Archive for the ‘Job Site Injury’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Feds Change Hazardous Materials Regs for Trucks and Semis and Carriers on the Road

August 23rd, 2011 by admin

Hazardous Materials are dangerous things: they involve cargo that could explode, projecting things at great speeds, or gases that could silently kill lots of people and animals, or things that can start big fires. When this stuff has to be moved from place to place, it’s a high risk event – and something that is heavily regulated.

This month, as part of the continuing CSA 2011 implementation (see our earlier discussion of that program here), changes have been made in how hazardous materials are transported in our nation.

1. Hazardous Materials are defined in the Code of Federal Regulations

Also known as “HazMat,” they have been defined by the Department of Transportation as:

(1) Hazardous Substances, (2) Hazardous Wastes, (3) Marine Pollutants, (4) Elevated Temperature Material (5) Materials identified in 172.101, and (6) Materials meeting the definitions contained in 49 CFR Part 173.

They include: radioactive material; explosives; material poisonous by inhalation; and compressed or refrigerated liquefied methane or liquefied natural gas, or other liquefied gas with a methane content of at least 85 percent.

2. Carriers Transporting Hazardous Materials Must Meet Special Criteria – the HM Intervention Threshold

When any motor carrier is moving a cargo of stuff defined by law to be “hazardous material” then that carrier must meet federal regulations on how that HazMat is packaged, moved, and labelled.  The shipping cartons must be labeled; the boxes that the cartons are placed inside must be labelled; the truck or trailer must likewise be labelled.  The Hazardous Materials warning labels are called “placards” in the law:

General placarding requirements are contained in 49 CFR Subpart F Part 172. Each person who offers for transportation any hazardous materials subject to the HMR shall comply with the applicable placarding requirements. Applicability of placarding requirements 172.500: Placarding is not required for infectious substances, ORM-D, limited quantities, small quantity shipments, and combustible liquids in non-bulk packages. Placards may not be displayed on any packaging, freight container, unit load device, motor vehicle or rail car unless the placard represents a hazardous material loaded into or onto the conveyance unless the shipment is in accordance with the TDG Regulation, the IMDG Code or the UN Recommendations.

General placarding requirements are contained in 172.504. Each bulk packaging, freight container, unit load device, transport vehicle, or rail car containing any quantity of hazardous materials must be placarded on each side and each end with the placards specified in Tables 1 and 2.

172.504 contains a number of notes and exceptions to these requirements. When two or more Table 2 materials are contained in the same transport vehicle, the Dangerous” placard may be used instead of the specific placard required for each hazard class. However, when 1,000 kg (2,205 lbs.) or more of a single category of HM is loaded on a transport vehicle, the placard specified for that material must be displayed.

172.504(c) contains an exception from the placarding requirement for shipments that contain less 454 kg (1,001 pounds) of Table 2 materials. A frequent problem encountered involves the 1,001 lbs. exception. The 1,001 lbs. is aggregate gross weight. Aggregate gross weight is the total weight of all hazardous materials and its packaging loaded on a single transport vehicle.

3.  The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) Has Changed The Criteria for HazMat Intervention Threshold.

This month, FMCSA issued its new, redefined criteria for deciding which motor carriers are legally required to meet the federal Hazardous Materials intervention threshold. FMCSA made these changes so it would be easier for the government to spot motor carriers that were transporting hazardous materials and to insure that the carriers were doing so safely and efficiently.

In the future, motor carriers must face new thresholds in the transport of placarded quantities of HM; usually, 1,001+ pounds.  Before now, the HazMat intervention threshold on motor carriers was based solely on their registration information indicating they transported any quantity of HM.

Problem was: some carriers who were not carrying placardable quantities of HazMat were subjected to the HM threshold, while some motor carriers that were carrying Hazardous Materials weren’t being subjected to the regs.

Now, the HM intervention threshold applies to American motor carriers transporting Hazardous Materials in quantities that legally require the warning placard (“HazMat”) based on operational evidence. They meet one of the following criteria:

  1. Inspection in the last 24 months where the motor carrier was identified as carrying placardable quantity of hazmat;
  2. Review or safety audit in the last 24 months where the motor carrier was identified as carrying placardable quantity of hazmat; or
  3. Motor carrier has a hazmat permit.

Trucks and trains and other motor carriers transporting hazardous materials are only allowed to move along certain routes, routes approved by the government as being safe for these kinds of dangerous loads. If you see one of these motor carriers with its distinctive red and white “Haz Mat” warning labels, then give it a wide berth.

