Employee signatures enter the cyber world
Employee signatures enter the cyber world
Also, off-site injuries count as work-related
In a move that will continue to help improve how federal paperwork requirements are handled by corporate America, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration recently informed DaimlerChrysler it would accept management’s electronic signatures on employee training certificates.
In separate rulings, OSHA clarified that a "work-related" injury can occur outside of normal working areas or conditions.
The OSHA interpretations were posted recently on the Web site of NetCompliance, which is a Seattle-based provider of Web-based compliance tools and on-line worker training programs (www.netcompliance.com.) The issue of electronic signatures was addressed in an interpretive letter responding to a major manufacturer’s query.
The agency’s interpretive correspondence to DaimlerChrysler is significant because it comes from a major federal agency and is one of the first official government actions, which reaffirms President Clinton’s desire to eliminate legal barriers to using electronic technology in the collection and storage of documents and the signing of contracts.
President Clinton signed the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act in June and said in his remarks that "government agencies will have the authority to enforce the laws, protect the public interest, and carry out their missions in the electronic world." Clinton said he envisioned a time when "vast warehouses of paper will be replaced by servers about the size of VCRs."
Krish Krishnan, CEO of NetCompliance, says the use of electronic signatures should ease the paperwork burden for occupational health professionals. "Firms have had to memorialize their transactions with pen and ink signatures, and traded their hard copy documents back and forth, slowing down the pace of commerce," Krishnan says. "But OSHA’s actions in its recent interpretation letter, coupled with the new electronic signature law signed by the President, signals that business can and should use digital technologies to meet government record-keeping requirements. It is our hope that other state and federal agencies follow OSHA’s lead in promoting the use of e-signatures on compliance documents."
According to the OSHA letter, DaimlerChrysler safety and health specialist Robert Champion asked the agency earlier this year whether, in light of new innovations in computer technology, the agency would accept electronic signatures in lieu of hard-copy signatures for mandatory OSHA-required training records. Richard Fairfax, director of OSHA’s compliance programs, said the agency’s standards "generally require the employer and trainers to sign a certification record which includes the identity of the person(s) trained; signatures of the employees are not required."
However, Fairfax added that "If you mean every time the [management or training] person signs, his or her signature will be electronically stored, then OSHA would have no objection to the use of an electronic signature pad to satisfy the certification requirements."
OSHA’s willingness to accept e-signatures is important in the face of the staggering cost of regulatory compliance and paperwork requirements, Krishnan says.
In another little-known federal document posted on the Web site, OSHA ruled that workers hurt at nonwork events must count as work-related injuries. OSHA originally informed a Toledo, OH, company earlier this year that an employee injured while walking for exercise on company grounds at lunchtime should be recorded as a work-related injury. The agency said "injuries occurring in the work environment are considered work-related" and that the specific activity the worker was engaged in at the time of the injury is "not the controlling factor."
But OSHA went even further in its interpretation, in a move that Krishan says will have a dramatic effect on companies in the habit of hosting recreational events for their employees. He says these events often include physical activities and sometimes require mandatory employee attendance. Krishnan says OSHA determined that workers injured during company-sponsored events at such places as baseball fields, golf courses, gymnasiums, swimming pools, and golf courses also must be counted as injuries occurring in the workplace.
"OSHA should have announced this ruling with great fanfare, but it didn’t," Krishnan says.
Recreation counts as work-related
OSHA’s letter states that "if the employee was engaged in some work-related activity or was required by the employer to participate" then injuries occurring in those recreational settings must be counted as work-related. The agency also says that "the nature of the activity which the employee is engaged in at the time of the event or exposure, the degree of employer control over the employee’s activity, the preventability of the incident, or the concept of the fault" does not affect the situation.
In fact, another little noticed OSHA interpretation — also available from NetCompliance — finds that the agency specifically states that a worker who injures himself in a recreational sporting event at a company-required picnic will be considered injured on the job by OSHA. The agency said that because attendance was required, "any resulting injury or illness is presumed work-related for OSHA record-keeping purposes."
The following is how the OSHA interpretation letter explained why a walking injury could be work-related:
"As stated on page 32, Section C of the Recordkeeping Guidelines, Work relationship is established under the OSHA recordkeeping system when the injury or illness results from an event or exposure in the work environment. The work environment is primarily composed of: (1) the employer’s premises, and (2) other locations where employees are engaged in work-related activities or are present as a condition of their employment.
When an employee is off the employer’s premises, work relationship must be established; when on the premises, this relationship is presumed. The employer’s premises encompass the total establishment. This includes not only the primary facility but also such areas as company storage facilities.
In addition to physical locations, equipment or materials used in the course of an employee’s work also are considered part of the employee’s work environment.’ The general rule is that all injuries and illnesses, which result from events or exposures occurring to employees on the employer’s premises are presumed to be work-related. As stated in Q&A C-1 on pages 32-33, company restrooms, hallways, or cafeterias are generally all considered to be part of the employer’s premises and constitute part of the work environment. Injuries occurring in the work environment are considered work-related. The specific activity the employee was engaged in at the time of the injury is not the controlling factor.’
