Federal Rail Safety Act subsection (c)(1) prohibits railroads from denying, delaying, or interfering with the medical treatment of employees “injured during the course of employment.” In a fact driven decision, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals sidesteps deciding the temporal scope of that protection (just first aid or entire course of treatment?) and its interpretative
Federal Rail Safety Act
Can OSHA Order the Training of Managers?
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
The FRSA is a “make whole remedy” statute, so the question arises: can OSHA force a recalcitrant railroad to train its managers so they comply with the statute going forward? The short answer is: yes, when the facts call for it. The long answer is found in Administrative Law Judge Timothy J. McGrath’s decision in Giuliano v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
Continue Reading Can OSHA Order the Training of Managers?
FRSA Subsection (c)(2)’s Safe Harbor Exception
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
In a case of first impression, a federal judge has applied FRSA subsection (c)(2)’s exception to the prohibition against railroads disciplining employees for following the orders of a treating physician. Stapleton v. Union Pac. R.R. Co.
The exception to (c)(2) is:
a railroad carrier’s refusal to permit an employee to return to work following medical
…
How the FRSA Can Protect Safety Absences From Discipline
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
It is especially important for rail workers in safety sensitive positions to know how to book off when their medical condition renders them unsafe. To quote the Chairman of the NTSB: “The public deserves alert operators. That’s not too much to ask.” Yes, but how can a rail worker protect a safety absence from…
What Is a Work-Related Illness?
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Federal Rail Safety Act Section 20109(a)(4) protects rail workers who notify their railroad of “a work-related personal injury or work-related illness.” Injuries usually are pretty obvious. But what qualifies as “a work related illness”? The federal court in Williams v. Ill. Cent. R.R. holds that any illness arising during the course of employment is included,…
A Tale of “Malicious Compliance”
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
How bad is it on New Jersey Transit Rail?
So bad, the NJT Chief Compliance Officer (my client Todd Barretta) had to file a Federal Rail Safety Act whistleblower retaliation complaint after he was terminated for insisting the Railroad comply with FRA safety regulations. Here is the Bloomberg article.
So bad, NJT Rail employees…
Update on Notable FRSA Cases
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
The steady stream of FRSA Section 20109 whistleblower decisions continues apace. Here are some recent notable decisions to keep in mind.
Railroad Bad Faith Conduct
The decision by U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson in Johnston v. BNSF Railway Company is remarkable in several respects. Judge Nelson granted the employee’s Motion for Reconsideration and reversed…
What Is A Hazardous Safety Condition?
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Rail workers who report a “hazardous safety condition” are protected from retaliation by FRSA subsection (b)(1)(A). There are not many cases discussing the scope of that protection, but a recent federal district court decision brings it into sharper focus. Head v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company.
The 3rd Circuit was the first court to comment
…
When the FRSA’s 180 Day Filing Window Opens (and Closes)
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Filing a Federal Rail Safety Act whistleblower retaliation complaint with OSHA within 180 days of a railroad’s adverse action is a threshold issue that can derail the best of cases. So when does that 180 day window open?
The United States Supreme Court tells us:
a limitations period commences when the plaintiff has a “complete
…
Two Recent FRSA Punitive Damages Decisions
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Here are two recent federal court decisions affirming the amount of punitive damages awarded by the Administrative Review Board and by a district court jury.
In Jason Raye v. Pan Am Railways, the Administrative Law Judge awarded the statutory maximum of $250,000 in punitive damages despite the fact Jason Raye was not actually disciplined and
…