Every big rig or semi truck on the road is dangerous in traffic; however, these HazMat loads are extremely high risk. If you are driving near a HazMat load, be especially careful – and let that driver have the right of way, even if he’s wrong to take it.

Be careful out there.

Posted in Explosions & Fires, Job Site Injury, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

We Cannot Trust Products We Buy to be Safe: Consider These Fines, Imposed on Respected US Companies for Putting Dangerous Products On Our Store Shelves

August 18th, 2011 by admin

Companies are out to make money, and that is a good thing when you consider that the company pays employees’ wages and sets up insurance and pension benefits.  Having companies interested in making money isn’t such a good thing when they do things like fail to report their products can hurt people, because they want to keep selling those products to unsuspecting consumers for a profit.

Sure, but those are just the shady companies right?  Surely the nationally known and long respected corporations that have products in stores across the country wouldn’t do this, right? Wrong.

Consider this.  So far, in the first half of August 2011, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission reports that these three national companies, while not admitting that anyone knowingly violated the law or did anything wrong, will collectively pay over a million dollars in penalties – and that is just in the first two weeks of this month:

1. Black & Decker Agrees to $960,000 Civil Penalty for Failing to Report Defective Grasshog XP Weed Trimmer/Edgers

…Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc., of Towson, Md., has agreed to pay a civil penalty of $960,000. … The settlement resolves CPSC staff’s allegations that Black & Decker knowingly failed to report several safety defects and hazards with the Grasshog XP immediately to CPSC, as required by federal law. CPSC staff also alleges the firm withheld information requested by CPSC staff during the course of the investigation.

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors and retailers to report to CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or fails to comply with any consumer product safety rule or any other rule, regulation, standard or ban enforced by CPSC.

CPSC staff alleges Black & Decker knew, on or before May 2006, that the high-powered, electric Grasshog XP GH1000 was defective and could cause harm, but failed to report this to CPSC.

CPSC staff also alleges that Black & Decker failed to provide full information about defects with the Grasshog XP as requested in May 2006. Based on the incomplete information provided at that time, CPSC closed the case. The firm did not give CPSC staff full information about the extent of Grasshog XP defects or the mounting number of incidents and injuries until October 2006.

In July 2007, Black & Decker and CPSC announced the recall of about 200,000 Grasshog XP model GH1000 trimmer/edgers. By that time, there were more than 700 reports of incidents, including 58 injuries with the Grasshog XP. The trimmer/edgers’s spool, spool cap and pieces of trimmer string can come loose during use and become projectiles. This poses a serious laceration hazard to the user and to bystanders. The trimmer/edgers also can overheat and burn consumers. Black & Decker sold the Grasshog XP weed trimmers from November 2005 through spring 2007 for about $70.

The recall was reannounced in August 2009 with an additional 100 injuries reported. CPSC urges consumers with recalled Grasshog XP trimmer/edgers to contact Black & Decker for a free repair kit.

2. Perfect Fitness Must Pay a $425,000 Civil Penalty for Failing to Report Its Exercise Equipment Causes Falls

….The penalty agreement resolves staff allegations that Perfect Fitness knowingly failed to report to CPSC immediately, as required by federal law, about a defect with the handles of Perfect Pullup exercise equipment. The defect causes the handles of the product to break during use, resulting in a fall hazard to consumers.

CPSC staff alleges that Perfect Fitness concluded in June 2008 that its exercise equipment was defective following retesting of the handle design. The testing was done after the firm received a complaint and, according to the firm’s internal review, an unusual number of product returns. Perfect Fitness redesigned the product to correct the defect in July 2008.

CPSC staff alleges that Perfect Fitness was aware of at least 23 injuries associated with its product in March 2010 and posted a notice on its website to let consumers know they could get free replacement handles. Staff alleges the firm told consumers that the original handles were “inferior” and could result in an “accident.”

The firm did not report the defect to CPSC until December 2010. By that time, CPSC staff alleges the firm was aware of at least 45 complaints of injury associated with the handles breaking and had received more than 2,000 requests for replacements.

In February 2011, the firm and CPSC announced a recall of about 7,000 Perfect Pullups. The exercise equipment with the original handles sold for between $80 and $100 at sporting goods stores nationwide and on Amazon.com from January 2008 through February 2011. The exercise equipment with the original handles was also sold through direct television marketing and on the firm’s website during some of 2008.

