NCJ Number
109631
Journal
Employee Relations Law Journal Volume: 13 Issue: 2 Dated: (Autumn 1987) Pages: 197-223
Date Published
1987
Length
27 pages
Annotation
This article examines the basis for criminal prosecutions in industrial accidents, issues and defenses in such litigation, and steps employers can take to reduce their potential for liability in such cases.
Abstract
In the past 2 years, State and local prosecutors have increasingly investigated serious industrial accidents to determine whether supervisors, management officials, or their corporate employers may be criminally liable under State law for injuries to workers. Many State penal codes with provisions for corporate liability for criminal acts are taken from the Model Penal Code, which provides for a 'corporation' to be convicted of a criminal offense, as well as an 'individual' acting on behalf of the corporation. Defenses to such charges include the 'due diligence' defense, which seeks acquittal on the ground that the employer used due diligence to prevent the commission of the offense. Another defense for a corporate employer is that a manager involved in the charged offense acted in violation or outside the scope of clearly stated internal corporate rules and policies. A corporate defendant may also use certain privileges, which serve to keep certain evidence out of court. These include the qualified self-evaluative privilege and the attorney-client privilege. The article also examines issues in cases where an individual employee and an employer are codefendants. Among the article's suggestions for employer steps to reduce liability are the development of clear and up-to-date safety and health internal communication policies and procedures. 34 notes.