The Hidden Cost of Ignoring Safety at the Workplace - FIRST, VERIFY

Dec 22, 2020

It is common knowledge that job-related injuries are expensive, due to medical expenses, lost workdays and insurance costs. But did you know that as much as 90% of the total cost of a workplace injury or illness is a hidden cost?


Those hidden costs could include replacing damaged tools and equipment, overhead costs incurred when work was disrupted, lost orders or billing opportunities, failure to meet production deadlines, and the cost of bad publicity. 


The scope of the total cost is eye-opening. According to NIOSH, “A recent economic analysis suggested that traumatic occupational deaths and injuries cost the nation $192 billion annually, including direct medical costs and indirect costs such as lost wages and productivity.”


Such statistics force us to delve deeper into the direct and indirect costs and see why preventing workplace injuries and illness makes sound fiscal sense.


Health and Safety: Direct Costs


OSHA cites the astounding figure of nearly a billion dollars per week for direct workers’ compensation costs.

OSHA’s list of direct costs includes workers' compensation payments, medical expenses, and costs for legal services.


According to the 2016 Liberty Mutual Workplace Safety Index report, the top five most disabling injuries and related direct costs were:


  • Overexertion, such as “lifting, pushing, pulling, holding, carrying, or throwing” ($15.08 billion)
  • Falls on the same level ($10.17 billion)
  • Falls to a lower level ($5.40 billion)
  • Struck by object or equipment ($5.31 billion)
  • Other exertions or bodily reactions ($4.15 billion)


Health and Safety: Indirect Costs


OSHA’s list of indirect costs includes training replacement employees, accident investigation and implementation of corrective measures, lost productivity, repairs of damaged equipment and property, and costs associated with lower employee morale and absenteeism.


Add to that list the cost of buying replacement equipment if the damages cannot be repaired. Other hidden costs are hiring replacement workers, providing benefits for replacement workers, and the fact that the company is now paying twice the benefit costs for one position. These costs are not typically factored in when calculating the costs of workplace injuries or illness.


There are even more potential hidden costs: the effect on the bottom line if the injured worker is in sales and has built up a strong rapport with a sizable number of customers; a potential surcharge on insurance fees if the company now is a higher risk; and non-compliance fees or even civil or criminal penalties.


Taking an injured worker off the job following an accident often means losing some critical expertise. There is, of course, the cost of training a replacement employee. But it goes beyond that.


Costs to Society and the Company’s Reputation


Besides just the direct and indirect costs, the costs both to society and to a company’s reputation are also important. While these are difficult to delineate, they ultimately play a role in the total cost of workplace injuries and illnesses.


When one worker is injured or becomes ill on the job, the entire family is affected as wellꟷin multiple ways. That situation generates new, unfunded costs, and other strains for the family.


Now, consider a scenario in which multiple workers from the same company are injured or become ill within a similar time frame. What are the potential ramifications? Here are just three:


  • A strain on local resources for example, caretakers, medical specialists, neighbors lending a hand.
  • Potential new hires shying away from accepting positions at that company.
  • Consumers hearing about workplace injuries and deciding to avoid that company’s products or services.


Eventually, multiple workplace injuries or illnesses at the same company will hit the company’s bottom line in ways that may not have been anticipated. For example, morale is bound to dip when an incident takes place, but the costs associated with this are difficult to measure.


Prevention to Boost Your Bottom Line


The business case for boosting workplace safety is clear. To help you calculate your company’s potential cost savings, you can access OSHA’s interactive "Safety Pays" program.


Additional assistance calculating the health and safety-specific cost savings for your company when you boost worker safety is available through the National Safety Council.


In conclusion, it is very clear that with arobust workplace safety program it will be possible to prevent the majority of workplace accidents. However, no matter what systems are in place, unexpected occurrences and human error can compromise the safety of your workers. But investing in a cohesive, site-specific, well-run safety orientation program, like the one FIRST, VERIFY offers, is very critical for maintaining safety at the workplace.