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to report to CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or violates any consumer product safety rule, or any other rule, regulation, standard, or ban enforced by the CPSC.


3. CVS Must Pay $45,000 Civil Penalty for Failing to Report Drawstrings in Children’s Jackets Can Strangle Kids

The penalty resolves CPSC staff’s allegations that CVS knowingly failed to report to CPSC immediately, as required by federal law, that it had sold children’s hooded jackets with drawstrings at the neck from August 2008 to January 2009. Children’s upper outerwear with drawstrings, including sweatshirts, sweaters, and jackets, poses strangulation and entanglement hazards to children that can result in serious injury or death. In March 2009, CPSC and the importer of the jackets announced a recall of the products, which were sold under the brand names Golden Grove and Young USA.

In 1996, CPSC issued drawstring guidelines (pdf) to help prevent children from strangling on or getting entangled in the neck and waist drawstrings of upper outerwear, such as jackets and sweatshirts. In 2006, CPSC’s Office of Compliance announced that children’s upper outerwear with drawstrings at the hood or neck would be regarded as defective and presenting a substantial risk of injury to young children.

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to report to CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or fails to comply with any consumer product safety rule or any other rule, regulation, standard, or ban enforced by CPSC.

Note: On June 29, 2011, the Commission approved a final rule that designates children’s upper outerwear in sizes 2T through 12 with neck or hood drawstrings, and children’s upper outerwear in sizes 2T through 16 with certain waist or bottom drawstrings, as substantial product hazards.

What This Means to You, The American Consumer Buying Products in Illinois or Indiana

In each of the instances, products that were dangerous were setting on store shelves for people to buy.  Products that could hurt someone, maybe even kill a child.

When you buy anything in this country, you cannot assume that you are safe just because the product has made it to the store.  You’re not. All too often, people are seriously injured before companies will agree to take their products out of the marketplace – because profits, sadly, are all too often prioritized over people.

If you think you or a loved one have been hurt by a product, then you can do several things.  You can report it to your local consumer protection advocacy group, you can report it to state officials, you can report it to federal agencies like the CPSC.  You can complain to the store, you can call the manufacturer.

However, none of these things will provide you with an avenue to seek monetary compensation for the damages that you or a loved one have sustained.  To pursue a claim for justice, you must seek the help of a personal injury lawyer experienced in product liability claims.  That’s right: you will have to make a claim and maybe file a lawsuit to get the company to take responsibility.


Posted in Defective Products, Electrocution, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Explosions & Fires, Job Site Injury, Product Liability, Serious Personal Injury, Spinal Injuries, Transportation, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Indiana State Fair Stage Collapse, Explosion at Illinois Plant: Who Is Responsible for Serious Personal Injury and Death Under the Law?

August 16th, 2011 by admin

The news in our area is filled with tragedy this week:  there is continuing national coverage (as well as YouTube videos) of the outdoor stage collapse at the Indiana State Fair last Saturday evening and there is local coverage of the tragic Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America plant explosion this morning in Hersher, Illinois.

At Work and At Play, Dangerous Conditions Result in Serious Injuries This Week

Latest reports have 5 workers hurt, with 2 workers seriously injured, in the blast that happened today while these folk were on the job in the NE Illinois gas works. All have been hospitalized and their current conditions are unknown.

News reports have five people dead as the result of the Indiana State Fair stage collapse with many of the crowd injured as a result of the 3-story stage falling to the ground, by some reports because of a sudden gust of wind. A doctor on the scene at the time of the tragedy gave his own personal account of the event, describing the stage as falling down “in slow motion” and that what he saw that day was “unbelievable.”

Meanwhile, USA Today is reporting that no state agency appears to have had responsibility for insuring that the Indiana State Fair facilities were safe for the people attending — it seems that not only did no agency take responsiblity for that duty, according to USA Today’s coverage, it may well be that no state agency had been given the legal duty to do so.

Legal Responsibility for Personal Injury Under State and Federal Law

Both federal law as well as state law protects workers on the job and people who attend popular events, like a concert during a state fair.  Workers’ compensation laws have been enacted in Indiana and Illinois to insure that workers hurt on the job are protected, and federal laws are also on the books to insure workplace safety.  The gas plant in Illinois will have state workers’ compensation claims filed by the injured victims to face was well as federal agency investigations into why that explosion occurred.   If tragedy hits and one of the blast victims dies, then wrongful death claims under Illinois law can be pursued.

However, traditionally workers have been better protected on the books that concertgoers, especially to a state event.  Governments are usually protected by something called “governmental immunity” under state and federal law, which means that state agencies cannot be sued for personal injury claims unless the state legislature allows it.  Additionally, there are defenses in the law for “Acts of God,” where mysterious winds or other natural events that cannot be predicted nor controlled will bar holding any party legally responsible.

In the Indiana State Fair matter, things are sticky right now.  Were the high winds an Act of God?  Will sovereign immunity claims bar any wrongful death claims by the decedents’ loved ones or estates?  Will the manufacturers, the concert promoters, the contractors who assembled the stage itself be liable for damages?  It’s not clear today, but questions are being asked – not just by personal injury lawyers but by reporters at Time Magazine and Rolling Stone.

Posted in Explosions & Fires, Illinois Wrongful Death, Indiana Wrongful Death, Insurance Claims, Job Site Injury, Product Liability, Serious Personal Injury, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Heat Kills: Feds Offer Free Phone App for Employers in Fight Against 2011 Heat Wave Injuries and Deaths

August 11th, 2011 by admin

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration knows better than most how truly dangerous this record-breaking heat wave is for those who work outside – and after issuing warnings and helpful tips on combating heat exposure and heat stroke, people on the job and at work are still succumbing to the heat, turning up in Emergency Rooms or in job-site calls to EMS after they’ve been harmed by heat.

Mobile App To Protect Workers from Heat-Related Illness

Today, Hilda L. Solis, Secretary of Labor, announced that the federal government is providing a free application for phones which gives both workers and their employers the ability to check the job site’s heat index from their phone.

It is available in English and Spanish, and was designed by combining various heat temperature data from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration with the phone’s location to provide the job site’s heat index.

The app is designed for devices using an Android platform (go here for details on Android phones), and versions for BlackBerries and iPhones are on their way. To download the heat index phone app, go here.

Workers In Danger from Heat in Two Ways

As OSHA explains to employers on its website, workers on the job can get overheated and at risk for heat injury because of two heat sources hitting them at the same time:

  1. the environmental conditions in which they work (external heat) and
  2. the internal heat generated by physical labor (internal heat).

Workers on the job in high temperatures will still build up heat inside their bodies as they exert themselves physically. Heat-related illnesses and wrongful deaths happen when supervisors aren’t protecting their crews from hot temperatures.

When a worker’s body is not able to lose enough heat that has built up internally (sweating, breathing heavily, etc.) to balance the heat generated by the outside temperatures, then he or she can suffer from heat exposure, heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and death.

Heat Sneaks Up On Workers – Careful Monitoring Is Needed, This Phone App is a Good Thing for Supervisors to Have

No one can trust their body to let them know when the heat is getting to be too much for them; that is one of the dangers of heat exposure: it creeps up on you. Having the ability to check your phone at work, to monitor the heat index and then act accordingly: get in the shade for awhile, drink some water, is important.

Workers need to be able to protect themselves even when supervisors aren’t — better a legal fight later over an employee being fired or held insubordinate for avoiding heat stroke than a negligent employer letting his crew members get sick, seriously injured, or killed because he didn’t take the dangers of heat seriously.

“Summer heat presents a serious issue that affects some of the most vulnerable workers in our country, and education is crucial to keeping them safe,” said Secretary Solis. “Heat-related illnesses are preventable. This new app is just one way the Labor Department is getting that message out.”

Adds Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA Dr. David Michaels, “OSHA’s prevention message is clear: Water. Rest. Shade. These are three little words that make a big difference for outdoor workers during the hot summer months.”

Legal Remedies for Workers Hurt or Killed By 2011 Heat Exposure on the Job

If workers aren’t protected by their employers from heat related injuries, then they have legal remedies under worker’s compensation and other laws. If a tragic death should occur due to heat stroke or other heat-related illness, then Wrongful Death actions are available to the surviving loved ones under Indiana and Illnois law.

Hopefully, these new free phone aps will help employers and supervisors do the right thing in the future and protect their people and not their profits. It’s been really, really hot out there this year.

Posted in Job Site Injury, Serious Personal Injury, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Will Federal Budget Cutbacks Mean More Workers Hurt or Killed? Many Say Yes as OSHA Budget Cuts Proposed

August 4th, 2011 by admin

This week, the following press release was issued by Public Citizen, a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy group.  In it, the consumer advocates are crying out against proposed Congressional action that would cut back the amount of federal monies provided to OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor.

