Co & Employee Safety

Co & Employee Safety

Week 7 Case Questions

Select TWO court cases (from different chapters) from the list below, and respond in writing to the case questions.

R. Williams Construction Co. v. OSHRC (Ch 15, p 548)

SeaWorld of Florida v. Perez (Ch 15, p 554)

State Ex Re. Gross v. Industrial Commission of Ohio (Ch 15, p 571)

City of Brighton v. Rodriguez (Ch 15, p 576)

Rachells v. Cingular Wireless Employee Services (Ch 16, p 591)

Cortez v. Walmart Stores (Ch 16, p 608)

Compass Environmental v. OSHRC (Ch 16, p 608)

Rosebrough v. Buckeye Valley High School (Ch 16, p 614)

Koeppel v. Speirs (Ch 17, p 633)

Ehling v. Monmouth-Ocean Hospital Service Corp. (Ch 17, p 642)

Dietz v. Finley Fine Jewelry (Ch 17, p 650)

The requirements below must be met for your paper to be accepted and graded:

Write between 750 – 1,250 words (approximately 3 – 5 pages) using Microsoft Word in APA style, see example below.

Use font size 12 and 1” margins.

Include cover page and reference page.

Use at least three references from outside the course material, one reference must be from EBSCOhost. Text book, lectures, and other materials in the course may be used, but are not counted toward the three reference requirement.


Unformatted Attachment Preview

• • • Required textbook reading for this week: Chapter 15 Chapter 16 Chapter 17 Employee Safety Employee safety is an important area of employment law. Historically, employers were free to set the conditions of employment, and this often led to unsafe work environments. Additionally, the historical doctrine of contributory negligence precluded any recovery by an employee in a negligence action against an employer if the employee was judged to be even slightly at fault. In a workplace environment, it is fairly common for an injury to be a result of the conjunction of an unsafe workplace and a momentary lapse by the employer. Due to this, contributory negligence worked to ensure that employers were mostly free to run unsafe workplaces with little fear of legal