•  
  •  
 

Abstract

When you hear occupational descriptions such as ultra-hazardous, high fatality rates, or unpredictable workplace environment, which occupations first pop into your mind? Some likely candidates might be aircraft pilots, iron and steel workers, police officers, or electrical power-line installers. It’s not likely that a small family farm located in the rural Midwest would first come to mind, and if it did, you probably grew up on a farm or within a farming community. Although agriculture is one of the most dangerous industries in the United States, few understand the realities of its day to day operations. As a result, small farms are excepted from Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) enforcement and from workers’ compensation statutes. The confusion caused by these exceptions coupled with the lack of understanding and appreciation of how the small farming industry works leads to inconsistent results when negligence claims against farm employers by farm employees are brought to court.

This article addresses this inconsistency by proposing a set of factors to help judges and juries focus on the key characteristics of the farm at issue, thereby minimizing guess work and irrelevant considerations and in turn producing consistent and fair judgments. Part II provides background on the dangers of small farming, OSHA’s failed attempts to regulate small farming, and how these conditions can result in inconsistent legal consequences. Part III analyzes the issues with the current application of common law tort principles as applied to OSHA-exempt and workers’ compensation-exempt small farms. Part IV proposes a multi-factor test to determine whether a small farm employer has breached his or her duty of care to provide a reasonably safe place to work to the employee.

Download

Share

COinS