This bill if it becomes law will help put an end to abuse of workers by employers who intentionally place workers at risk in an attempt to increase productivity. All to often safety features are removed or rendered inactive in the name of increased efficiency. Countless worker are injured and killed while the employer is left free from responsibility.
Finally, a measure to place responsibility where it firmly belongs, on the abusive employer.
Usually, there is a provision under statute for an employee to pursue action in tort for “wanton and reckless” endangerment of the employee by the employer. To strike a fair balance between the employers’ obligation to provide workers comp. benefits, and the employees forfeiture of his right to sue, their should be a mechanism available to an employer, when it is obviuos that the employee reckless disregards safety training and measures implemented by the employer.
The employers who are hollaring about this must not care about the safety of their employees. Why shouldn’t the employee be allowed to sue the employer who has not made sure the sarety guards are on the machine? Yes, workers’ comp is an “exclusive remedy” but that came about as a way to exclude ordinary negligence from the equation. If a guard is missing, you have a more culpable level of negligence. If the employer cares so little about the employee that it doesn’t even bother making sure the safety guards are on the machine, then the reason for the “exclusive remedy” is no longer valid. The threat of these suits will make for safer workplaces. We have a similar rule in NC but after an initial flurry of suits the first 3 or 4 years, very few suits have been filed since.
No, we lawyers just know that the only way to make you “compassionate conservative” business owners and managers treat your employees like human beings is to make it cost you dollars when you treat them like they are expendable. Take care of your people and you won’t have to worry about getting one of these suits.
What is does intentional mean. What is the cost of defending against an alligation of intentional. $20,000 a claim? If a guard is removed by another employee without the knowledge of the owner of the company is that intentional on the employer’s part. Are action of employees imputed to be the action of the employer? What if the person who removed thought it would spead up work.
Last year LA removed the statute that barred recovery for failure of the employee to use a safety devise. If LA passes this statute – should the penality prevision be added back to the statute?
Last year how many workers were injured by the removal of a safety devise? What does “countless” mean.
What does “free of responsibility” mean. Is the payment of workers’ compensation benefits free? Does the employer pay the cost of providing WC benefits. Is loosing a worker free, is replacing a lost worker with a new worker free, is the cost of training and hiring free…
Reinstate 23.1081(c) “No compensation shall be allowed for an injury caused:
(C) by the injured employees deliberate failure to use an adequate gard or protection against accident provided for him,or” Add an additional condition to this defense. When the defense is raised after the intentional guard removed action is raised, the employer can stop all WC benefits and even if the defense fails no penality or attorney fees can be awarded. The A&C bar would not apply if the defense is raised by the employer when no intentional tort action has been filed.
This compromise would place responsibility for safety on both the employer and employee and make one think before filing a questionable intentional tort claim against and employer. It would also make the employee responsible for their deliberate refusal to use an adequate gard…Just think of the investigations that would become necessary on every worker’s compensation claim where a guard issue could be raised. It would mean more work for independent adjusters…
I am a 48 year-old male living in the State of Louisiana. In November 2001 I road (as a guest passenger) with my employer while he was going to a business meeting. Though I was not in “the course and scope of my employment,” and it was not part of my job description to go with him, I did so out of personal curiosity. My “former” employer ran a red light and hit another motor vehicle causing me permanent injury. For the past twenty (20) years I had been a successful businessman in the community. Since that time I have been drawing worker’s compensation benefits. At the time I was not aware of Louisiana worker’s compensation laws, until I was placed on worker’s comp. The worker’s compensation carrier says this is the way “Worker’s Comp. Is Suppose to Work”. I really do not feel that a person injured through the negligence of his employer should only be entitled to just worker’s compensation. I have been made to suffer from this Louisiana law by only receiving 2/3rd’s of my income while working. Not to mention how much worker’s compensation laws have allowed my former employer’s worker’s compensation carrier to jerk me around through their loop holes, and interpretations of present worker’s compensation laws in the state of Louisiana. Why should I be punished for my employer’s negligence? I may never be able to return back to any type of work, and will never be compensated for any pain and suffering, due to my former employer’s direct negligence. Under existing worker’s compensation laws after ten (10) years from the date of the accident, I will be without any remedy or means to care for myself, and my injuries. I have had one (1) major surgery so far, and almost a dozen out-patient procedures since the accident, and am due to have another major surgery. I do not think that the Louisiana House Civil Law Committee Senate Bill 672 will help me if it passes, but I do hope it passed the Full House, to help the next persons that end up in a situation similar to mine. Right now, I do not feel that Louisiana Worker’s Compensation Laws in the State of Louisiana are working, and it is not in my opinion how “worker’s comp. Is suppose to work”. If business are so worried about the rise and cost of Worker’s Comp. Insurance, they should use more effort to improve life/safety in the work place.
