The bureau announced these figures as American labor unions came under increasing political attack. Republican governors and Republican-controlled legislatures in Wisconsin and elsewhere have moved to diminish public employees’ rights to collective bargaining. More recently, Indiana is moving to become the first state in over a decade to implement a “right to work” law, which bars employers and unions from entering into contracts that require workers to pay fees for union representation.

According to the BLS, unions currently represent 16.3 million workers, some 1.5 million more than the total membership, suggesting that many workers choose to refrain from joining the unions that represent them in their place of work.

The percentage of public sector workers in unions stood at 37% last year, more than five times higher than the 6.9% membership rate for private sector employees. By comparison, more than 35% of private sector workers belonged to unions in the 1950s.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics claims that the total number of private sector employees in unions rose by 110,000 to 7.2 million, aided by a partial recovery in manufacturing and construction sectors. Yet as an increasing number of states, cities and school districts lay off workers, the number of public sector employees in unions fell 61,000, to 7.56 million.

The Labor Department reported that the highest union rates were in New York State, where 24.1% of workers are members; this is followed by Alaska (22.1%) and Hawaii (21.5%). North Carolina currently has the lowest rate at a mere 2.9%, followed by South Carolina (3.4%) and Georgia (3.9%).

If you are in need of a Washington Employment Attorney, Workers Compensation Lawyer, or need experienced counsel for any part of your L&I Claim, contact Emery Reddy for help with your case.  Our team can also provide confidential legal advice and representation to workers who have been ordered to complete an independent medical examination for a workplace injury.

In response to these workplace injuries – along with other health and safety hazards common among workers in the primary metals industry –the Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) has joined in a national campaign headed by OSHA to reduce serious injuries and enhance workplace safety across the industry. L&I officials estimate that approximately seventy businesses in Washington are in the primary metals industry.

In a statement released by the head of L&I’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH), L&I Assistant Director Michael Silverstein offered the following remarks:

“Men and women working in foundries and other jobs where metal is cast or refined face several significant hazards, including exposure to lead and dangerous chemicals, extreme noise and heat, as well as injuries from the machinery and materials being used. With this special emphasis, L&I hopes to reduce the risks these workers face.”

As part of this new worker safety initiative, L&I has created a web page specifically devoted to reducing workplace hazards in the metals industry; the page also provides training materials and other relevant resources. Washington workers and employers are encouraged to visit the site here: www.PrimaryMetals.Lni.wa.gov.

The new workplace safety campaign also includes a mailing of informational literature to nearly seventy businesses in Washington that fall within the primary metals category. For those interested in seeing images of two serious workplace injuries caused by to molten metal, L&I has also put together a slideshow (viewer discretion advised). Finally, Washington L&I plans to expand enforcement inspections throughout the state.

The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) launched a nationwide program to protect metal workers last year. Officials stated that due to the hazards of this workplace, workers in the metal industry have an injury and fatality rate exceeding many other industrial jobs. This trend, unfortunately, holds true in Washington State as well.

Employers and managers who oversee worker safety are encouraged to request individualized help in addressing workplace hazards by contacting an L&I Safety and Health consultant, or by calling a local L&I office.

If you have suffered a workplace injury or have an occupational illness, contact a Seattle L&I Lawyer at Emery Reddy today for help with your L&I claim.

Broadcast version of L&I’s news release:

“The Department of Labor & Industries has joined a national effort to improve safety at smelters, foundries and other metal processing facilities that make up the state’s primary metals industry. The effort involves increased inspections, more safety and health outreach into the industry, including the development of a new L&I web page, with training materials and other information. Businesses in this industry should expect to receive a postcard in the mail announcing the effort.”

The rule was enacted in response to a bill passed by the Washington State Legislature, which requires L&I to implement protections that abide by recommendations in the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health reports of 2004 and 2010.

L&I will host a public meeting to discuss the creation of a Hazardous Drugs Advisory Committee, as well as model programs that support employers as they implement the rule.  This event will take place at the L&I Tumwater building from 2 – 4 pm on Wednesday, January 25^th. The Auditorium is located at:

Department of Labor & Industries Auditorium
7273 Linderson Way SW
Tumwater, WA 98501-5414

When the Hazardous Drugs rule goes into effect it will cover all health care settings where workers come into contact with these hazardous drugs. Some of those substances have been identified as cancer-causing agents, while others are known to cause irreversible harm to health care workers – even at low-level exposure rates.

Under this new rule, “health care facilities” will be defined as sites where a health care provider administers medical care to patients.

The rule includes minimum requirements for advancing a hazardous drug control program.  Using existing hazard assessments, employers will establish programs to reduce or eliminate employee exposure to hazardous substances.

