Indiana injury law: the sad truth is that the laws of Indiana favor big companies and insurance companies, not people like Declan Sullivan and his surviving loved ones.

And it’s bad. Since Sullivan died young and without a wife or kids, his worker’s compensation coverage under Indiana worker’s compensation laws comes to $7500.00. That’s it.

What about a lawsuit? The Sullivans could file against the manufacturer of the scaffold – a scissor lift – that failed. This would be a products liability case under Indiana law, not federal law. They could also sue any other company that dealt with the lift: from the leasing company, to the repair company, etc. — but as Kenneth J. Allen explained to ESPN readers, the Sullivan family would have a small likelihood of victory here.

Why? There’s a safety law that states no one is supposed to be working from scaffolds when there are high winds, unless someone in the know has okayed it as being safe, and they’ve implemented safety precautions against the winds, like a wind screen. As Kenneth Allen explained to ESPN, the claims have to deal with this legislation as well.

So, what happens? Outside of the legal system, it appears that the parties will be trying to find justice on their own. As ESPN reports, Notre Dame’s president has written an open letter, sent by email to the entire Notre Dame community on Friday, stating, “Declan Sullivan was entrusted to our care, and we failed to keep him safe. …We at Notre Dame, and ultimately I, as president, are responsible.”

Indiana law does not favor the Sullivans. However, obviously Notre Dame abides by a higher law than this — and hopefully, justice is resulting from this sad, sad situation.

Our condolences to the family and friends of Declan Sullivan – and we tip our hat to Rev. John Jenkins for writing this letter.

Posted in Defective Products, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Indiana Wrongful Death, Insurance Claims, Job Site Injury, School & Playground Injuries, Serious Personal Injury, Work Related, Wrongful Death | 1 Comment »

Peabody Expanding S. Illinois Gateway Mine – Will the Reminder of Chile’s 33 Rescued Miners Be Remembered?

October 14th, 2010 by admin

This week, the entire world watched as 33 miners were rescued from 2000+ feet below the ground — in fact, the Washington Post has compiled a nice timeline of the Chile miners’ recovery which is worth your time to read.

They had been trapped underground for 2 months, 9 days, and 8 hours in a collapsed mine shaft. Imagine. Just imagine.

We’ve Been Watching the Chile Mine Rescue – Along with People like the Pope and the President

The Pope has been monitoring the Chile mine disaster, referencing the ongoing rescue effort in his address from the Vatican on Wednesday, as almost a dozen men had been brought to the surface. Graceland has just invited one of the rescued miners for a visit (assumedly, miner Edison Pena is a big Elvis fan).

President Obama along with the Chilean President issued emotional statements to the press as the miracle of every man recovered and reunited with family was viewed, as it happened, on screens all over the world.

It was a wonderful thing – all these men being safely returned to their families after being trapped so far below ground for so long a time. For those who understand the inherent dangers of mining, this was an impressive feat.

Appreciation and Relief

Representing plaintiffs who have been seriously injured or killed in mining disasters, Ken Allen Law has a special appreciation for what has happened in Chile. It’s simply a wonderful thing, thrilling and at the same time, such a relief. It could have so easily gone the other way.

Which brings us to the recent news release by Peabody Energy Corporation that they will be expanding their coal mine in southern Illinois by 40% — that’s a big, big expansion of a mine, right?

Peabody explains the need to grab all the coal that’s lying underneath this Illinois soil (over 280 million tons) as part of a fight against oil dependency as well as providing jobs to the local community. Which sounds great.

It would be even better to hear about all the safety features that are being implemented as part of this expansion of the Gateway Mine in Southern Illinois. Moving fast doesn’t jive with moving carefully.

Mining is dangerous, dangerous business.

Let’s hope that in the current economic atmosphere, profits and jobs aren’t going to be deemed so important that protecting future miners working in that expanded mine takes a back seat. Let us all learn a lesson from the 33 miracle miners in Chile.

