Orami01/Test3 · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 1.03k
with certainty that the injury/illness was caused by the employee’s feet being wet all day due to
work at the cooling tower. Since the injury/illness was determined to not be work-related, the
company deemed the incident non-reportable.
Response 2:
A case is work-related if it is more likely than not that an identifiable event or exposure in the
work environment was a discernable cause of the injury or illness. The work event or exposure
need only be one of the causes; it need not to be the sole or predominant cause. In this case, the
fact that neither the physician nor the employee could state with absolute certainty that the
employee’s edema was caused by working with wet feet is not dispositive. In these situations,
the railroad should evaluate the surrounding circumstances and relevant information (i.e., the
FRA Guide for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports
55
F 6180.55a
physician’s description of the edema as an “occupational disease,” the employee’s statement that
working with wet feet was “the only thing he could of” as the cause, the employee’s medical
history and events surrounding the injury/illness) to determine whether it is more likely that the
identifiable event (working with wet feet) was a cause. The fact that the employee did not wear
proper protective equipment is irrelevant for reporting purposes. If the railroad determines that
the case it reportable, the case must be recorded on the Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness
Record, Form FRA F 6180.98, and reported to FRA on Form FRA F 6180.55a.
Scenario 3:
An employee was to report to work by 8:00 a.m. The employee drove into the company parking
lot at 7:30 a.m. and parked the car. The employee exited the car and proceeded to the office to
report to work. The parking lot and sidewalks are privately owned by the facility and both are
within the property line, but not the controlled access points (i.e., fence, guards). The employee
stepped onto the sidewalk and slipped on the snow and ice. The employee suffered a back injury
and missed multiple days of work. The company believes that the employee was still in the
process of the commute to work since the employee had not yet checked in at the office. Since a
work task was not being performed, the site personnel deemed the incident not work-related and
therefore not reportable.
Response 3:
Company parking lots and sidewalks are part of the employer’s establishment for injury/illness
reporting purposes. In this case, the employee slipped on an icy sidewalk while walking to the
office to report for work. In addition, the event or exposure that occurred does not meet any of
the work-related exceptions. The employee was on the sidewalk because of work not because
the employee was a member of the general public or a trespasser. The event or exposure
occurred in the work environment and caused or contributed to the resultant injury. Therefore,
the case is work-related, regardless of the fact that he had not actually checked in, and must be
reported as a case involving a Railroad Employee Not On Duty (Class B). See reporting
exceptions listed at § 225.15.
Scenario 4:
An employee reports to work. Several hours later, the employee goes outside for a “smoke break
and to get a pair of sunglasses from his truck.” The employee slips on ice and injures his back.
Since the employee was not performing tasks related to the employee’s work, the company has
deemed this incident non-work-related and therefore not reportable.
FRA Guide for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports
56
F 6180.55a
Response 4:
An injury or illness is not work-related if it is solely the result of an employee doing personal
tasks (unrelated to their employment) at the establishment outside of the employee’s assigned
working hours. See reporting exceptions listed at § 225.15. In order for this exception to apply,
the case must meet both of the stated conditions. The exception does not apply here because the
injury or illness occurred within normal working hours as “breaks” during normal working hours
are considered within assigned working hours. Therefore, this case is work-related, and must be
recorded on the Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness Record, Form FRA F 6180.98, and
reported on Form FRA F 6180.55a.
Scenario 5:
An employee drove into the company parking lot at 7:30 a.m., exited his car, and proceeded to
cross the parking lot to clock in to work. A second employee, also on the way to work,
approached the first employee, and the two individuals got into a physical altercation in the
parking lot. The first employee broke an arm during the altercation. The employee went to the
doctor and received medical treatment for his injury.
The company deemed this a non-work-related incident, and therefore non-reportable, since the
employees had not yet reported to work and a work task was not being performed at the time of
the altercation.
Response 5:
The reporting requirements contain no general exception for purposes of determining workrelatedness for cases involving acts of violence in the work environment. Company parking
lots/access roads are part of the employer’s premises and therefore part of the employer’s
establishment. Whether the employee had not clocked in to work does not affect the outcome for
determining work-relatedness. Therefore, this case is work-related and must be recorded on the
Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness Record, Form FRA F 6180.98, and reported on Form
FRA F 6180.55a.
Scenario 6:
An employee injured a knee performing work-related activities in 2005. The accident was
FRA-reportable. The employee had arthroscopic knee surgery 11 months later and was released
to full duty a month and a half after the arthroscopic surgery.
The employee had a second knee injury 3 months after the return to work release (after the first
surgery). After the second surgery, the doctor prescribed Vioxx® as an anti-inflammatory drug.
FRA Guide for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports
57
F 6180.55a
Approximately 1½ months after the second knee surgery, the employee was given another full
release to return to work full duty, and returned to work. However, the doctor told the employee
to continue to take Vioxx® as prescribed (as needed) and to return to the doctor as needed. The
employee scheduled a followup appointment with the doctor. The day before the appointment,
the employee bumped his knee at work. During his scheduled doctor’s appointment (which was
to be the last followup visit), the employee mentioned the latest incident (bumping the knee) to
the doctor and showed him where the pain was occurring due to bumping his knee. The doctor
stated that the employee had an inflamed tendon (Grade 1 lateral collateral ligament sprain) that
was not part of the initial surgery (patellar tendonitis). The doctor stated in the diagnosis that the
original injury that required knee surgery was resolved. The doctor told the employee to
continue taking Vioxx® for the inflamed tendon. Since the employee was already taking the
medication prescribed (Vioxx®), the railroad does not believe this is reportable as a second
incident.
Response 6:
In the accident/incident regulation and reporting guidelines, the employer is required to follow
any determination a physician or other licensed healthcare professional has made about the status
of a new case. The inflamed tendon is a new case because the employee had completely
recovered from the previous injury and illness and a new event or exposure had occurred in the