If you or someone you know has suffered a work-related illness due to exposure to hazardous substances, contact an Employment Attorney at Emery Reddy for help recovering damages.

Construction accidents cause Washington workers to suffer more than just serious injury; employees also face financial hardships, the inability to support families, long-term medical complications and expenses, surgery, and sometimes life-long difficulties maintaining employment.

When the responsible party is the workers’ employer, a coworker, or even the injured worker him- or herself, claims and benefits are managed by the Department of Labor and Industries.  However, if a construction site injury is caused by the negligence of someone other than a direct employer – or if accidents occur at a location other than the place of employment – workers may have the right to additional compensation and benefits through a third-party liability claim.  In distinction from workers’ compensation benefits, there is virtually no limit to the settlement amount in a third-party liability claim. This can give injured workers access to additional medical benefits and wage-loss benefits, and further compensate them for personal pain and suffering as well as loss of services for dependents or a spouse.

From a legal perspective, construction accident claims are highly complex. Construction sites are demanding and rapidly-changing environments where projects are managed under intense time constraints, and projects often involve multiple businesses, contractors, sub-contractors, rental companies, property owners, workers, and equipment manufacturers and owners.  Simply pinpointing the party responsible for an accident can be overwhelming.  This means that victims without skillful and experienced legal representation can face an endless series of questions and criteria in assessing the viability of their construction accident claim: what personnel were present on the site when an accident occurred? What machinery or equipment was involved? Who manufactured, owned, installed, or operated it? Are there available witnesses?  A construction site attorney with comprehensive knowledge of third-party liability and workers’ compensation laws can be crucial to the success of a case. The Construction Site Accident Attorneys at Emery Reddy are experienced in maximizing compensation that workers receive from serious injury and wrongful death cases.

Our attorneys have successfully negotiated and litigated construction site accident cases involving defective products that are commonly used in commercial building projects.  Each year, poorly manufactured or improperly maintained construction equipment causes thousands of serious injuries and fatalities.  Life-altering injuries and deaths, for instance, commonly result from scaffolding that is incorrectly installed or that fails to follow L&I and OSHA safety regulations.  Rental companies that do not properly care for or install equipment may be held accountable in a third-party liability claim.

While some workers are tempted to accept a quick settlement from an insurance company, this rarely reflects the full cost of personal, medical, financial and professional damages suffered by the injured worker.  What is in the insurer’s best interest is generally not in the best interest of the victim, since insurance companies will look for every available means to pay claimants as little as they can.

Emery Reddy’s Construction Accident Attorneys can help client recover the maximum compensation to which they are entitled by Washington law. As committed advocates of Washington workers, we take pride in our successful record of securing benefits for the injured and disabled, and will guide you through every step of your personal injury, third party liability or workers’ compensation claim.  Contact one of our attorneys today for a free consultation.

Denise Frisino’s troubles with toxic mold began in 2000 when she acquired a respiratory illness in response to chemical toxins present at Hamilton International Middle School. The illness made her sensitive to a range of airborne toxins, from mold to other irritants.  After attempts to clean up the toxic environment at the school failed, Frisino was forced to go on medical leave in April 2004 and agreed to be transferred to Nathan Hale High School the following school year.

According to court documents, the extent to which Seattle Public Schools has failed to address widespread mold and toxin problems became clear when Frisino entered her new classroom at Hale.  She “immediately note[d] visible mold as well as blackened and missing ceiling tiles.”  Frisino discussed her concerns with Hale Principal Lisa Hechtman.  In September and October, a private firm, Clayton Group Services, as well as the Seattle/King Country Department of Health investigated and “reported no active mold growth in the building.”  Although they reported “the total fungal structure concentrations inside the hale building were lower than those found outdoors,” the District still performed some minimal remediation on the classroom.  On November 21, the issue came to a head when Frisino experienced a respiratory emergency in the classroom requiring a visit to the emergency room.

Michelle Esteban of KOMO News reported on November 29, 2004 on photos of mold that a Nathan Hale parent provided.  Esteban notes, “Some of the ceiling tiles are peeled away and, underneath, a black mold.”  The article also described Frisino’s reaction as “severe–everything from a hacking cough, swollen nose, ringing ears and now respiratory complications.”

Frisino was not the only person put in jeopardy by the continuing mold problem at Nathan Hale.  Seattlepi.com reported on December 7, 2004 that Jennifer Aspelund pulled her son out of Nathan Hale because of the threat the mold posed.  Her son, North Aspelund Jr., was “diagnosed with leukemia at age 4, relapsed four years later, then endured a bone marrow transplant and the removal of a cancerous kidney.”  After detecting a an odd smell in the library, officials confirmed an “area above a northeast stairwell contain[ed] Stachybotrys atra, a greenish-black mold.” His mother noted they never would have enrolled North in Hale had they been aware of the mold problem.

