Employment Law Cases

Construction accidents are one of the most common work related personal injuries. Construction injuries may be the result of machinery failure involving fork lifts, cranes, front end loaders and any other piece of construction machinery found on the job site. They may also involve faulty safety equipment, falling debris, lack of proper training for construction workers, improperly assembled scaffolding, structural collapse, electrical fires, electrocution and a slew of other job site violations.

Under the U.S. Department of Labor, The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) must protect those who work in the construction industry. OSHA guarantees a certain level of safety for any construction worker who works on high risk job sites and is exposed to hazardous conditions. In addition, the State of Oregon protects construction workers under the Oregon’s Employer Liability Law. This law requires all construction companies engaged in dangerous work to take every necessary precaution in order to prevent worker injury on the job site.

Construction is a dangerous profession and there are many hazards in the construction workplace. While these state and federal regulations are necessary, they offer only a small amount of comfort to construction workers and their families. In many cases, construction workers are victims of irresponsible employers and are exposed to unnecessary risk while at work. It is also common for third party members, such as contractors and subcontractors, to be present on the job site, creating hazardous and chaotic conditions for the workers.

No matter what construction company you work for, it is the responsibility of the construction company to educate their workers on proper safety precautions and to make sure the job site meets all safety regulations. The Department of Labor and Industries examined construction injuries over a four year period. They found the following seven injuries to be the most common (they also accounted for 92 percent of all compensable claims):

• Work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, back and upper extremities
• Workers struck by heavy machinery or falling objects
• Workers pinned up against a wall by machinery or motor vehicles
• Workers caught inside or underneath a piece of machinery
• Slips or falls on ground level of the construction site
• Falls from an elevated height of the construction site
• General motor vehicle injuries

If you or someone you know has been injured on a construction site, contact a personal injury lawyer to help you with your case. An experienced personal injury attorney will know how to deal with multiple insurance policies, identify all parties involved in the construction process and help you figure out who is responsible for the construction injury.

Thousands of women who were systematically underpaid by Glasgow City Council for a number of years have begun legal proceedings to try and recoup the full amount that they are owed in back-pay.

Compromise package

Back in late 2005, the council offered the women a compromise deal, which would see them receiving a percentage of the due amount because, the council argued, to pay out the full amount would mean a dramatic cut in jobs and services for the community.

Even at the time, around 300 of the women rejected the compromise deal, despite what unions called “high-pressure sales techniques” to encourage them to sign. The women were generally employed in some of the lowest paid jobs in the council, mainly as care assistants, cleaners, school cooks, classroom aides and home helpers.

The offers’ dealt with back-pay going back to 1999 and ranged from a compensation package of between £1000 and £9000.

Legal proceedings get underway

Now, many of the women have launched legal proceedings to gain a more favourable settlement and are also challenging the legal advice that they received at the time.

No win no fee solicitor Stefan Cross who is representing 2800 of the women who originally took the compensation packages has said that the lawyers involved had a conflict of interest by advising both the council and the women.

“We have just issued 893 letters of complaint to law firms, and many more are likely to follow in the weeks ahead. Our clients’ allegations are that these firms were paid by the council, and the employees had no choice in the matter.”

Cross alleges that the women were unfairly pressured by both the lawyers and the council into signing away their rights for much less than the real value they deserved.

“We allege the firms failed to comply with their obligations to the women as individual clients, and in particular failed to take time to advise the clients of the merits of the deal on offer, and as a result the women accepted offers that were far below the true value of their claims,” he added.

According to information that was retrieved under a Freedom of Information request, the council spent £350,000 in legal fees.

Even with this “high-pressure” almost 1000 women ended up rejecting the pay offers and arranged independent settlements. According to figures uncovered by the press, these settlements were up to three times higher than those on offer in the compromise.

The council vehemently disagreed with accusations that they had misled or failed to provide independent advice for the women and encouraged the claimants to look to the lawyers for any bad advice that may have been given.

“The council’s role was to simply to arrange for a number of different legal firms to provide independent legal advice to these members of staff. If people have any issues, they will have to take them up with those lawyers,” said a Glasgow City Council spokesman.