Liability doesn\’t matter here. The crazy NY law says that if it happened on your property, you\’re wrong. PERIOD, AMEN.
As a result, property owners get conrtactors to assume liability under contract, so everybody has to pay. In this case, the contractor (the injured employee\’s emploer) didn\’t have high enough limits of liability, so the municipality will have to pay. Since they are self-insured, the tax payers will have to pay.
To Mcheck57. Since this unfortunate worker was hurt so badly, would you like to pay his bills? How about his lost income? If not, why not? Just because you didn\’t cause his injuries shouldn\’t be cause for you not to pay. Hey, the town in this case didn\’t cause this guy\’s injuries either. That\’s why Workers Comp was invented. In every state except NY, Workers Comp is a \”sole remedy.\”
Until you\’re ready to pay for him, perhaps you ought to learn about what you\’re complaining about.
Which would you prefer; 30 mil. and paralyzed for life or no accident / no 30 mil. / normal life? I am willing to bet the guy would give up all the money if he could turn back time. So while it may be easy for us outsiders to say the amount of money \”awarded\” to him is ridiculous, put yourself in his shoes before condemning him.
Ulitmately the consunmer and the tax payers pay for this sort of thing. Juries need to recognize that these unreasonable judgements are going to come out of their pockets too. I think maybe 2 million is generous. My wife has cerebral palsy and works, doesn\’t collect any government funding, is discriminated against but still works hard for our family. I assume this guy can be a produtive dude too. It\’s too bad.
I\’m not saying this verdict AMOUNT was unreasonable. My point here is that the NY scaffold laws are unreasonable in that they say that property owners are liable when a worker falls from a height, and there is no defense on the part of the defendant.
In every other state, Workers Compensation is the sole remedy for this sort of thing. If the property owner (in other states than NY) were truly negligent, the injured worker could then sue, and if he could show some negligence on the part of the property owner, he would get something.
Mcheck, I think YOU don\’t get it. How would YOU like it if you were to be charged with a crime but were not allowed to present a defense? This is essentially what 240, 241 in NY do. I\’m not against injured workers collecting WC benefits, or even being able to sue when there is negligence. But 240, 241 say that liability on the part of the property owner is ABSOLUTE, which means, in essence, there is NO DEFENSE (except in cases of gross negligence on the part of the worker, like showing up for work drunk).
No one should deny injured workers their due benefits, but the question should be, who should pay? Mcheck, if you were in NY and you owned some property, you could be sued if any worker on your premises fell from \”a height\” (again, the law deosn\’t define that, so ANY height, even 1 foot, qualifies). And if you were sued, you would have no defense becuase liability, under 240, 241 is ABSOLUTE.
Here in NY, it\’s more a case of the trial lawyers wanting to keep these laws and controlling the state legislature (although our state legislators claim it is the unions who are keeping these laws on the books) than injured workers getting fairly compensated when they are injured.
Before you make noise, Mcheck, learn what you\’re talking about. Try reading 240, 241 and then you can squawk.
How does the man live on a max of $400 per week and support a family? Under the new law he gets 10 years max benefits. Then who would have paid for his needs of life? Not a huge profit making insurance company. You and I will.
NYBroker when Workers\’ Comp becomes a fairer system then talk to me. The system is no benefits to workers or their employers. It only benefits money hungrey, we don\’t give a s**t carriers like those you work for.
Get real and get fair…then call me names
McCheck: you are obviously a social mal-content and not a member of the industry. You must like us because you read insurance journals. Having investigated and handled scores of labor law claims over a career that spans 35 years I feel qualified and comfortable to say that 80-90% of them are groundless. You see workers being careless, drinking at lunch, refusing to wear safety harnesses, and failing to check-out their equipment. I\’ve seen them recover for injuries they sustained when they themselves positioned the ladder, stood on the very top contrary to posted instructions, then lost their balance and fell. I\’ve yet to see an honest claimant admit it was his own ineptitude, carelessness, or stupidity that caused his injury. Why not? Follow the money trail. They can\’t pay for their mistakes. They should get WC for their medicals and lost wages FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY. They should not profit from these types of incidents. Of course our badly flawed legal system, the trough that fees the plaintiff counsels, has convinced people they are ENTITLED to damages. Labor law created an incentive to get injured and receive a pension settlement. It\’s BAD LAW anyway you cut it.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Liability doesn\’t matter here. The crazy NY law says that if it happened on your property, you\’re wrong. PERIOD, AMEN.
