Search Our Site

March 4, 2025   False statements about previous injuries get overruled– because of the employer's actions   Inalfa Roof Systems has a significant presence in the United States, with multiple manufacturing facilities and engineering centers supporting the North American automotive market. The company operates major plants in Michigan and Georgia, where it produces sunroofs and panoramic roof systems for leading automakers, including Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis. Inalfa is owned by Beijing Hainachuan Automotive Parts Co., Ltd. (BHAP), a subsidiary of the BAIC Group, one of China’s largest state-owned automotive manufacturers.   Sharon McKay, an employee at the company, sustained two separate workplace injuries in 2021. The case primarily focused on the second injury, which occurred on September 14, 2021. McKay had originally been hired in late 2020 as an assembly operator, a physically demanding job requiring significant lifting, standing, and mobility.   The legal dispute At the heart of the case was the Rycroft defense, a legal precedent from a 1989 Georgia Supreme Court ruling. The Rycroft defense allows an employer to deny workers' compensation benefits if three conditions are met: 1.       The employee knowingly made a false statement about their medical history. 2.       The employer relied on that false statement when making the hiring decision. 3.       There is a direct connection between the false statement and the injury in question. Inalfa successfully used this defense to argue that McKay’s original June 11 injury should not qualify for workers’ compensation because she had not disclosed her previous back injury. The State Board of Workers’ Compensation agreed with Inalfa, and the superior court upheld the decision. However, McKay appealed, arguing that the Rycroft defense should not apply to her second injury on September 14. By that time, Inalfa knew about her past injuries and had still allowed her to continue working.   Read more

March 3, 2025   Jacksonville, Florida – U.S. District Judge Wendy W. Berger has sentenced Marielys Feliciano Rodriguez (47, Orlando) to one year of house arrest and ordered her to pay $3,338,558 in restitution to the Internal Revenue Service for wire fraud and tax fraud. She was also ordered to serve a five-year term of supervised release. The court also entered a money judgment against Rodriguez in the amount of $347,760, representing the proceeds of the wire fraud.   According to court documents, Rodriguez established a shell company that purported to be involved in the construction industry. She obtained a workers’ compensation insurance policy in the name of the shell company to cover a minimal payroll for a few purported employees, then “rented” the workers’ compensation insurance to work crews who had obtained subcontracts with construction contractors on projects in various Florida counties as well as contractors in other states. Rodriguez sent the contractors a certificate as “proof” that the work crews had workers’ compensation insurance, as required by Florida law. By sending the certificate Rodriguez falsely represented that the work crews worked for the shell company. Over the course of the scheme, Rodriguez “rented” the certificates to dozens of work crews, defrauding the worker’s compensation carrier, typically allowing numerous undocumented illegal workers to be employed unlawfully.   As part of the scheme, the contractors issued payroll checks for the workers’ wages to the shell companies and Rodriguez cashed these checks, then distributed the cash to the work crews, after deducting their fee, which was typically about 6% of the payroll. During the scheme, Rodriguez cashed payroll checks totaling approximately $13 million. Neither the shell company nor the contractors reported to government authorities the wages that were paid to the workers, nor did they pay either the employees’ or the employer’s portion of payroll taxes – including Social Security, Medicare, and federal income tax. The amount of payroll taxes due on wages collected by Rodriguez totaled over $3 million.   The scheme also facilitated the avoidance of the higher cost of obtaining adequate workers’ compensation insurance for the numerous workers on the work crews to whom Rodriguez “rented” the workers’ compensation insurance. The policy that Rodriguez purchased and then “rented” out was for an estimated payroll of $121,800 and the insurance company issued a policy for a premium of approximately $8,006. Had a workers’ compensation insurance policy been purchased for the actual payroll totaling approximately $5 million dollars, the policy premium would have totaled about $461,679.   Read more

February 20, 2025 A Florida man was sentenced yesterday to 48 months in prison and ordered to forfeit more than $5.5 million to the United States as well as forfeit numerous real properties and cash, and to pay over $55 million in restitution for conspiracy to commit wire fraud, conspiracy to defraud the United States and willful violation of a workplace standard that resulted in the death of his employee. Manual Domingos Pita, of Wesley Chapel, previously pleaded guilty to those charges on July 9, 2024.   