Posted in Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Explosions & Fires, Job Site Injury, Mill Accidents, Serious Personal Injury, Work Related, Workers’ Compensation | No Comments »

The Miner Safety and Health Act of 2010 – Providing More Safety for Miners and Independent Investigation of Mining Accidents — May Never Become Law

August 11th, 2010 by admin

Right now, a statute has been proposed in the House of Representatives (H.R. 5663) that, if it becomes law, will change parts of both the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (FMSHA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHA).

If it passes, the new law would make some mining companies implement new safety measures for the protection of their employees as they work in the mines, as well as forcing the companies to adhere to new standards regarding employee rights – including new protections for whistleblowers and mining accident victims.

Finally, the proposal as it is currently written makes it mandatory for there to be independent, third-party accident investigations for certain mine accidents.

Which all sounds good, right? Except that H.R. 5663 may never become reality. Right now, opposition is growing to its passage.

Follow it here:

Posted in Construction Injuries, Electrocution, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Explosions & Fires, Falls, Job Site Injury, Longshoremen & Maritime, Mill Accidents, Railroad Workers (FELA), Serious Personal Injury, Work Related, Workers’ Compensation, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Federal Appeals Court Finds Illinois Law Applies To Retaliatory Discharge Lawsuits, Placing Bigger Evidence Burden on Plaintiffs

August 5th, 2010 by admin

On July 15, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit released its opinion in Gacek v. American Airlines, Inc., No. 09-3131 (July 15, 2010) – and it’s big news for plaintiffs seeking justice from evildoing employers. The news isn’t good.

Illinois Retaliatory Discharge Plaintiff’s Burden of Proof

In the case, the Seventh Circuit considered Illinois workers suing for justice in federal court after being harmed for retaliatory discharge.

What is retaliatory discharge? In some jurisdictions, it’s known as “wrongful discharge” or “wrongful dismissal” and it happens when someone is fired without good cause as the employer retaliates against them – firing them in response to an action that the worker has taken. Whistleblowers, for example, risk retaliatory discharge by their employer.

In this month’s decision, all the 7th Circuit justices agreed, issuing a unanimous opinion written by Judge Posner which states that the legal standard in these lawsuits is not the federal standard used in federal court pursuant to McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, but instead the Illinois state law standard which requires a plaintiff to prove causation.

What’s the difference? Under the federal standard found in McDonnell Douglas, the plaintiff only needs to show the employer’s reasons for firing the plaintiff were just pretext — unworthy of belief. That’s a lesser burden than having to prove causation.

Gacek and the Erie Doctrine

In the Gacek opinion, Judge Posner notes that in Clemons v. Mech. Devices Co., 704 N.E.2d 403, 407-08 (Ill. 1998), the Illinois Supreme Court rejected the McDonnell Douglas standard because the state high court was “… unwilling to expand the tort of retaliatory discharge by reducing plaintiff’s burden of proving the elements of the tort.”

With this precedent in place, the opinion relied upon the longstanding Erie doctrine which requires the federal courts to apply state law in substantive issues that come before it. The 7th Circuit felt legally bound to adhere to the Illinois Supreme Court’s rationale in Clemons.

No word yet on whether or not the decision will be appealed.

Whistleblowers Given New Online Protection by OSHA

July 21st, 2010 by admin

Whistleblowers are employees and workers who “blow the whistle” on wrongdoing in the workplace: they are witnesses to all sorts of unlawful practices, but especially important are those who come forward about dangerous safety and health code violations. These men and women undertake great risk to speak up about wrongs being done.

Whistleblowers are vital to the safety of any workplace, but especially the dangerous work environments found in steel mills, auto manufacturing plants, construction sites, and the like. Whistleblowers can save lives – often at the risk of their own.

This month, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) added online support to its whistleblower protection program, by creating a new whistleblower web site, www.whistleblowers.gov. According to OSHA, the new site is designed “…to provide workers, employers, and the public with easily accessible information about the 18 federal whistleblower protection statutes that OSHA currently administers.”