"As stated in Q&A C-2 on page 33, For OSHA record-keeping purposes, the definition of work premises excludes all employer-controlled ball fields, tennis courts, golf courses, parks, swimming pools, gyms, and other similar recreational facilities, which are often apart from the workplace and used by employees on a voluntary basis for their own benefit, primarily during off-work hours. Therefore, injuries to employees in these recreational facilities are not recordable unless the employee was engaged in some work-related activity, or was required by the employer to participate.’
"The examples cited in your question (e.g., on the premises on the sidewalk, or along their roadway during lunch or break, which is also on the premises, or walking in the plant at lunchtime or break time for exercise, in the aisles, etc.’) do not meet the definition of recreational facility and therefore are not exempted from the on-premises presumption of work relationship. In order to meet the definition of recreational facility, a facility must be used exclusively for recreational purposes during a designated time period.
"Remember, too, that, as indicated in Q&A C-7 on page 34, the determination that an event or exposure on the employer’s premises is considered work-related is not affected by the nature of the activity which the employee is engaged in at the time of the event or exposure, the degree of employer control over the employee’s activity, the preventability of the incident, or the concept of fault.’"
The interpretation letter addressed another question about an employee who was scheduled to perform a climbing activity four times a year and, in the past year, climbed those four times. He suffered an injury in February and was restricted from climbing for three days. His next scheduled climb would not be done until June. Should the three days still be counted as restricted.
Cheryle Greenaugh, PhD, director of OSHA’s Directorate of Information Technology, responded by saying yes, the three days must be reported as restricted days. This is how the OSHA interpretation letter explained why:
"Restricted workdays are those days when (1) the employee was assigned to another job on a temporary basis; or (2) the employee worked at a permanent job less than full time; or (3) the employee worked at a permanently assigned job but could not perform all duties normally connected with it (page 60, Glossary of Terms). Historically, the phrase employee’s normal job duties’ has been interpreted to include any tasks that the employee performs or may be expected to perform throughout the calendar year.
"Whether or not the employee was scheduled to perform the duty which is restricted is not relevant in the decision-making process. If the employee would be expected to perform the activity which is restricted on any single day during the year, the case must be recorded as one involving restricted work activity. If the employee is never expected to perform the activity which is restricted during any one day of the calendar year, then the case does not involve restricted work activity."
Auto accident ruled work-related injury
In another interpretation that received little fanfare, OSHA ruled that a worker injured in an automobile accident while attending an off-site training session must be considered a work- related injury by her employer. An interpretive letter made available by NetCompliance indicates the agency has ruled "employees who travel on company business shall be considered engaged in work related activities all the time they spend in the interest of the company."
OSHA was responding to a letter from a Memphis, TN, occupational health professional who described an accident to an employee who was exiting the parking lot of an off-site training facility in her privately owned vehicle "when it was rear ended, causing strain injuries to the employee’s shoulder, neck, back and knee. These injuries were treated at a hospital emergency department with a sling and prescription painkillers." OSHA said the letter described a scenario that "would indicate that the travel was in the interest of the company and therefore work-related. Because the employee received prescription medications as a result of the injuries, the case should be recorded" as a work injury.
"This little noticed OSHA determination has major implications for all American companies, particularly small businesses," Krishnan says. "Employers spend tens of millions of dollars each year in providing off-site worker training. Now the federal government has reaffirmed its long-standing policy that these workers are covered by workplace safety rules even while traveling to and from an off-site training facility. This will increase dramatically the liability facing American business. Furthermore, the ruling calls into question who is responsible if the injury occurs within the training facility."
The letter writer explained that the employee was attending an off-site, three-day ergonomic training course open to personnel nationwide. The training facility was located in the next town, situated 19 miles from the employee’s normal worksite and approximately 40 to 45 miles from the employee’s home. Because of the proximity of the training facility, the employee was not permitted to stay overnight at the facility and was required to travel daily from home.
At the end of the second day of training, after being dismissed from the course and conducting a training/feedback session with some of the out-of-state employees, the employee began driving back to her normal worksite to pick up a computer for a customer and to enter notes from the training/feedback session.
OSHA’s Greenaugh responded to the letter by saying the employee’s travel between the training facility and the home office should be considered work-related and therefore the case should be recorded on the OSHA Log. Q&A C-19 on page 36 of the Recordkeeping Guidelines states, "Employees who travel on company business shall be considered to be engaged in work related activities all the time they spend in the interest of the company."
"As described in your scenario, at the time of the accident, the employee was engaged in travel between the training facility and the home office in order to retrieve a computer for a customer and paperwork for a manager. This would indicate that the travel was in the interest of the company and therefore work-related." Greenaugh wrote. "Because the employee received prescription medications as a result of the injuries, the case should be recorded."