Meanwhile, Frisino was earnestly negotiating with the District to accommodate her disability.  According to court documents, the District hired Superior Colt to remove visible mold from Classroom 216.  The remediation project was completed in December and the District demanded Frisino return to work on January 3, 2005.  Thus began a flurry of communication between Frisino and the District, with the District claiming the environmental remediation was “appropriate” and Frisino’s doctors repeating she was “advised to remain away from her current workplace or be transferred to a more accommodating environment.”  The District terminated Frisino on June 1, claiming she failed to return to work.

Frisino’s original lawsuit alleged the District failed to provide a reasonable accommodation as required by the Washington Law Against Discrimination, and engaged in employment discrimination and retaliatory discharge.  The trial court dismissed her claim in favor of the District.

Yesterday Frisino’s claim was given new life by the Washington State Court of Appeals when she was granted a new trial.  Among other irregularities, the court noted the District attempted to apply an “objective measure” to her illness and questioned whether the District reasonably accommodated Frisino. Most importantly, in the last month many of the key players working for the School District have been terminated for misuse of District funds and poor leadership after being swept up in the Seattle Public Schools Scandal.

Since the case was dismissed in 2009, Nathan Hale has been completely renovated.

The Appeals Court’s granting of a trial is an important victory for injured workers whose employers violate their rights by refusing to accommodate a disability or terminate in retaliation.  There is a Washington L & I attorney at Emery Reddy  that has the expertise to protect your rights.  Stay tuned as this case continues to unfold…

In an October 21 press release, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics reported an encouraging decline in workplace injuries and illnesses. Across much of the U.S., workers compensation claims are down in many industries, particularly construction. Among private employers, nonfatal accidents declined to a rate of 3.6 cases for every 100 full-time workers in 2009, down from 3.9 per 100 in 2008. BLS also announced a drop in the total number of cases in the U.S., which declined from 3.7 million in 2008 to 3.3 million in 2009.

“While the reported decline in workplace injuries and illnesses is encouraging, 3.3 million workplace injuries and illnesses are 3.3 million too many,” said Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. “No worker should fear being injured or made sick for a paycheck.”

Solis emphasized the importance of thorough and accurate reporting in the case of workplace injuries. Solid record-keeping for workers compensation claims, she stated, can “serve as the basis for employer programs to investigate injuries and prevent future occurrences.” The Labor Secretary indicated that most employers recognize this obligation and do their best to correct conditions in which worker injuries occur, but pointed out that too many still do not. “That is why my department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration is aggressively working to ensure the completeness and accuracy of injury data compiled by the nation’s employers. We are concerned about the widespread existence of programs that discourage workers from reporting injuries, and we will continue to issue citations and penalties to employers that intentionally under-report workplace injuries.”

Solis concluded the press release by reiterating the importance of adherence to workers’ compensation guidelines and regulations that prevent workplace injury. “Too many Americans suffer each year from preventable injuries or illnesses they received while on the job. Even in these difficult economic times, we must keep in mind that no job is a good job unless it’s a safe job.”

Under the care of Dr. Orn Eliasson, the worker was diagnosed with a 54% bilateral pulmonary impairment, which Dr. Eliasson determined using the 5th Edition AMA Guide.  Yet a second physician, Dr. Albert Rizzo, also attended to the same patient, and rated a 24% permanency based on the 6th Edition AMA Guide.

During his July 2010 hearing the claimant was no longer working.  His employers maintained that worker safety measures from 1986 should have provided him with adequate protection from asbestos exposure beyond that date—meaning, according to the logic of their argument—that the employee’s disability benefit quotient should have been based on his average weekly wage in 1986 for determining his present disability award.

The worker’s complicated employment history has made it difficult to determine all the factors involved in his asbestos exposure.  He was last employed by Catalytic in 1982.  The worker then moved to Raytheon, where he worked from 1984 until 1997.  After retiring from Raytheon, the claimant took a part-time position with Delaware City Refinery, Raytheon (from 1997 to 1998), and Washington Group (from 2000 to 2001).  The workers also performed services for several other companies for short spells between 2004 and 2007.

In 2008, the worker started to develop acute respiratory symptoms.  It was at this point that Dr. Eliasson initially diagnosed him with asbestos-related lung disease, and designated a 54% bilateral lung impairment rating based on the AMA Guide 5th edition.  Dr. Eliasson testified that there is a 10 to 20 year-latency period for developing asbestosis following exposure, and so in his medical opinion, the worker’s contributory exposure likely occurred between 1982 and 1997.  However, Dr. Albert Rizzo also examined the injured worker, and in a testimony on behalf of the various employers,  he argued that the harmful exposures were “most likely cumulative, making it difficult, if not impossible, to pinpoint when the harm occurred.”   Drawing on the guidelines of the 6th Edition AMA Guide, Dr. Rizzo gave the patient’s bilateral lung impairment a 24% rating.