Whistleblowers.org – Information Hub for Workers Blowing the Whistle on Wrongdoing

At Whistleblowers.org, visitors can find current information regarding all the various statutes and agency regulations established under federal law to protect workers coming forward with evidence of employer wrongdoing (“whistleblower laws”). State laws are not covered by the new site.

According to the agency’s news release, “OSHA doesn’t work unless workers feel secure in exercising their rights,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA David Michaels. “This Web page is part of OSHA’s promise to stand by those workers who have the courage to come forward when they know their employer is cutting corners on safety and health.”

The Federal Whistleblower Laws

Indiana, Illinois, and other states have their own set of laws protecting whistleblowers. However, the federal government has been proactive in protecting these workers and the following federal laws are in place to protect whistleblowers today (click here for links to the particular provision):

• Section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. §660
• Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA), 49 U.S.C. §31105
• Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA), 15 U.S.C. §2651
• International Safe Container Act (ISCA), 46 App U.S.C. §1506
• Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C. §300j-9(i)
• Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), 33 U.S.C. §1367
• Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. §2622
• Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA), 42 U.S.C. §6971
• Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. §7622
• Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. §9610
• Energy Reorganization Act (ERA), 42 U.S.C. §5851
• Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR21), 49 U.S.C. §42121
• Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act, Title VIII of the Sarbanes Oxley Act (SOX), 18 U.S.C. §1514A
• Pipeline Safety Improvement Act (PSIA), 49 U.S.C. §60129
• Federal Rail Safety Act (FRSA), 49 U.S.C. §20109
• National Transit Systems Security Act (NTSSA), 6 U.S.C. §1142
• Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), 15 U.S.C. §2087
• Section 1558 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), P.L. 111-148
• 29 CFR Part 1977 – Discrimination Against Employees Exercising Rights under the Williams-Steiger Occupational Safety and Health Act
• 29 CFR Part 1978 – Rules for Implementing Section 405 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982
• 29 CFR Part 1979 – Procedures for the Handling of Discrimination Complaints under Section 519 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century
• 29 CFR Part 1980 – Procedures for the Handling of Discrimination Complaints under Section 806 of the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002
• 29 CFR Part 1981 – Procedures for the Handling of Discrimination Complaints under Section 6 of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002
• 29 CFR Part 24 – Interim Final Rule, Procedures for the Handling of Retaliation Complaints under the Employee Protection Provisions of Six Federal Environmental Statutes and Section 211 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended

Here at Kenneth J. Allen & Associates Law Firm, we commend those who have the courage and integrity to risk their jobs and livelihoods, and even their physical safety, to come forward and speak the truth about dangers in the workplace. If there is any way that we can be of help, please feel free to call.

Posted in Construction Injuries, Electrocution, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Explosions & Fires, Falls, Job Site Injury, Longshoremen & Maritime, Mill Accidents, Railroad Workers (FELA), Work Related, Workers’ Compensation | No Comments »

U.S. Steel Worker Seriously Injured on Tracks After Their Repair Was Cancelled

July 16th, 2010 by admin

Shortly after midnight last Wednesday morning, a U.S. Steel Gary Works employee was seriously injured when the transfer car he was operating – moving coke and lime to the blast furnaces — left the tracks. The car plummeted 25 feet into the ore yard below in what steel workers call a “crush.”

The steel worker was seriously injured – so much so, he was airlifted to Loyola Hospital from the injury site. He’s known to have suffered multiple broken bones as well as a serious injury to his hip.

The Tracks Suffered “Catastrophic Failure” – Repair Had Been Cancelled

Union representatives are blaming a failure of a girder under the transfer car as the reason for the accident. Furthermore, the Union is reporting that the support girder under the tracks shows evidence of a “catastrophic failure,” and that repair work was scheduled – but had been cancelled. Which means that U.S. Steel Gary Works knew that the track was dangerous and let workmen access it anyway.

