The arrogance of rail management never ceases to amaze. The latest example comes from the BNSF, whose General Counsel had the gall to tell OSHA’s Office of Whistleblower Protection that it “must disclose the names of the employee witnesses” OSHA intends to interview so the BNSF can “offer its representation” to those workers and be
Charlie Goetsch
Contact:Read more about Charlie Goetsch
OSHA Confirms The FRSA Protects All Railroad Workers Who Follow Their Doctor’s Orders Not To Work
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
The case of my client Chris Bala established that the FRSA protects ALL railroad workers (not just employees with an on-the-job injury) from attendance discipline when they follow the orders of a treating doctor not to work Why? Because safety trumps discipline. No one wants medically impaired railroad employees reporting to work against their doctor’s…
OSHA Hammers CSX Transportation For Outrageous FRSA Violation
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
In an important ruling underscoring OSHA’s commitment to protect rail workers who file Federal Rail Safety Act complaints, OSHA has hit the CSX railroad with the highest award for emotional distress damages yet.
After CSX fired dispatcher Robin Young in connection with a near miss incident, on March 2, 2010, he filed a FRSA complaint…
More FRSA Developments
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Important developments in the Federal Rail Safety Act just keep coming. Here are a couple.
OSHA has issued another punitive damages award against Metro North Railroad, this time for harassing an injured employee by interfering with his medical treatment and recovery. The Finding in Cortese v. Metro North Railroad is especially notable because it recognizes…
Two Major New Landmarks Dominate FRSA Landscape
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Two new landmarks have appeared in the Federal Rail Safety Act landscape, one erected by a federal court jury and the other by OSHA’s top policy makers. Last week’s $1 million punitive damages jury award for my client is indeed historic, but should not overshadow a recent seminal Memo by OSHA of equal importance.
The…
First FRSA Jury Awards $1 Million in Punitive Damages!
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
Yesterday, at the end of the first Federal Rail Safety Act jury trial in the nation, I asked the federal jury to send a message to every railroad in the country. An unmistakable message that singling out injured workers for discipline while ignoring management’s role will not be tolerated. An unmistakable message that rail management’s…
FRSA Protects Injured Workers From Medical Treatment Interference
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
In a major decision clarifying the scope of the Federal Rail Safety Act, OSHA confirms that a railroad’s denial, delay, or interference with an injured employee’s medical treatment constitutes adverse action recoverable under FRSA Section (a)(4). Section (a)(4) protects employees from adverse action due to the reporting of a work-related injury, and OSHA now…
Dept of Labor Elevates Status of Whistleblower Office
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
In an encouraging sign to whistleblowers, the Department of Labor has elevated the status of its Office of the Whistleblower Protection Program (OWPP) so it now reports directly to the Head of OSHA, Assistant Secretary Dr. David Michaels. This puts whistleblower protection on an equal footing with OSHA’s health and safety enforcement, and increases the…
FRSA Alert! FRSA Protects Non-Injury Absences From Discipline
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
WARNING UPDATE: see the 3rd Circuit’s decision in PATH v. U.S. DOL.
Any rail worker absence ordered by a treating doctor can no longer be used for attendance discipline purposes. That is the message of a ground-breaking decision interpreting the scope of FRSA protected medical treatment.
Subsection (c)(2) of the FRSA prohibits railroads from…
The FRSA Is Not Subject to Title VII Burden Shifting
By Charlie Goetsch on
Posted in Federal Rail Safety Act
The burden of proof applicable to a Federal Rail Safety Act whistleblower protection case is markedly different from a Title VII discrimination case. And much more favorable to the employee.
Title VII cases have a three step burden of proof: the employee establishes a prima facie case, the employer raises a non-discriminatory reason, and then…