Skip to content
Whistle Blower Latest Videos
  • Education

OSHA Whistleblower

OSHA Whistleblower

Post Views: 121
October 14, 2021 October 14, 2021 hero 4 Comments on OSHA Whistleblower
whistleblowers

In this month's podcast, Stuart J. Oberman, Esq. of Oberman Law Firm provides a review of the OSHA Whistleblower Statute. Mr. Oberman discusses retaliatory employment practices that violate federal law and reviews the grounds that an employee may have for wrongful termination. During the podcast, Mr. Oberman explains some of the penalties and sanctions that affect a practice owner if they violate OSHA's Whistleblower Statute.

Post Views: 121

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 Comments

  1. blinddogroofer says:
    December 8, 2020 at 12:47 pm

    I can’t believe there are no other comments in 2 years. As an OSHA whistleblower I have a different perspective. Sometimes employers cut serious safety corners and something needs to be said. You are spot on, on documentation. I disagree that you can’t fire an employee who has filed an OSHA complaint, but you darned well better do it right. Follow your procedures, document document document document document. If you need to terminate employment, don’t make things up. Be conservative with your reasons and don’t “enhance” things. In my case, I was both perplexed and relieved that my former employer chose to list demonstrably false reasons for adverse action. I’m wondering at what point a former employee might be successful in a 1983 action, despite the fact there is no private right of action in OSHA retaliation complaints, the right to not be retaliated against is a federal right. 1983 is a catch all remedy, and the Supreme court, I believe, has stated that for every violation of law there is a remedy. There are punitive damages available under 1983 and no damage caps. Another thing many people don’t know is that individuals are prohibited from retaliation, and I can see OSHA starting to take action against persons in their individual capacities, not just their companies or organizations. Particularly with public employers, there simply isn’t a mechanism to discourage vengeful employers from retaliating unlawfully, spending a virtually unlimited amount of money dragging out frivolous defenses for years or even decades at an overwhelming expense, and then walk away scot free while someone else pays the bill. There was an OSHA case in Idaho where a school fired an employee for reporting concerns about asbestos and the retaliated against another employee who participated i the resultant investigation. Recently, I was in a focus group that was a jury in a mock trial. Obviously I cannot discuss the details. There were two general takeaways, though. First is to reiterate the importance of documentation. If an employee does something improper, document it contemporaneously. Make a good faith effort to be sure that there was actual misconduct. The second takeaway is that attorneys are people, and people sometimes believe their own baloney. I saw defense attorneys so utterly dumbfounded that both test juries returned multi million dollar verdicts in cases they apparently thought were slam dunk wins. At least they had the foresight to do the focus group (I assume it was the defense). They were questioning specifics as to why the juries made the decisions they did and so on. I think it really all came back to two things: lack of documentation, and not following procedure. If you take a case to a jury, and your clients did not thoroughly document things, and they did not follow their own procedures, you will get your proverbial head handed to you on a platter. Another thing counsel should understand is that your clients are problematic. Perhaps you already do. You say do nothing and they open an investigation. If an employer fires an employee, under conditions sufficient to constitute a blacklisting, and then they spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars defending their actions instead of just parting as amicably as possible, then that alone is pretty strong evidence of animus. Why would you spend years and thousands of dollars harming or even impeding someone that you don’t have animus towards? Clients, espeicially those working with somone else’s money, tend to deny, avoid, obfuscate, double down, and so on, and in my opinion counsel needs to be the voice of reason to mitigate damages. In every case that results in big verdicts, there was a moment in time where cooler heads could have prevailed, when damages were at or near zero. I wonder how many attorneys fan the flames as they are the only parties who benefit from protracted litigation.

    Reply
    1. Robert E says:
      March 15, 2021 at 4:56 pm

      Great insight! But im confused on this, “clients did not thoroughly document things and they did not follow their own procedures, you will get your proverbial head handed to you on a platter.” What does that mean? Client as in whistleblower?

      Reply
    2. blinddogroofer says:
      March 16, 2021 at 3:03 am

      ​@Robert E Not my best writing. Clients as in the employer. Employers are expected bu juries to document employee misconduct. They can’t say the employee did a bunch of stuff later, there be no evidence of it, and convince anyone. It doesn’t even matter if the employee was a lousy employee, and sometimes they are. Employers also have to show they followed policy consistently. If they have 10 lousy employees all committing overtime fraud, say, and they only fire the one who called OSHA, it’s probably going to be determined that they fired that one because they blew the whistle. Suppose they claim an employee was bad and was ripping the compny off as far back as 5 years ago, the question still becomes “why now?” A well documented chain of progressive discipline is a defense. Essentially, it is illegal to fire someone because they called OSHA, and “because” is the operative word. If a reasonable person thinks that it is more likely than not that the protected activity was the reason, then the employee wins. There should be two schools of thought. First, most private employers except very very large companies, don’t wnat to spend money on lawyers, even if they prevail, what’s the point of spending $50,000- $200,000 to fire an employee? Public employers, such as schools, just don’t care. They get paid, win or lose, and so do their attorneys. Still, I scratch my head some times. There’s a case in Alaska inolving Bald Mountain Aviation. A pilot reported that they were skimping on safety, in 2012, and was fired and filed a complaint with OSHA. The investigation took 4 years, (in my best guess) because attorneys for the company assured thier client they could win. OSHA ordered $500,000 in back pay and restitution in 2016. Once again (my opinion) attorneys for the aviation company were well paid to dig their clients’ graves and convinced them that they would win on appeal and they appealed. In 2018 the former employee prevailed again, and this time the amount was $750,000 with interest and other considerations. What did the newspaper article say? Despite the aviation company losing $125,000 per year plus legal expenses during the appeal, and ($125,000 per year during the previous 4 years, on average), they announced they found hope in the judge’s decision and were debating appealing it. I haven’t been able to find out more on the case.

      Reply
  2. Sierra Lynette says:
    September 1, 2021 at 5:22 pm

    protect your employees. period. stop painting them as disgruntled and be responsible.

    Reply

Recent Posts

  • 2022 Russia-Ukraine war : Russian Tank Crushing Ukrainian Vehicle
  • #shorts #youtubeshorts Russia vs Ukraine whistleblower protection program
  • Godi Media vs Ravish Kumar | Russia Ukraine | McAdams | WhistleBlower Being Honest | NDTV |
  • Russia Ukraine || Operation Ganga – Ground Reality || WhistleBlower || Godi Media || Being Honest ||
  • Russia and Ukraine whistleblower

Recent Comments

  1. Amby Kp on What Dr. Greer Told Us About NEW Whistle Blower Is Shocking! 2022
  2. Wally Tidwell on What Dr. Greer Told Us About NEW Whistle Blower Is Shocking! 2022
  3. clandestine.thoughts on What Dr. Greer Told Us About NEW Whistle Blower Is Shocking! 2022
  4. Rox In Space on What Dr. Greer Told Us About NEW Whistle Blower Is Shocking! 2022
  5. Peter Maddison on What Dr. Greer Told Us About NEW Whistle Blower Is Shocking! 2022

Archives

  • May 2022
  • March 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021

Categories

  • hero

© 2022 - All rights reserved
Manage Cookie Consent
We use cookies to optimize our website and our service.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
Preferences
{title} {title} {title}
Get Notified Of New Videos
Stay Connected
BY ME A COFFEE