According to court documents, Pita owned and operated Domingos 54 Construction, a subcontracting business for the wood framing of new construction homes. Domingos 54 was a shell construction company that Pita used to provide workers, including undocumented aliens, with construction jobs. However, Pita failed to secure the required workers compensation insurance coverage for these employees by falsifying in worker’s compensation insurance applications the number of workers for which he sought coverage. In addition, Pita failed to pay any federal employment taxes on the wages that these workers earned during the course of the scheme between 2018 and 2022. As a result, Pita caused several worker’s compensation insurance companies to sustain a loss of over $22.7 million in premiums that they could have charged had they been aware of the number of workers which they had been manipulated into covering with their policies. In addition, Pita failed to pay to the IRS over $33.7 million in federal employment taxes on those workers’ wages.   Between February and July 2019, investigators with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued six citations to Domingos 54 for failure to provide fall protection to workers. Even after being cited for these violations, Pita continued to ignore OSHA requirements. In March 2020, Pita assigned a worker and three other carpenters to install sheeting on the roof of a residential home in windy conditions without providing the required fall-protection gear or ensuring its use. As a result, one of the workers was blown off the roof and died from his injuries.   “Pita’s history of OSHA violations and deception tragically led to a worker’s death,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “We are committed to upholding the rule of law by prosecuting fraud and enforcing worker safety standards.” Read more

February 20, 2025 U.S. Representative Andy Biggs (R-AZ) first introduced the “Nullify the Occupational Safety and Health Administration Act” or “NOSHA Act” in November 2021, legislation aimed at abolishing the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). His justification for filing the bill was that OSHA was “usurping states’ authorities and forcing [President] Biden’s vaccine mandate on the private sector.” Though Arizona has a “state plan” and federal OSHA does not regulate workplaces there, he had nine cosponsors of the NOSHA Act.   Quick Hits Representative Andy Biggs (R-AZ) reintroduced legislation (H.R. 86) that would abolish OSHA.   Although the bill has little chance of being enacted—the bill has no cosponsors and there is no companion legislation in the U.S. Senate—what seems more likely to happen is a challenge to how OSHA standards are created.   Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has expressed support for curtailing the OSH Act’s delegation of authority to OSHA and stated that “[a]t least five justices have already expressed an interest in reconsidering [the] Court’s approach to Congress’s delegations of legislative power.”   The NOSHA Act was reintroduced in the 118th Congress with a single cosponsor, Representative Scott Perry (R-PA). (He became a cosponsor in August 2023, eight months after introduction in January 2023.) As was true of its predecessor bill, this version did not make it out of the House Committee on Education and Labor (renamed the “House Committee on Education and the Workforce” when Republicans took the reins of the U.S. House of Representatives in January 2023), which is the first step in becoming law.   Representative Biggs recently introduced it again in the 119th Congress, without cosponsors, as H.R. 86. It has been referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.   H.R. 86 is a simple piece of legislation that includes two simple sentences that have caused an uproar: “The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 is repealed. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is abolished.” These two sentences have generated more controversy in the workplace health and safety sphere than any two other sentences have, potentially since the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) was signed into law.   The OSH Act was signed into law by President Richard M. Nixon on December 29, 1970, after years of movement toward a national law to regulate health and safety in the workplace. While the OSH Act and OSHA are often viewed as partisan creations, they were a bipartisan effort to improve workplace health and safety conditions for American workers.   Though some potential exists for the U.S. Congress to take action to overturn the OSH Act and eliminate OSHA, given the lack of current and historical support for the NOSHA Act bill and the fact that no companion bill has been introduced in the U.S. Senate, the likelihood of either succumbing to the NOSHA Act appears rather limited. Moreover, the impact of the bill seems suspect, given that at present, twenty-two states have their own state plans that provide oversight of both private and government workplaces, while seven more have plans that provide oversight of government workplaces (while federal OSHA provides oversight of the private workplaces).   What seems more likely to happen is a challenge to the way OSHA standards are created. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, in a dissent to the denial of certiorari in Allstates Refractory Contractors, LLC, v. Su, stated that “[t]he Occupational Safety and Health Act may be the broadest delegation of power to an administrative agency found in the United States Code.” He continued, writing, “If this far-reaching grant of authority does not impermissibly confer legislative power on an agency, it is hard to imagine what would.” He also indicated that a majority of the justices had expressed an interest in reviewing this sort of broad delegation of authority.   If the Supreme Court of the United States were to determine that the OSH Act constituted an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to an agency, Congress would need to reframe OSHA’s rulemaking authority or take on some of the rulemaking responsibilities itself. This would likely result in a dramatic decrease in OSHA’s already limited rulemaking activity.

February 19, 2025 Gainesville, FL — Heatstroke can lead to long-term organ damage and obesity, results of a recent study suggest.   For three months, researchers at the University of Florida observed mice that were exposed to high levels of heat while on a running wheel. The mice were also fed a high-fat Western diet after exposure.   Findings show that the heat weakened the animals’ hearts, led them to eat more and put on weight, and disrupted their metabolism of carbohydrates.   More specifically, the animals’ hearts “metabolically crashed” two weeks after recovery (which is when physicians often stop following human patients), Thomas Clanton, lead study author and professor of applied physiology and kinesiology at UF, said in a press release.   “The findings show how important it is to prevent and limit heat injury before it occurs … by hydrating and cooling down when symptoms like fatigue set in,” the researchers said. “There is no established treatment for chronic heatstroke injury. But future research could help identify ways to limit the long-term damage in people.”   Clanton and his colleagues plan to follow people who have experienced heatstroke to further understand the factors that cause long-term problems. “We think there’ll be more of this chronic heat injury as we face a warming environment,” Clanton said. More than 100,000 people suffer a heat-related illness or injury each year in the United States, the release notes.

February 14, 2025 The introduction of the Nullify OSHA Act (NOSHA) by U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) has reignited the debate on whether workplace safety should be a federal responsibility or left to individual states. The bill seeks to abolish the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and replace it with state-based workplace safety regulations. Supporters argue that states should have control over their workplace safety policies. At the same time, opponents warn of a "race to the bottom" in workplace protections. This issue has significant implications for the workers' compensation industry, which relies on standardized safety regulations to mitigate risks, reduce injuries, and control claim costs. Without OSHA's oversight, workplace safety and workers' compensation could change dramatically, leading to more significant financial and human costs for employers and insurers.   The Link Between OSHA and Workers’ Compensation OSHA is crucial in reducing workplace injuries and illnesses, directly impacting workers' compensation claims. Its regulations set minimum safety standards that protect workers from hazardous conditions, and its enforcement efforts help ensure compliance. Without OSHA, workplace safety would shift entirely to state governments, creating inconsistencies across industries and geographic locations.   Workplace Safety Standards . OSHA establishes baseline safety standards for all industries, ensuring a level playing field. If each state sets its regulations, discrepancies in safety measures could lead to greater risks in states with weaker enforcement. Employers operating in multiple states would face compliance confusion, potentially increasing their liability exposure. Regulation variation would also make it harder for insurers to assess risk and set appropriate workers' compensation premiums. A fragmented regulatory system could create uncertainty, increasing overall claim costs for insurers and employers.   Reduction in Workplace Injuries . The presence of OSHA has contributed to a steady decline in workplace injuries and fatalities since its inception in 1970. Without federal oversight, companies may deprioritize safety measures to cut costs, leading to increased workplace incidents. More injuries mean higher workers' compensation claims, increased insurance premiums, and more prolonged recovery periods for injured workers. States with lax safety regulations could see significant increases in workplace injury rates. The financial burden of these claims would ultimately fall on the workers' compensation system, increasing costs for businesses and insurers.   Employer Accountability . OSHA’s enforcement mechanisms, including fines and penalties, hold companies accountable for maintaining safe work environments. If OSHA is eliminated, the ability to enforce workplace safety would be inconsistent across states, leading to varying levels of employer accountability. Some states may implement stringent enforcement policies, while others may take a more lenient approach. Employers who cut corners on safety could face a surge in workplace accidents, resulting in higher litigation and claims costs. This inconsistency would make it difficult for insurers to predict risk, leading to fluctuations in premium rates and potential coverage challenges.   Economic and Legal Ramifications for Employers and Insurers The elimination of OSHA would have far-reaching economic and legal consequences for employers and workers’ compensation insurers beyond impacting workplace safety. The costs associated with workplace injuries extend beyond medical bills and lost wages; they also include legal battles, disability benefits, and long-term claims management.   