Allen Industries, a manufacturer based in Ohio, challenged a decision by the Industrial Commission of Ohio awarding additional compensation to an injured employee under the state’s violation of specific safety requirement (VSSR) statute. The claim involved a 2020 workplace injury where employee Colton Holbrook lost two fingers while operating a press brake machine. Holbrook alleged that Allen Industries failed to install proper point-of-operation guards and foot pedal safety covers.
Holbrook was injured while working on a Cincinnati press brake. He stated that the foot pedal was unguarded and that no physical barrier prevented hand injuries. The Bureau of Workers’ Compensation (BWC) Safety Violations Investigation Unit inspected the site and concluded that Allen Industries violated Ohio Adm.Code 4123:1-5-11(D), which required point-of-operation guards on power presses. Holbrook filed a VSSR application, and the BWC issued a finding supporting the violation.
Commission found company violated state safety requirements
The Industrial Commission adopted the BWC findings and awarded Holbrook additional compensation under R.C. 4121.47. Allen Industries filed a complaint in mandamus, arguing that the commission abused its discretion. It claimed that the Cincinnati press brake was not a mechanical power press covered by the rule and that Holbrook had been adequately trained and warned not to place his hands near the press area.
The court reviewed whether the commission acted within its discretion in finding a violation. It examined evidence including Holbrook’s injury report, photographs, and machine specifications. Expert testimony classified the equipment as a mechanical power press, and documentation showed the absence of required guards. The court also noted that Allen Industries did not challenge the classification until after the injury.
Allen Industries also argued that the commission failed to adequately explain its reasoning. The court found that the commission had sufficiently articulated its basis, citing specific rule provisions and investigative findings. It held that the company’s disagreement with the conclusions did not constitute a lack of explanation.
Final outcome
The Court of Appeals of Ohio denied Allen Industries’ mandamus request. It upheld the commission’s VSSR award, finding that the company had violated specific safety rules by failing to install required guards on equipment involved in the workplace injury.
Help with OSHA violations and workplace safety defense
If your company is facing an OSHA investigation, VSSR claim, or safety equipment dispute, Whitcomb, Selinsky PC handles regulatory defense, workplace accident liability, and compliance issues. Reach out to schedule a consultation and learn how our team can assist with your case.
Joe Whitcomb