Thank you!
Charles Rushing
664 Rock Hill Road
Bentley, Louisiana 71407 / CHARLESLEE042@aol.com
I am a 48 year-old male living in the State of Louisiana. In November 2001 I road (as a guest passenger) with my employer while he was going to a business meeting. Though I was not in “the course and scope of my employment,” and it was not part of my job description to go with him, I did so out of personal curiosity. My “former” employer ran a red light and hit another motor vehicle causing me permanent injury. For the past twenty (20) years I had been a successful businessman in the community. Since that time I have been drawing worker’s compensation benefits. At the time I was not aware of Louisiana worker’s compensation laws, until I was placed on worker’s comp. The worker’s compensation carrier says this is the way “Worker’s Comp. Is Suppose to Work”. I really do not feel that a person injured through the negligence of his employer should only be entitled to just worker’s compensation. I have been made to suffer from this Louisiana law by only receiving 2/3rd’s of my income while working. Not to mention how much worker’s compensation laws have allowed my former employer’s worker’s compensation carrier to jerk me around through their loop holes, and interpretations of present worker’s compensation laws in the state of Louisiana. Why should I be punished for my employer’s negligence? I may never be able to return back to any type of work, and will never be compensated for any pain and suffering, due to my former employer’s direct negligence. Under existing worker’s compensation laws after ten (10) years from the date of the accident, I will be without any remedy or means to care for myself, and my injuries. I have had one (1) major surgery so far, and almost a dozen out-patient procedures since the accident, and am due to have another major surgery. I do not think that the Louisiana House Civil Law Committee Senate Bill 672 will help me if it passes, but I do hope it passed the Full House, to help the next persons that end up in a situation similar to mine. Right now, I do not feel that Louisiana Worker’s Compensation Laws in the State of Louisiana are working, and it is not in my opinion how “worker’s comp. Is suppose to work”. If business are so worried about the rise and cost of Worker’s Comp. Insurance, they should use more effort to improve life/safety in the work place.
Thank you!
Charles Rushing
664 Rock Hill Road
Bentley, Louisiana 71407 / CHARLESLEE042@aol.com
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.
it figures that lawyers are trying to get a better hold on louiaiana businesses by leach sucking their way to prosperity.
This bill if it becomes law will help put an end to abuse of workers by employers who intentionally place workers at risk in an attempt to increase productivity. All to often safety features are removed or rendered inactive in the name of increased efficiency. Countless worker are injured and killed while the employer is left free from responsibility.
Finally, a measure to place responsibility where it firmly belongs, on the abusive employer.
Usually, there is a provision under statute for an employee to pursue action in tort for “wanton and reckless” endangerment of the employee by the employer. To strike a fair balance between the employers’ obligation to provide workers comp. benefits, and the employees forfeiture of his right to sue, their should be a mechanism available to an employer, when it is obviuos that the employee reckless disregards safety training and measures implemented by the employer.
The employers who are hollaring about this must not care about the safety of their employees. Why shouldn’t the employee be allowed to sue the employer who has not made sure the sarety guards are on the machine? Yes, workers’ comp is an “exclusive remedy” but that came about as a way to exclude ordinary negligence from the equation. If a guard is missing, you have a more culpable level of negligence. If the employer cares so little about the employee that it doesn’t even bother making sure the safety guards are on the machine, then the reason for the “exclusive remedy” is no longer valid. The threat of these suits will make for safer workplaces. We have a similar rule in NC but after an initial flurry of suits the first 3 or 4 years, very few suits have been filed since.
No, we lawyers just know that the only way to make you “compassionate conservative” business owners and managers treat your employees like human beings is to make it cost you dollars when you treat them like they are expendable. Take care of your people and you won’t have to worry about getting one of these suits.
What is does intentional mean. What is the cost of defending against an alligation of intentional. $20,000 a claim? If a guard is removed by another employee without the knowledge of the owner of the company is that intentional on the employer’s part. Are action of employees imputed to be the action of the employer? What if the person who removed thought it would spead up work.
Last year LA removed the statute that barred recovery for failure of the employee to use a safety devise. If LA passes this statute – should the penality prevision be added back to the statute?
Last year how many workers were injured by the removal of a safety devise? What does “countless” mean.
What does “free of responsibility” mean. Is the payment of workers’ compensation benefits free? Does the employer pay the cost of providing WC benefits. Is loosing a worker free, is replacing a lost worker with a new worker free, is the cost of training and hiring free…
Is protecting the worker your true agenda?
