Products You May Like
Private industry employers reported 2.5 million nonfatal workplace injuries and illnesses in 2024, the lowest count in a data series that runs back to 2003.
Every year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics agency records thousands of cases of fatal occupational-related injuries. These statistics show the status of fatal occupational hazards across different industries.
Most industries in the United States recognize the at-will employment standard. This standard is the default standard in 49 states. Keep in mind that at-will status is a default rule, not a grant of employer immunity. Federal and state statutes sit on top of it and bar termination for reporting a workplace injury or pursuing benefits.
Understanding how workplace injury laws interact with employment at will can help employees understand the legal standing of a termination and whether it was done according to the law.
Let’s discuss the effects of at-will employment on injured workers along with the legal remedies that may be relevant upon a work-related injury event.
What At-Will Status Covers
At-will employment means that unless there’s some agreement saying otherwise, the employer or the employee can end their professional relationship any time.
Discrimination and retaliation for using a legal right are outside what at-will status permits. These actions can violate the law, regardless of what an offer letter or employee handbook says.
California discusses these exceptions in Labor Code 2922. The comp retaliation provision can be found in Labor Code 132a.
The main safeguard against retaliation for reporting a workplace injury reaches well beyond one single state.
Reporting an Injury Is a Protected Activity
Federal law backs this assertion up directly. Under Section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, it is expressly prohibited for an employer to take any adverse action against an employee for raising a concern with, or on behalf of, OSHA administration.
A Section 11(c) complaint has to reach OSHA within thirty days of the adverse action. State workers’ compensation retaliation statutes run on their own clocks and are often far longer. For example, New York allows two years under Workers’ Compensation Law Section 120. California allows one year under Labor Code 132a. Missing the federal window does not automatically close the state route. This time restriction shows why establishing a timeline is important. Documenting things right away after a termination or even a demotion can contribute to
Timing and Pattern Are What Prove Retaliation
Retaliation is rarely announced outright. Performance issues, restructuring, or attendance problems are examples of the excuses used by some employers to retaliate against an employee. The worker starts by connecting the adverse action to the protected activity. The employer then has to put forward a legitimate reason for what it did. Only after that does the burden shift back to the worker to show that the stated reason is a cover for something else.
In practice, investigators and courts tend to focus on how soon the adverse action occurred after the protected activity. Whether it differs from how the employer handled similar situations before and whether the employer’s explanation changes, or at least shifts, over time.
Retaliation is the most common allegation the EEOC sees, appearing in 42,301 charges in fiscal year 2024 and topping the list for the seventeenth straight year. Those charges arise under the discrimination statutes rather than the injury reporting rules, but the proof problems look similar.
Why a Workers’ Comp Claim Usually Isn’t a Lawsuit
In most states, accepting workers’ compensation coverage limits an injured employee’s ability to sue their employer directly, even where retaliation is not the issue.
New York’s system illustrates the general structure. Benefits are paid regardless of fault once an employer carries the required coverage, but that same coverage forecloses a separate injury lawsuit against the employer.
The legal firm of workplace injury lawyer Frank Gattuso says that direct claims against an employer are typically limited to narrow circumstances, such as an employer failing to carry required coverage or intentionally causing the injury.
Outside those exceptions, a claim against a third party such as a negligent contractor or an equipment manufacturer is usually the only route to compensation beyond the comp system. New York adds another. Its labor law gives construction workers a direct claim against property owners and general contractors for elevation-related falls and safety code violations, even where those parties never employed the injured worker.
Moving Forward After a Workplace Injury
An at-will designation doesn’t leave injured workers without recourse if a termination happens too soon after an injury report or a claim. It does mean that the burden shifts to the worker to keep relevant records and document incident dates carefully.
Familiarity with the distinction between the termination of an at-will working relationship and a violation of employment laws can help workers recognize if legal action is warranted.