Currently, OSHA inspectors roam American workplaces, performing safety inspections and making sure that employers know and follow federal regulations designed to keep American workers safe.  This is very, very important for those who work in dangerous job sites like mills, mines, or construction sites.   It has been proven in courtrooms time and again that employers cannot be trusted to keep their people safe without the law requiring them to do so.

So, when Congress considers where to cut back, perhaps the safety of the American worker should not be dismissed easily.  Here, argued eloquently by Private Citizen, are some things to be considered:

Sen. Coburn is Dead Wrong on Worker Safety

Senator’s Report Distorts Data in Call for Cuts to OSHA Budget

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A deficit reduction report that Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) published in late July relies on misrepresented data when it calls for a $72.6 million cut to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) budget.

One section of the report, entitled “Back in Black,” urges Congress to eliminate OSHA training grants and shift the agency away from worksite inspections. Coburn, a member of the U.S. Senate’s “Gang of Six,” proposes that OSHA instead focus its resources on unproven voluntary safety programs.

“Sen. Coburn’s proposal would weaken OSHA and put workers’ lives in danger,” said Justin Feldman, worker health and safety advocate for Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. “The report bends facts to conform to an anti-regulatory bent.”

The report misrepresents data several times, Feldman said. Attempting to show evidence of inefficiency at the agency, the report incorrectly asserts that the number of OSHA inspections declined between 2008 and 2010, a time when the agency’s budget was growing. OSHA’s official statistics, however, show that the number of inspections actually increased by 6 percent during this period.

In another case, Coburn’s report cites a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report as evidence that voluntary safety programs are effective. But the GAO report actually states that the programs have never been properly evaluated.

The Coburn report is particularly critical of OSHA’s training grant program, which pays for community organizations to provide health and safety trainings. Coburn calls for the outright elimination of this program, which trains more than 60,000 vulnerable, hard-to-reach workers each year.

“OSHA’s training grant program is one of the country’s only funding sources for worker health and safety education and accounts for just 2 percent of OSHA’s budget,” Feldman said. “Sen. Coburn, a physician, should see the importance of this program for public health.”

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, Spinal Injuries, Work Related, Workers’ Compensation, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Illinois Roads Are More Dangerous After Gov Quinn Okays Faster Semi Truck Speeds at 65 MPH and More

August 2nd, 2011 by admin

On July 27, 2011, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed into law new legislation that his office describes will “… simplify regulation of trucks traveling in Illinois, easing the regulatory burden faced by Illinois businesses while helping ensure the safety of Illinois’ roads.”

From the Governor’s official press release:

“One of the top priorities of my administration has been working with the business community to make Illinois an easier place to do business. By clarifying laws that impact transportation, we will help businesses to function more efficiently and still keep the public safe while traveling on Illinois roads.” Governor Quinn said. “This law creates common sense rules, eliminates confusing language, and enhances productivity in the trucking industry and benefits the environment.”

In this economy, focusing upon the dollars and cents of things is understandable, and it seems reasonable to pass Senate Bill 1644 as it “… clarifies and standardizes enforcement language for truck weight and size in the Illinois vehicle code.”

What Governor Quinn Has Signed Into Law Makes for More Danger On Illinois Roads

However, as the Governor points out, this new law also ups the allowable maximum truck weight in Illinois to 80,400 lbs because it will mean less diesel fuel usage in the long run.  Saves money.

However, one thing doesn’t change.  The heavier the truck, the more dangerous it is on the roads.

Of even more concern, Governor Quinn has signed into law Senate Bill 1913 which will mean that starting on January 1, 2012, trucks in Illinois will be able to drive 65 mphs on our roads.

Increasing Speed Limit on Big Rigs May Save Fuel But Will It Cost Lives?

This bill joins other legislation that works to increase the legal speed limit of big rigs to 65 mph on Illinois roads (this week’s bill doesn’t impact interstates, however prior legislation already covered that issue). For many, increasing the speed of big rigs is dangerous for us all.

Think of this:

  • semi trucks carrying a full load of cargo, up to the legal limit of 80,400 pounds, will be driving alongside sedans that weigh around 5000 pounds.
  • It will probably be around 80 feet long, lumbering alongside families in minivans, sedans, and SUVs at 65 mph.
  • And if that truck needs to stop?  It will take it almost twice as long as the car alongside it to do so.

Be careful out there, if you’re driving anywhere in Illinois – especially after the first of the year.