You might also like

28 Oct, 2021
When a subcontractor is having trouble completing its subcontract work, it is not uncommon for a contractor to assert itself more directly into the completion process to help expedite the work. What’s the harm you might ask? A recent Loudoun County, Virginia case answered that question: It could lead to tortious interference with contract and conspiracy claims by the subcontractor. That case was Evans Construction Services (the subcontractor) versus Ox Builders (the contractor), and it also included a claim by the subcontractor against the contractor’s site superintendent, Lawler, as a co-defendant in the case individually. Evans alleged that Ox and Lawler tortuously interfered with Evan’s subcontracts by dealing directly with the subcontractors and directing the subcontractors’ work, cutting Evans out of the picture. Evans sought to recover its lost profits. Ox and Lawler argued against liability because Evans’ claims sought redress outside of Evans’ subcontracts with Ox and because Evans had no contract with Lawler at all, moving to dismiss Evans’ lawsuit as a matter of law. The court denied that motion, holding that the facts as pled by Evans were legally sufficient if ultimately proven by Evans, to support a claim for breach of legal duties separate from duties arising contractually only; and specifically for wrongful interference with Evans’ subcontracts and Evans’ related conspiracy claim against the defendants. Although the court acknowledged that Evans’ claims were interrelated with the Ox – Evans subcontracts underlying the parties’ relationship, those common facts could support both contractual and non-contractual breach claims in certain circumstances. The court further determined that such circumstances, if ultimately proven, included Evans’ claims that Ox and Lawler violated their independent common law duties to not interfere with Evans’ lower tier subcontracts and not conspire together to injure Evans in its business. The court, therefore, allowed Evans’ claims to proceed to trial on their merits. The defendants apparently did not argue to dismiss the conspiracy claim on the basis Lawler, as an employee of Ox, could not conspire with Ox, his employer (referred to as the intercorporate immunity doctrine), or at least that defense was not discussed in the court’s decision. But, regardless, this decision reflects the necessity for caution “going around” subcontractors when subcontract disputes arise. Author: Neil S. Lowenstein Source: https://vanblacklaw.com/construction/contractor-takeover-leads-to-tortious-interference-with-contract-and-conspiracy-claims/
21 Oct, 2021
In the construction industry, where multiple companies working closely together abound and where it is more difficult to monitor employee behavior because many employees are in the field, more incidents of inappropriate behavior occur. Texas and California, two states opposite politically and in law making, have instituted legislation expanding sex harassment protections for employees in the workplace that go even further than federal protections. Indeed, both laws have similarities. Texas and California Similarities In Texas , as of September 1, 2021, under expanded protections against sexual harassment, individuals in management and companies that have even only one employee can be held liable. In the construction industry, this expansion could sweep many subcontractors and tradesmen under the new law. The new law will challenge the definition of who is a manager. In California, under the 2019 law, an employer may be liable for acts of nonemployees concerning any type of harassment (not just sex harassment) against employees and other nonemployees working as interns or volunteers and service contractors. In Texas, the new law increases the time limit to file a sex harassment charge from 180 days to 300 days, making it consistent with federal law. Similarly, in California, an employee has up to 10 years to file a civil action for sexual assault or attempted sexual assault, or within three years after an employee discovers an injury or illness as a result of the assault or attempted assault, whichever is later. In Texas, instead of requiring supervisors to “take prompt remedial measures,” individual liability will hang on whether supervisors “knew or should have known” about the sex harassment in the workplace. The new law also requires “immediate and appropriate corrective action.” Certainly, the standard of “knew or should have known” will be case-specific and fact-intensive, making it difficult to dismiss cases before they reach trial. In California, recent amendments to the Fair Employment and Housing Act have made it easier for employees to prevail in sex harassment actions. They also lowered the employee’s burden and standard of proof.  Implications What does this mean for employers of all sizes? More frequent training, updating sex harassment policies and employee handbooks, expansion of human resources departments to respond more quickly to complaints, and a closer evaluation of what constitutes a managerial position are required. In California, recent legislation requires training for even the smallest of employers (a minimum of five employees). As of January 2020, California imposed minimum time requirements for the length of such training for supervisors and other employees. To be sure, in the multi-employer setting, companies also may need to verify that other companies they work alongside have sex harassment policies, that they conduct periodic training, and that their employee handbooks have been updated to comply with the law. Author: Victor N. Corpuz Source: https://www.jacksonlewis.com/publication/new-sex-harassment-laws-making-strange-bedfellows-construction-industry
OSHA inspection, CONSTRUCTION Management
13 Oct, 2021
During an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspection, the OSHA official, escorted by management, will tour the facility or construction site to observe working conditions, identify violations, and so on.
More Posts

Book a Service Today

Share by: