Prevent injuries? Or prevent reporting of further injures?
We heard about an employee that was recently injured at work. Following protocol, he documented the injury and was held out of work for one day to recover. When he returned, his Performance Lead called him in to discuss the injury saying he wanted to find a way to prevent further injuries like this one.
During the discussion, it was noted by the PL that MSP currently has a high injury rate. Management just wanted to have a finding of facts to determine the cause. The manager suggested that it was related to the employee working an increased number of hours. The employee disagreed, explaining that his slip and injury were due to extremely icy conditions. They agreed to disagree.
At the conclusion of the meeting, management informed the employee that his ability to swap days and shifts would be revoked for 90 days, as if this would protect the worker from further injury. The employee was and still is adamant that the injury had nothing to do with the number of hours he works.
If the Company's ultimate goal is to reduce the number or work related injuries, a few questions are left unanswered. If Delta is actually interested in "protecting" this employee from overwork, why does the punishment stop after 90 days? Is he allowed to overwork himself after this time? If the Company actually believes their own argument, why didn't they extend this to protect all of us? Why did the Company just recently increase the number of double shifts allowed each week from 2 to 3?
Here's the reality of the situation - Delta knows many of us like our overtime and swaps. They also know this employee (and anyone who hears about this situation) will be much less likely to report an injury for fear of retaliation. Delta's reported injuries go down.
Fortunately, Delta's action in this case is illegal. Any action which discourages workers from reporting injuries at work is a violation of the law. But most workers don't know this and most don't have the money to hire a Workers Compensation attorney. IAM union workers don't have this problem. They have union reps who are trained to know the basics of Workers Compensation statutes. They also have access to attorneys who will answer their questions. With a union this worker would have brought a union rep to the meeting and the Company action would have been quickly quashed.