Posted in Illinois Wrongful Death, Job Site Injury, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Lead Exposure in Toys Can Harm or Kill Kids: CPSC Sets Tougher Lead Levels for U.S. Toys Effective August 2011

July 26th, 2011 by admin

“Lead exposure is one of the most common preventable poisonings of childhood,” reports the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP), the nation’s top professional medical association dedicated to treating children and adolescents affected by this type of injury or harm.

Lead is a poison.

Kids are at high risk of injury or death from lead exposure because they have growing nervous systems which are particularly susceptible to being compromised by any sort of lead exposure. Still, it’s reported that almost every child in this country has been exposed to lead: either from lead paint chips, to lead in the soil, to lead in their drinking water, to lead in their toys.

Lead impacts the child’s brain — even very small amounts of lead exposure can have terrifying consequences: kids can become inattentive; with just a little more lead in their systems, they can develop hearing loss and learning disabilities. Lead poisons the human brain and nervous system.

High lead levels in a child’s body can cause permanent brain injury and sometimes, lead will kill the child.

This is so serious a reality in this country that the Center for Disease Control (CDC) wants every single child to be screened for lead exposure (which can be easily done with a quick blood test). There are medicines that can pull the lead out of the human body; additionally, once the lead exposure has been discovered, steps can be taken to remove the source of the lead from the child’s environment.

This week, in response to this continued problem, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) voted (3-2) to establish higher lead standards for products designed and sold for children in this country. Read the agency’s full press release here.

The new lead limit is contained within the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), and it goes into effect on August 14, 2011. Within a matter of weeks, manufacturers, distributors, importers and retailers of children’s products must comply with the new lead exposure laws which establish a new 100 ppm federal limit for total lead content. It will be one of the lowest acceptable lead limits in the world.

If your child is 12 years of age or younger, then be on the safe side: have your child tested for lead exposure.

It is a simple blood test, and you are protecting your child against brain injury or worse. If your child has been exposed to dangerous lead levels, then get help in investigating the source of the lead exposure – and if necessary, seek legal remedies to insure that your child is protected from harm as well as other potential victims and that those responsible for the lead exposure injuries are made to take responsibility for the harm they have caused.

Posted in Defective Products, Illinois Wrongful Death, Indiana Wrongful Death, Job Site Injury, Product Liability, School & Playground Injuries, Serious Personal Injury, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

2011 Heat Wave Can Injure and Kill Workers, Secretary of Labor Issues Warning: Illinois and Indiana Workers Be Careful

July 21st, 2011 by admin

Meteorologists are explaining the extremely high temperatures hitting Indiana and Illinois this month as being the result of a “heat dome,” which boils down to record-breaking heat of 100 degrees or more throughout much of our region, which is not prepared to deal with how hot this can really get.

Yesterday, parts of Chicago had a heat index of 112.  Today, Indianapolis is expected to reach a heat index of 120 degrees by mid-afternoon.

Heat index is the real number to monitor if you’re working outside:  the heat index measures the humidity in the air as well as the actual temperature, and this is important to humans because the humidity impacts our physical ability to sweat and disperse heat.  The higher the heat index, the more vulnerable we are to heat stroke and other potentially fatal heat-related conditions.

Workers Are Warned to Be Careful of the Heat by Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis

The high temperatures can be deadly, although many disregard that reality and the seriousness of being in the heat for too long, especially while physically exerting the body through exercise or hard work.  Workers can die from doing their job in this weather, and that’s the reality that both employers and employees need to respect.

In fact, Hilda Solis has issued a formal warning about this “heat dome” situation in her role as Secretary of Labor for the United States.  Here is what Secretary Solis wants you and your employer to know:

“Four weeks into the summer, the nation continues to experience record heat. For outdoor workers, this means being at risk for heat-related illnesses, including heat exhaustion and heat stroke. Employers must take the precautions needed to protect outdoor workers:

  • Have a work site plan to prevent heat-related illnesses and make sure that medical services are available to respond to an emergency should one occur.
  • Provide plenty of water at the job site and remind workers to drink small amounts of water frequently – every 15 minutes.
  • Schedule rest breaks throughout the work shift and provide shaded or air conditioned rest areas near the work site.
  • Let new workers get used to the extreme heat, gradually increasing the work load over a week.
  • When possible, schedule heavy tasks for earlier in the day.