with certainty that the injury/illness was caused by the employee’s feet being wet all day due to

work at the cooling tower. Since the injury/illness was determined to not be work-related, the

company deemed the incident non-reportable.

Response 2:

A case is work-related if it is more likely than not that an identifiable event or exposure in the

work environment was a discernable cause of the injury or illness. The work event or exposure

need only be one of the causes; it need not to be the sole or predominant cause. In this case, the

fact that neither the physician nor the employee could state with absolute certainty that the

employee’s edema was caused by working with wet feet is not dispositive. In these situations,

the railroad should evaluate the surrounding circumstances and relevant information (i.e., the

FRA Guide for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports

55

F 6180.55a

physician’s description of the edema as an “occupational disease,” the employee’s statement that

working with wet feet was “the only thing he could of” as the cause, the employee’s medical

history and events surrounding the injury/illness) to determine whether it is more likely that the

identifiable event (working with wet feet) was a cause. The fact that the employee did not wear

proper protective equipment is irrelevant for reporting purposes. If the railroad determines that

the case it reportable, the case must be recorded on the Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness

Record, Form FRA F 6180.98, and reported to FRA on Form FRA F 6180.55a.

Scenario 3:

An employee was to report to work by 8:00 a.m. The employee drove into the company parking

lot at 7:30 a.m. and parked the car. The employee exited the car and proceeded to the office to

report to work. The parking lot and sidewalks are privately owned by the facility and both are

within the property line, but not the controlled access points (i.e., fence, guards). The employee

stepped onto the sidewalk and slipped on the snow and ice. The employee suffered a back injury

and missed multiple days of work. The company believes that the employee was still in the

process of the commute to work since the employee had not yet checked in at the office. Since a

work task was not being performed, the site personnel deemed the incident not work-related and

therefore not reportable.