Reinstate 23.1081(c) “No compensation shall be allowed for an injury caused:
(C) by the injured employees deliberate failure to use an adequate gard or protection against accident provided for him,or” Add an additional condition to this defense. When the defense is raised after the intentional guard removed action is raised, the employer can stop all WC benefits and even if the defense fails no penality or attorney fees can be awarded. The A&C bar would not apply if the defense is raised by the employer when no intentional tort action has been filed.
This compromise would place responsibility for safety on both the employer and employee and make one think before filing a questionable intentional tort claim against and employer. It would also make the employee responsible for their deliberate refusal to use an adequate gard…Just think of the investigations that would become necessary on every worker’s compensation claim where a guard issue could be raised. It would mean more work for independent adjusters…
Dear Sen. Kip Holden:
I am a 48 year-old male living in the State of Louisiana. In November 2001 I road (as a guest passenger) with my employer while he was going to a business meeting. Though I was not in “the course and scope of my employment,” and it was not part of my job description to go with him, I did so out of personal curiosity. My “former” employer ran a red light and hit another motor vehicle causing me permanent injury. For the past twenty (20) years I had been a successful businessman in the community. Since that time I have been drawing worker’s compensation benefits. At the time I was not aware of Louisiana worker’s compensation laws, until I was placed on worker’s comp. The worker’s compensation carrier says this is the way “Worker’s Comp. Is Suppose to Work”. I really do not feel that a person injured through the negligence of his employer should only be entitled to just worker’s compensation. I have been made to suffer from this Louisiana law by only receiving 2/3rd’s of my income while working. Not to mention how much worker’s compensation laws have allowed my former employer’s worker’s compensation carrier to jerk me around through their loop holes, and interpretations of present worker’s compensation laws in the state of Louisiana. Why should I be punished for my employer’s negligence? I may never be able to return back to any type of work, and will never be compensated for any pain and suffering, due to my former employer’s direct negligence. Under existing worker’s compensation laws after ten (10) years from the date of the accident, I will be without any remedy or means to care for myself, and my injuries. I have had one (1) major surgery so far, and almost a dozen out-patient procedures since the accident, and am due to have another major surgery. I do not think that the Louisiana House Civil Law Committee Senate Bill 672 will help me if it passes, but I do hope it passed the Full House, to help the next persons that end up in a situation similar to mine. Right now, I do not feel that Louisiana Worker’s Compensation Laws in the State of Louisiana are working, and it is not in my opinion how “worker’s comp. Is suppose to work”. If business are so worried about the rise and cost of Worker’s Comp. Insurance, they should use more effort to improve life/safety in the work place.
Thank you!
Charles Rushing
664 Rock Hill Road
Bentley, Louisiana 71407 / CHARLESLEE042@aol.com
I am a 48 year-old male living in the State of Louisiana. In November 2001 I road (as a guest passenger) with my employer while he was going to a business meeting. Though I was not in “the course and scope of my employment,” and it was not part of my job description to go with him, I did so out of personal curiosity. My “former” employer ran a red light and hit another motor vehicle causing me permanent injury. For the past twenty (20) years I had been a successful businessman in the community. Since that time I have been drawing worker’s compensation benefits. At the time I was not aware of Louisiana worker’s compensation laws, until I was placed on worker’s comp. The worker’s compensation carrier says this is the way “Worker’s Comp. Is Suppose to Work”. I really do not feel that a person injured through the negligence of his employer should only be entitled to just worker’s compensation. I have been made to suffer from this Louisiana law by only receiving 2/3rd’s of my income while working. Not to mention how much worker’s compensation laws have allowed my former employer’s worker’s compensation carrier to jerk me around through their loop holes, and interpretations of present worker’s compensation laws in the state of Louisiana. Why should I be punished for my employer’s negligence? I may never be able to return back to any type of work, and will never be compensated for any pain and suffering, due to my former employer’s direct negligence. Under existing worker’s compensation laws after ten (10) years from the date of the accident, I will be without any remedy or means to care for myself, and my injuries. I have had one (1) major surgery so far, and almost a dozen out-patient procedures since the accident, and am due to have another major surgery. I do not think that the Louisiana House Civil Law Committee Senate Bill 672 will help me if it passes, but I do hope it passed the Full House, to help the next persons that end up in a situation similar to mine. Right now, I do not feel that Louisiana Worker’s Compensation Laws in the State of Louisiana are working, and it is not in my opinion how “worker’s comp. Is suppose to work”. If business are so worried about the rise and cost of Worker’s Comp. Insurance, they should use more effort to improve life/safety in the work place.
Thank you!
Charles Rushing
664 Rock Hill Road
Bentley, Louisiana 71407 / CHARLESLEE042@aol.com