“Tell workers what to look for to spot the signs of heat exhaustion or heat stroke in themselves and their co-workers, and make sure they know what to do in an emergency. OSHA has fact sheets and posters that illustrate the signs of heat-related illnesses, and the steps that you can take to prevent them at your work site.

“Remember: water, rest, shade – the three keys to preventing heat-related illnesses in this extreme heat.”

Posted in Construction Injuries, Illinois Wrongful Death, Indiana Wrongful Death, Job Site Injury, Serious Personal Injury, Work Related, Workers’ Compensation, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Big Rigs Getting Bigger? Rising Costs May Mean Huge Semi Trucks on American Roadways

July 12th, 2011 by admin

Prices are rising and it’s hitting the trucking industry hard. Diesel fuel is costing more, and that’s an expense that can’t be cut. Tires are costing more, and every truck needs its rubber, even if it’s retreads.   Of course, the trucking industry is nothing if not cost-aware, and one of the ways that many are arguing is an efficient way to fight rising prices is to have each truck carry more cargo. Less trucks on the road, overall.

In Canada, they are ready for test runs of the latest attempt to get the most bang from a big rig buck.

Starting soon in Canada’s Saskatchewan province, certain roadways have been okayed for HUGE trucks to roll on. These are dominoed fifty-three (53) foot tractor trailer trucks. Imagine a tractor trailer truck. Imagine adding on an extra trailer on its end. Now, add another one. Two big, long trailers being pulled by the single truck engine.

They are around TWO HUNDRED FEET LONG.

They can carry over 200,000 pounds of cargo.

Technically, these are called “triple LCVs” (“longer combination vehicles“) and Canada’s powers that be have okayed them to run between two cities, Regina and Saskatoon, in a route that extends 160 miles each way. This is just the testing phase — if these long snakes do okay on that 160 mile route, expect them to be approved to run on certain roadways throughout Canada.

And it won’t be long before these 200 feet long big rigs are rolling in the United States once Canada’s done all the guinea pig work. Trucking companies will argue efficiency, and safety concerns like AAA will have a big fight on their hands. Because big rigs are dangerous enough now, just think of the crashes that can happen with a 200,000 pound monster colliding with a standard size sedan(s).

Posted in Job Site Injury, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

Ability of Plaintiffs to File Class Actions is Vital: Congress Investigating Recent U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Harming Plaintiffs’ Class Action Rights

July 7th, 2011 by admin

Class action lawsuits allow individual plaintiffs to group together in one lawsuit and in one courtroom as they seek justice against a defendant that is all too often a huge, international corporation. Class action lawsuits level the David vs Goliath playing field in countless ways, and class action lawsuits have proven to be vital to justice when defendants are powerful, rich, and ruthless.

Consider these famous class action lawsuits in American history: (1) the breast implant litigation of the 1990s, settled for $3.4 billioin, where a class action lawsuit sought damages for women injured by silicone breast implants against the major implant makers (Corning, Baxter, Bristol-Meyers Squibb/MEC, 3M), (2) the Exxon-Mobil class action litigation after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, where those injured by the oil spill along 1300 miles of coastline took the oil and gas giants to judgment (not settlement) for $5 billion in damages, or (3) the nationwide tobacco product class action litigation, where the top six tobacco companies were sued by each state’s attorney general for injury and death caused by cigarette smoking, etc..

Movies are made about class actions: A Civil Action and Erin Brockovich are just two examples.

Senate Is Investigating Supreme Court’s Recent Impact on Class Action Lawsuits

The Senate Judiciary Committee is investigating recent opinions released by the United States Supreme Court and for details, the Opening Statement by SJC Chairman Patrick Leahy to the June 29, 2011 Hearing provides a good overview of what Congress is doing to help injured plaintiffs and their families:

This morning, we will highlight several recent Supreme Court decisions to examine the impact on the lives of hardworking Americans. Each of these decisions give corporations additional power to act in their own self-interest, and each limits the ability of Americans to have their day in court. This hearing is a continuation of previous hearings about how Supreme Court rulings affect Americans’ access to their courts. Especially in these tough economic times, American consumers and employees rely on the law to protect them from fraud and discrimination. They rely on the courts to enforce those laws intended to protect them. Unfortunately, these protections are being eroded by what appears to be the most business-friendly Supreme Court in the last 75 years.

Last week, in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, five men on the Supreme Court disqualified the claims of 1.5 million women who had spent nearly a decade seeking justice for sex discrimination by their employer, Wal-Mart. They ruled that the women did not share enough in common to support bringing a class action. Perhaps more troubling, they told those women that Wal-Mart could not have had a discriminatory policy against all of them, because it left its payment decisions to the local branches of its stores.