Increased Insurance Costs . When workplace injuries rise, so do workers' compensation premiums. Insurers must reassess risk factors in an unpredictable regulatory environment if OSHA is defunded. Premium rates may increase in states with weaker safety enforcement, making workers' compensation insurance more expensive for businesses. Companies that fail to meet adequate safety standards could see claim denials or policy restrictions, leading to financial strain. The absence of uniform regulations could cause wide disparities in premium structures across different states and industries.   Legal Challenges and Liability . OSHA provides a clear framework for workplace safety violations and employer responsibilities. Without federal oversight, states will set their liability standards, potentially leading to increased litigation. Employers could face more lawsuits from injured workers seeking compensation, as the absence of clear safety standards may result in negligence disputes. The legal landscape for workplace safety claims would become more complicated, increasing costs for employers and insurers. Insurers may have to navigate a patchwork of state-level laws, making underwriting and claims management more complex and costly.   Financial Burden on State Workers’ Compensation Programs . While some states already have their OSHA-approved safety plans, others do not, meaning they would have to create new regulatory structures from scratch. States with fewer resources may struggle to enforce effective safety measures, leading to higher injury rates and increased strain on workers' compensation funds. The shift in responsibility from a federal to a state level could create funding disparities, disproportionately affecting smaller businesses and states with less developed regulatory frameworks. Ultimately, states failing to implement robust safety standards could see workers' compensation costs surging, impacting businesses and taxpayers.   The Role of OSHA in Preventing Catastrophic Incidents Beyond the economic and legal implications, eliminating OSHA could lead to an increase in catastrophic workplace incidents. OSHA has played a crucial role in holding employers accountable for serious safety violations, such as those in high-risk industries like construction, manufacturing, and warehousing.   Nationally Recognized Standards . OSHA's standards ensure that hazardous work environments—such as heavy machinery, toxic chemicals, and elevated workspaces—are subject to strict safety protocols. Some states may adopt weaker standards without federal oversight, increasing the likelihood of major accidents. Workers in states with limited enforcement would face greater risks, impacting their long-term health and ability to return to work. Increased workplace accidents in high-risk industries would result in higher workers' compensation claims, placing additional financial strain on the system. Consistent national standards help maintain predictability in risk assessment and claims management for insurers.   OSHA’s Enforcement in High-Profile Cases . OSHA has been instrumental in holding companies accountable for unsafe conditions, as seen in recent cases against major discount retailers. Companies like Dollar General and Family Dollar faced significant fines for repeated safety violations, including blocked emergency exits, improper storage of hazardous materials, and unsafe working conditions. Without OSHA, enforcement would be left to individual states, many of which may lack the resources or political will to impose similar penalties. Weak enforcement would allow unsafe practices to persist, resulting in higher injury rates and more claims within the workers' compensation system. Eliminating federal oversight could embolden some employers to neglect workplace safety, putting more workers at risk.   The Need for a Unified Approach to Workplace Safety The proposal to eliminate OSHA raises serious concerns for the workers' compensation industry, which relies on national safety standards to prevent injuries and control costs. While state-level regulations may work for some, a patchwork approach to workplace safety could lead to increased injuries, higher insurance premiums, and more legal challenges. Workplace injuries' financial and human costs extend far beyond individual businesses, impacting insurers, workers, and the economy.   The workers' compensation industry must advocate for continued workplace protections, recognizing that a strong regulatory framework benefits employers and employees. A consistent, nationwide approach to workplace safety ensures predictability, accountability, and fairness in workers' compensation claims. Defunding OSHA would not only put workers at greater risk. Still, it would also increase costs for businesses and insurers, making it a losing proposition for all involved. Maintaining a robust national workplace safety system is essential to protecting workers and preserving the stability of the workers' compensation industry.