Response 3:

Company parking lots and sidewalks are part of the employer’s establishment for injury/illness

reporting purposes. In this case, the employee slipped on an icy sidewalk while walking to the

office to report for work. In addition, the event or exposure that occurred does not meet any of

the work-related exceptions. The employee was on the sidewalk because of work not because

the employee was a member of the general public or a trespasser. The event or exposure

occurred in the work environment and caused or contributed to the resultant injury. Therefore,

the case is work-related, regardless of the fact that he had not actually checked in, and must be

reported as a case involving a Railroad Employee Not On Duty (Class B). See reporting

exceptions listed at § 225.15.

Scenario 4:

An employee reports to work. Several hours later, the employee goes outside for a “smoke break

and to get a pair of sunglasses from his truck.” The employee slips on ice and injures his back.

Since the employee was not performing tasks related to the employee’s work, the company has

deemed this incident non-work-related and therefore not reportable.

FRA Guide for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports

56

F 6180.55a

Response 4:

An injury or illness is not work-related if it is solely the result of an employee doing personal

tasks (unrelated to their employment) at the establishment outside of the employee’s assigned

working hours. See reporting exceptions listed at § 225.15. In order for this exception to apply,

the case must meet both of the stated conditions. The exception does not apply here because the

injury or illness occurred within normal working hours as “breaks” during normal working hours

are considered within assigned working hours. Therefore, this case is work-related, and must be

recorded on the Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness Record, Form FRA F 6180.98, and

reported on Form FRA F 6180.55a.

Scenario 5:

An employee drove into the company parking lot at 7:30 a.m., exited his car, and proceeded to

cross the parking lot to clock in to work. A second employee, also on the way to work,

approached the first employee, and the two individuals got into a physical altercation in the

parking lot. The first employee broke an arm during the altercation. The employee went to the

doctor and received medical treatment for his injury.

The company deemed this a non-work-related incident, and therefore non-reportable, since the

employees had not yet reported to work and a work task was not being performed at the time of

the altercation.

Response 5:

The reporting requirements contain no general exception for purposes of determining workrelatedness for cases involving acts of violence in the work environment. Company parking

lots/access roads are part of the employer’s premises and therefore part of the employer’s

establishment. Whether the employee had not clocked in to work does not affect the outcome for

determining work-relatedness. Therefore, this case is work-related and must be recorded on the

Railroad Employee Injury and/or Illness Record, Form FRA F 6180.98, and reported on Form

FRA F 6180.55a.

Scenario 6:

An employee injured a knee performing work-related activities in 2005. The accident was

FRA-reportable. The employee had arthroscopic knee surgery 11 months later and was released

to full duty a month and a half after the arthroscopic surgery.

The employee had a second knee injury 3 months after the return to work release (after the first

surgery). After the second surgery, the doctor prescribed Vioxx® as an anti-inflammatory drug.

FRA Guide for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports

57

F 6180.55a

Approximately 1½ months after the second knee surgery, the employee was given another full

release to return to work full duty, and returned to work. However, the doctor told the employee

to continue to take Vioxx® as prescribed (as needed) and to return to the doctor as needed. The

employee scheduled a followup appointment with the doctor. The day before the appointment,

the employee bumped his knee at work. During his scheduled doctor’s appointment (which was

to be the last followup visit), the employee mentioned the latest incident (bumping the knee) to

the doctor and showed him where the pain was occurring due to bumping his knee. The doctor

stated that the employee had an inflamed tendon (Grade 1 lateral collateral ligament sprain) that

was not part of the initial surgery (patellar tendonitis). The doctor stated in the diagnosis that the

original injury that required knee surgery was resolved. The doctor told the employee to

continue taking Vioxx® for the inflamed tendon. Since the employee was already taking the

medication prescribed (Vioxx®), the railroad does not believe this is reportable as a second

incident.

Response 6:

In the accident/incident regulation and reporting guidelines, the employer is required to follow

any determination a physician or other licensed healthcare professional has made about the status

of a new case. The inflamed tendon is a new case because the employee had completely

recovered from the previous injury and illness and a new event or exposure had occurred in the