The case gives Wal-Mart, and the rest of corporate America, a clear path to avoid company-wide sex discrimination suits: Have your lawyers write a non-discrimination policy, then allow your local branches to implement compensation decisions, and you can hide behind your policy regardless of what really happened to your employees across America. Through this decision, a narrow majority of five justices have, again, made it harder to hold corporations accountable under our historic civil rights laws.

Earlier this month, in Janus Capital v. First Derivative Traders, the same five justices gave corporations another victory by shielding them from accountability even when they knowingly lie to their investors. In that case, the Court held that investors have no remedy when a corporation knowingly issues false statements from a shell entity it created to “make” the false statement. Some have said that the Janus decision provides Wall Street companies with a “license to lie.” Others have called the opinion “a roadmap for fraud.” Whichever phrase you use, the decision allows Wall Street companies to design new ways to evade accountability from the harm inflicted on hardworking Americans who have seen their life savings ravaged over the past few years by fraudulent investment schemes and corporate misconduct.

This term, the Supreme Court also issued a devastating decision that will harm the ability of consumers to band together when their phone company or other corporations falsely charge them small, unjustified, and unfair fees. Two months ago, in AT&T v. Concepcion, the Supreme Court, in another 5-4 opinion, held that companies can take advantage of the fine print on telephone bills and other contracts to bar customers from bringing class action lawsuits. What’s more, the Court held that states cannot prohibit such “mandatory arbitration clauses” — even if the state legislatures vote to do so — because such a law would be preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act. Justice Scalia and the four fellow conservatives on the Court, once again, misinterpreted Congress’ intent; they favored corporations and further weakened protections for consumers. Binding mandatory arbitration makes a farce of the American people’s constitutional right to a jury trial and the due process our Constitution guarantees to all Americans.. In arbitration, there is no transparency. There are no juries. There is no appellate review.

Like the Wal-Mart case, the AT&T case also denies consumers the right to bring their lawsuit as part of a class action. Class actions serve an important function in our justice system. If I have a claim for $50 or $100 against a company, the potential recovery is too small for me to hire a lawyer and seek redress. If I combine my claim with those of other people who also have a small claim, that would allow us to attain adequate representation and seek accountability. When consumers can band together, then corporations can be forced to account for their misconduct, even if the harm to each individual consumer is relatively small. Class actions are an essential way for everyday Americans to gain access to our courts.

The cases we are discussing today are just a few examples of how the Supreme Court’s recent decisions will hurt individual Americans and benefit large corporations who engage in misconduct. A study by Lee Epstein, William Landes and Richard Posner, entitled “Is the Roberts Court Pro-Business?” illustrates this phenomenon. It found that the Supreme Court ruled in a pro-business fashion in 29 percent of cases under Chief Justice Earl Warren. Under Warren Burger the figure was 47 percent. Under Chief Justice Rehnquist, it was 51 percent. Now, under Chief Justice Roberts it has risen to 61 percent. The point of today’s hearing is to put these statistics in context by examining some of the most troubling pro-business rulings from the Supreme Court’s term and to consider the lasting effect of these divisive rulings.

Over the past few years, the American people have grown frustrated with the notion that regardless of their conduct some corporations are too big to fail. The Supreme Court’s recent decisions may make some wonder whether the Supreme Court has now decided that some corporations are too big to be held accountable. You get the unfortunate feeling that many of the Justices view plaintiffs as a mere nuisance to corporations. We cannot ignore that sex discrimination in the workplace continues, that corporations continue to deceive consumers and that fraud continues on Wall Street. I believe that the ability of Americans to band together to hold corporations accountable when these things occur has been seriously undermined by the Supreme Court. These decisions have been praised on Wall Street, but will no doubt hurt hardworking Americans on Main Street.

Posted in Airplane & Train Crashes, Auto Accidents, Bus Crashes, Construction Injuries, Defective Products, Electrocution, Equipment and Machine Malfunction, Explosions & Fires, Falls, Illinois Wrongful Death, Indiana Wrongful Death, Insurance Claims, Job Site Injury, Longshoremen & Maritime, Medical Malpractice, Mill Accidents, Motorcycle Accidents, Other Jurisdictions, Product Liability, Semi-Truck Crashes, Serious Personal Injury, Transportation, Work Related, Wrongful Death | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »