What Out-of-State Employers with Employees Working in New York State Need to Know.

We received a recent newsletter from Dan Borgna at the Dale Group.  The newsletter discussed the Workers Compensation/Disability requirements for out-of-state contractors.  We found it very interesting with permission from Mr. Borgna of the Dale Group (Thank you for allowing us to reprint it) here is the newsletter post:  

 

If you have no office location in New York, but have employees on site in NY, this article is important to your business.

WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

New York State workers' compensation insurance covers employees for work-related accidents, injuries or illness.   
As part of the 2007 Workers' Compensation Reform Legislation, all out-of-state employers with at least one employee working in New York State will be required to carry a full statutory New York State workers' compensation insurance policy. The workers' compensation insurance policy must be effective no later than the first day you have employees working in NY State.  

Misconception - "I have all states coverage listed in section 3.c of my home state workers compensation policy".
Reality- As part of the reform, having "all states" in section 3.c is no longer valid. "NY" must be specifically listed in section 3.a of the workers compensation declarations page or endorsement. 
Penalties - Failure to maintain this coverage can result in the following: 

1.     Failure to carry Workers' Compensation Insurance for more than 5 employees within a twelve month period is a class E felony and is punishable by a fine not less than $5,000 nor more than $50,000.

2.     For 5 or less employees within a twelve month period, it is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not less than $1,000 nor more than $5,000.

3.     Subsequent convictions within a 5 year period shall constitute a class D felony and fines not less than $10,000 nor more than $50,000.

4.     Any employer who fails to maintain a workers' compensation policy when it is required or owes a fine or assessment to the Board may be issued a stop-work order, meaning the business must shut down all activity until the order is lifted.

5.     A penalty in the sum of $2,000 for each ten-day period of non-compliance or a sum not in excess of two times the cost of compensation for the period of such failure may be imposed 

DISABILITY BENEFITS INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

NY State statutory disability benefits (DB) insurance coverage is totally different from and is not included in NYS workers' compensation insurance coverage. Statutory NY State disability benefits insurance covers employees for off-the-job accident, injury or illness.
If you have one or more employees for 30 days in a calendar year, you are required to obtain NYS disability benefits insurance coverage. Such insurance must be effective no later than four weeks after the 30th day you have employees.  

Penalties under the Disability Benefits Law 

1.     Failure to carry Disability Benefits Insurance is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $100 nor more than $500 or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, with increased monetary penalties for second and third or subsequent violations, and

2.     Where an employee of a non-insured employer is disabled due to an off-the-job injury or illness, the noninsured employer will be responsible for payment of the amount of benefits to which the employee is entitled or for payment of 1% of his/her payroll for the period of non-compliance, whichever is greater. And

3.     Where an employer fails to carry Disability Benefits Insurance, the Chair will impose a penalty not in excess of ½ of 1% of the employer's weekly payroll for the period of non-compliance and a further amount not in excess of $500 

Employees traveling through the State not stopping for deliveries, pick-ups, or other work are not deemed to have worked a day here. An employer that has reason to know that it will meet these criteria in the current year, even if it has not done so in the prior year, must obtain the required coverage.

For a complete description of the Form and Regulation, please visit the following link at the New York State Workers Compensation Board.

http://www.wcb.ny.gov/content/main/forms/oc923.pdf 

If you are concerned that your company may not be compliant, please contact Dan Borgna at Dale Group (973)437-9664 or danb@dalegroup.com who will be happy to discuss the matter with you.

Related articles

• Does your business need workers' compensation insurance? (hiscoxusa.com)
• Workers Compensation back-and-forth (timesunion.com)
• Evidence exists of productivity benefits of OHS but no one is using it (safetyatworkblog.com)

Deutsche Bank Fire Defendants All Acquitted Of Charges.

Last week, the three defendants charged with manslaughter and other charges of causing the fatalities at the former Deutsche Bank building, were acquitted of all charges.  The jury cleared two former managers, Jeffrey Melofchik and Salvatore DePaolo, on June 29, while the Criminal Court Judge Rena K. Uviller acquitted Mitchel Alvo, on July 6.  Uviller also tossed out the major charges against the subcontractor, The John Galt Corp., convicting the company only of a misdemeanor count of reckless endangerment.

Image via Wikipedia

The former Deutsche Bank building was undergoing asbestos abatement and demolition at the time of the fire in 2007, that caused the death of firefighters Robert Beddia 53, and Joseph Graffagnino, 33, who died trying to fight the blaze.  Charges included multiple counts of negligent homicide, manslaughter and reckless endangerment.
Defense attorneys were able to convince the judge and jury that the actual causes were more complicated.  Those complications included:

• New York City Fire Dept. did not abide by the 15-day rule of inspections
• Errors made by the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. (LMDC)
• The negative air system used in the abatement caused rising smoke to descend and block the firefighters vision.

It seems this may not be the end of the Deutsche Bank fire issues, because the Uniformed Fire Officers Association, which felt that the wrong people were charged, and thought the defendants were scapegoats, released the following statement: "We urge the Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance heed his self-described duty as to do what is right in every case without fear or favor, wherever that may lead by re-opening an investigation into the Deutsche Bank fire.  In fact, we are demanding that the District Attorney conduct an investigation into the LMDC."

Goldberg & Connolly's Construction Law Update Covers Change Order Crisis at the SCA



BearAcade™ Sticky Poly is now patented–both the product and the method. 
It’s US Patent No. 7,818,941

Hope all of you have a Happy Thanksgiving and may your family and friends make the day beautiful.  As we have discussed in our classes, some of you are doing consulting and contracting work for the New York City School Construction Authority (SCA).  Many of you have complained about the SCA and the way they handle accounts payables (your accounts receivables).  Goldberg & Connolly are construction attorneys and they put out a monthly newsletter (Construction Law Update) discussing various construction issues.  Their latest newsletter is titled "Change Order Crisis at the SCA."  If you do business with the SCA, we strongly recommend you read this update discussing issues with the SCA's policy and the language in the terms and conditions on handling change orders that you submit to the SCA.  The article starts with the following statistic: "It has been estimated that there are 5,000 outstanding, unresolved change orders pending at the New York City School Construction Authority totaling $600-800 million dollars."  That is an amazing amount money to be still on the table waiting for payment and, in this economy, that amount of money is having a significant effect on small businesses.  That effect probably matches the effect of unvailable financing for small businesses.  The article is written well and is very understandable for us non-legal types.

Excellant Article by Will Spates on Being an Expert Witness

I recently read Mr. Will Spate's article in Indoor Environment Connection's November issue (yes, I know, it takes me a month to catch up on my reading) on "Do You Qualify To Be An Expert Witness".  Mr. Spates is the President of Indoor Environmental Technologies, Clearwater, Florida and the article provided several pieces of information that I did not know.  Such as the difference between an expert witness and a percipient witness and the need for your reports to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26.  I strongly recommend that if you are an environmental consultant that you read this article, because it applies even if you are not an expert witness.  You never know when you may end up in court to defend your reports and advice you gave.