As a result, property owners get conrtactors to assume liability under contract, so everybody has to pay. In this case, the contractor (the injured employee\’s emploer) didn\’t have high enough limits of liability, so the municipality will have to pay. Since they are self-insured, the tax payers will have to pay.
To Mcheck57. Since this unfortunate worker was hurt so badly, would you like to pay his bills? How about his lost income? If not, why not? Just because you didn\’t cause his injuries shouldn\’t be cause for you not to pay. Hey, the town in this case didn\’t cause this guy\’s injuries either. That\’s why Workers Comp was invented. In every state except NY, Workers Comp is a \”sole remedy.\”
Until you\’re ready to pay for him, perhaps you ought to learn about what you\’re complaining about.
Which would you prefer; 30 mil. and paralyzed for life or no accident / no 30 mil. / normal life? I am willing to bet the guy would give up all the money if he could turn back time. So while it may be easy for us outsiders to say the amount of money \”awarded\” to him is ridiculous, put yourself in his shoes before condemning him.
Ulitmately the consunmer and the tax payers pay for this sort of thing. Juries need to recognize that these unreasonable judgements are going to come out of their pockets too. I think maybe 2 million is generous. My wife has cerebral palsy and works, doesn\’t collect any government funding, is discriminated against but still works hard for our family. I assume this guy can be a produtive dude too. It\’s too bad.
I\’m not saying this verdict AMOUNT was unreasonable. My point here is that the NY scaffold laws are unreasonable in that they say that property owners are liable when a worker falls from a height, and there is no defense on the part of the defendant.
In every other state, Workers Compensation is the sole remedy for this sort of thing. If the property owner (in other states than NY) were truly negligent, the injured worker could then sue, and if he could show some negligence on the part of the property owner, he would get something.
Mcheck, I think YOU don\’t get it. How would YOU like it if you were to be charged with a crime but were not allowed to present a defense? This is essentially what 240, 241 in NY do. I\’m not against injured workers collecting WC benefits, or even being able to sue when there is negligence. But 240, 241 say that liability on the part of the property owner is ABSOLUTE, which means, in essence, there is NO DEFENSE (except in cases of gross negligence on the part of the worker, like showing up for work drunk).
No one should deny injured workers their due benefits, but the question should be, who should pay? Mcheck, if you were in NY and you owned some property, you could be sued if any worker on your premises fell from \”a height\” (again, the law deosn\’t define that, so ANY height, even 1 foot, qualifies). And if you were sued, you would have no defense becuase liability, under 240, 241 is ABSOLUTE.
Here in NY, it\’s more a case of the trial lawyers wanting to keep these laws and controlling the state legislature (although our state legislators claim it is the unions who are keeping these laws on the books) than injured workers getting fairly compensated when they are injured.
Before you make noise, Mcheck, learn what you\’re talking about. Try reading 240, 241 and then you can squawk.
How does the man live on a max of $400 per week and support a family? Under the new law he gets 10 years max benefits. Then who would have paid for his needs of life? Not a huge profit making insurance company. You and I will.
NYBroker when Workers\’ Comp becomes a fairer system then talk to me. The system is no benefits to workers or their employers. It only benefits money hungrey, we don\’t give a s**t carriers like those you work for.
Get real and get fair…then call me names
The CEO of State Farm made $11.6 million in 2006; AIG $21.3 million; Allstate $22.5 million; Aetna $32 million
need I go on.
mcheck57
You\’ve convinced me…
If I sue someone, I want you on the jury!!!!
My point was that you cannot determine what is fair UNTIL YOU KNOW THE WHOLE STORY. When you assume you make…………
McCheck: you are obviously a social mal-content and not a member of the industry. You must like us because you read insurance journals. Having investigated and handled scores of labor law claims over a career that spans 35 years I feel qualified and comfortable to say that 80-90% of them are groundless. You see workers being careless, drinking at lunch, refusing to wear safety harnesses, and failing to check-out their equipment. I\’ve seen them recover for injuries they sustained when they themselves positioned the ladder, stood on the very top contrary to posted instructions, then lost their balance and fell. I\’ve yet to see an honest claimant admit it was his own ineptitude, carelessness, or stupidity that caused his injury. Why not? Follow the money trail. They can\’t pay for their mistakes. They should get WC for their medicals and lost wages FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY. They should not profit from these types of incidents. Of course our badly flawed legal system, the trough that fees the plaintiff counsels, has convinced people they are ENTITLED to damages. Labor law created an incentive to get injured and receive a pension settlement. It\’s BAD LAW anyway you cut it.