February 7, 2025 The actions come after a recent Tampa Bay Times investigation found twice as many workers have died across the state from heat than previously known.   Florida Democratic lawmakers are proposing statewide heat protections for outdoor workers, months after a Tampa Bay Times investigation found far more Florida workers have died of heat illness than authorities know.   “It’s an atrocity, and it’s a tragedy,” said Sen. Darryl Rouson, D-St. Petersburg, who filed the bill in the Senate on Wednesday. “There’s a need to put these types of regulations in place.” Four other Democrats filed a companion bill in the House.   Florida is one of the nation’s hottest states, with punishing humidity that can make it difficult for the body to cool down. Currently, neither the state nor federal government has heat safety standards to protect workers from high temperatures — despite Florida requiring similar safeguards for high school athletes.   Some of the legislators co-sponsoring the heat protection bill are also calling for a repeal of a law passed last year that blocks local governments from creating their own oversight for workers exposed to heat.   House Minority Leader Fentrice Driskell, D-Tampa, is also in favor of repealing the preemption law.   “This is an issue that has been brought into sharp relief by the number of deaths — both that are known, and now these that have been unreported,” Driskell said. “This lax regulatory environment is empowering employers to try to get away with this, and to not do the right thing and protect their workers.”   Proponents of the ban at the time said businesses and federal regulators could keep laborers safe. But the Times found authorities have missed more than half of all heat-related deaths of workers statewide in the last decade — because Florida companies failed to report them as required by law.   Neither Gov. Ron DeSantis, who signed the prohibition measure last April, nor its Republican sponsors responded to requests for comment.   No lawmaker has yet filed a bill to repeal the 2024 legislation.   “The federal government is used as an excuse,” Rouson said. “I understand that employers want a standard and don’t want it to change from location to location — making hodgepodge regulation — and this is why we need a statewide standard.”   The proposed heat safety bill would create a program to train businesses and outdoor employees on signs of heat illness. It would require employers to provide water, as well as shade and 10-minute breaks every two hours on hot days.   The push for statewide protections is not new. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have sponsored bills with nearly identical language for years, the Times previously reported, with little traction.   But Rep. Anna Eskamani, D-Orlando, said the Times’ findings “emphasized the urgency” of this year’s legislation.   “I think that this issue often gets tied up in the interests of big businesses, and they brand it as burdensome,” said Eskamani, who is co-sponsoring the House bill filed by Rep. Michael Gottlieb, D-Davie. “I would argue that you save money when you have a healthy work environment, because you avoid things like worker’s comp, you avoid litigation.”   Extreme heat is more deadly than any other natural disaster plaguing the U.S., killing more people annually than hurricanes, tornadoes and floods combined.   Employers are supposed to notify the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which oversees worker safety, about employee deaths within hours. But the Times identified 19 additional heat-related deaths that were kept from the agency, more than doubling the official number of worker heat fatalities in Florida.   Many were young. At least a handful died during their first week on the job, unaccustomed to Florida’s stifling heat and humidity. Roughly half were immigrants.