Ultimately, the Industrial Accident Board deferred to the prevailing doctrine of “the last injurious exposure rule” and upheld Dr. Eliasson’s testimony that the latency period for manifesting asbestos-related disease is 10-20 years.  The Board cited the 1988 case “Lake Forest School District v. DeLong” (WL 77665), arguing that when an injurious exposure is cumulative over the period of successive employment, the final employer is liable for the entire award.  In the case in question, the Board regarded the final year of the claimant’s fulltime employment (which fell between 1996 and 1997) as his last injurious exposure, and disregarded any asbestos exposure from 1997-2007 as outside the latency period.  Under these measures, Raytheon was found liable for the occupational illness.

When it calculated the worker’s award for permanent impairment, the Board declined to base its decision on the 5th Edition AMA Guide, and partially adopted Dr. Rizzo’s rating.  Using the 6th Edition, the Board determined that Dr. Rizzo’s rating corresponded with a Class 3 disability, which falls in the range between 24% to 40% impairment.  Yet the Board found Dr. Rizzo’s rating of 24% “low,” and awarded 30% to each lung.

If you think you may be suffering from asbestos exposure or another work-related injury or illness, please contact a workers’ compensation attorney at Emery Reddy.  We will fight to ensure that you receive the full workers’ compensation benefits to which you are entitled.

The present state of the economy appears to be a significant factor in the decline of work-related deaths, especially as high-risk occupations like construction are experiencing a historic downturn and employing fewer people.

Here in Washington State, 57 workplace injuries resulted in death, the lowest number since 2000.  Of these fatalities 9 were construction-related, less than half the number of construction-accident deaths in 2008.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics published the following data on Fatal Occupational Injuries in 2009:

• 2009 saw an overall 17% decrease in fatal work injuries, although workplace homicides dropped by only 1%.
• Workplace fatalities among salaried and wage-workers declined by 20%, while accidental deaths among self-employed workers dropped only 3%.
• Fatalities in private construction declined by 16%.
• Building cleaning and grounds maintenance occupations were the only sectors that experienced an increase of fatalities.

See the full report published by the United States Department of Labor.

This information is provided by the Emery Reddy Worker’s Compensation and L&I blog.  If you have been injured at work, or if someone close to you has been killed in a a workplace accident, please contact our firm today for a free and confidential consultation with one of our Worker’s Compensation attorneys.

Historically, New Jersey’s maximum workers’ compensation has increased by modest increments on a yearly basis. The decrease slated for 2011 indicates a significant faltering of the state’s economy.  And while there will be a decline in scheduled disability rates, skyrocketing medical costs will continue to go uncapped.  The financial consequences of that disparity remain unclear in a period of declining payrolls and smaller premium collections on workers’ compensation benefits.
2011’s maximum workers’ compensation benefits for temporary disability, permanent partial disability and permanent total disability rates are based upon the States’s Average Weekly Wage (SAWW) for the prior year. Currently, New Jersey allows a maximum benefit of 75 percent of the state’s average weekly wage.

Maximum workers’ compensation benefit rates in New Jersey have been regarded as rather low in relation to other states in the U.S., and many workers’ compensation attorneys and workers’ rights advocates have purchased for a higher adjustment.

The new payment schedules will apply to workers who suffer on the job injuries and deaths in 2011.

According to the Globe and Mail, the lawsuit is being filed by Dilshod Marupov, a 22-year-old worker from Uzbekistan who was repairing balconies on a Toronto apartment building when the scaffolding he was using snapped in half, causing him to fall 13 stories to the ground. Both of Marupov’s legs were crushed and his spine was broken, forcing him to stay in the hospital for several months. All other workers who fell from the scaffolding were killed.

Charges filed against Metron Construction of Toronto and Swing N Scaff of Ottawa include failure to ensure that workers were provided with proper devices to protect them from falling, and failure to make certain that the work platform was not overloaded.  “We are suing them because we think they have a duty that they didn’t exercise properly,” said Marupov’s lawyer, William Friedman.

Unfortunately, such workplace accidents are common in Washington as well.  While OSHA reports a declining trend in deaths from workplace accidents, workplace injuries remain at unacceptably high levels.  If you have been seriously injured in a workplace accident, contact a Washington workers’ compensation attorney to help you recover damages including medical costs, lost wages and compensation for pain and suffering.