Investigations Begin into U.S. Steel Workplace

U.S. Steel reports that the company is investigating the accident. (Read that as their defense attorneys are on the job.) A complaint has also been filed with the Indiana Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which will conduct its own independent inquiry into what happened on that track last Wednesday.

How Safe Are the Steel Mills Today? The Statistics Aren’t to be Trusted

If you read the statistics, industrial workers overall are purportedly working in a much safer environment – rates of injury have been cut almost in half (46%) over the past ten years.

However, in March 2010, Business Week published an expose of those numbers, reporting that the Department of Labor is suspicious of the numbers that have been reported by employers. The GAO has found that employers underreport injuries to keep insurance premiums down. A Johns Hopkins professor and noted scholar in occupational injury doesn’t believe that the numbers are correct – this big of a decrease just isn’t realistic in her opinion.

At least one steel company has come back fighting: AK Steel had its rebuttal to the Business Week article published in the national magazine, refuting any subterfuge on its part and denying fudging of numbers to keep costs down.

Statistics versus Reality

Meanwhile, here is one concrete example of a steel worker who has been seriously injured in a work environment that is notoriously dangerous. And from the information that was provided by the Union to the media, it was an accident that would not have happened if the repairs had taken place.

Repairs cost money. Insurance premiums cost money. Money chosen over safety: who is going to explain that reality to the U.S. Steel Gary Works’ injured worker and his loved ones?

Posted in Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Falls, Job Site Injury, Mill Accidents, Serious Personal Injury, Work Related | 1 Comment »

Employers Not Fazed by Increased OSHA Fines

June 21st, 2010 by admin

On May 27, 2010, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued its second fine over $1 million within the last month. The South Dakota Wheat Growers Association of Aberdeen, South Dakota was fined $1.6 million for 23 willful violations after the December 2009 death of a worker at one of the company’s grain handling operations. The worker suffocated to death after being engulfed by grain in one of the facility’s storage bins.

Hilda L. Solis, Secretary of Labor, spoke about the Department’s investigation and stated that “The S.D Wheat Growers Association ignored long-established standards addressing safety in grain handling operations.” Solis also stated that “The company’s intentional disregard for its safety…led to an unnecessary loss of a life.”

The company’s utter disregard for the safety of its employees is even more troubling given the fact that just last year Tempel Grain Company, one state over in Haswell, Colorado, was fined more than $1.5 million for 22 similar OSHA violations.

This came after a 17-year old employee of Tempel suffocated to death in a bin after being engulfed by grain.

This inexcusable ignorance to OSHA citations and fines can also be seen closer to home. Just last year, the Indiana Occupational Health and Safety Administration issued fines totaling more than $400,000 to two Indiana Companies for repeated workplace safety violations. Steel Dynamics, based in Fort Wayne, was cited and fined $240,000 when one employee was injured and another was killed by nitrogen fumes released by a furnace.

Many of the violations were repeat violations, meaning that they company had already been cited for the violation and was aware of the dangerous condition that existed. Similarly, Noblesville based company King Systems Corp., which manufactures anesthesia and respiratory care products, was cited for repeat violations and fined for $191,000.

The violations resulted from the company’s ongoing failure to minimize employee exposure to harmful gases.

At first blush, one might assume that increased fines have lead to a safer working environment. However, this is not always the case. All too often, these repeat violations and increased fines provide little deterrent to employers primarily concerned with the bottom line: profits. Rather than addressing the safety hazards and unsafe conditions, employers wait until one of its employees is seriously injured or killed, before taking the proper corrective measures prescribed by OSHA. Unfortunately, the tragic incidents described above demonstrate this all too well.

Posted in Construction Injuries, Defective Products, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Explosions & Fires, Falls, Job Site Injury, Mill Accidents, Product Liability, Serious Personal Injury, Slip & Falls, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Archive for the ‘Equipment and Machine Malfunction’ Category

Categories

Links

Archives

Serious Personal Injury

Wrongful Death

Transportation

Work Related