L. E. Myers Co. v. Secretary of Labor

Background

This case concerns an enforcement action under the Occupational Safety and Health Act. An employer was cited after a workplace accident, and the central factual dispute was whether the accident resulted from unforeseeable employee misconduct or from failings in the employer’s safety program. The Sixth Circuit ruled on that question and the Government’s initial showing in these cases. The Court of Appeals treated unforeseeable employee misconduct as an affirmative defense raised by the employer after the Government makes a basic case that the employer failed to implement an effective safety program.

Reasoning

The core question was who must prove that an accident was caused by unforeseeable employee misconduct rather than by inadequate safety enforcement. The Sixth Circuit held that once the Government establishes a prima facie case that an employer failed to implement an effective safety program, the employer must show the misconduct was unforeseeable. The Sixth Circuit agreed with an Eighth Circuit decision adopting that approach. Other federal appeals courts, however, use different rules: some require employers to show they had safety rules that were effectively enforced without any initial Government burden, while others place the burden on the Government to prove the accident was not due to unforeseeable employee misconduct.

Real world impact

Because the Supreme Court declined to review the case, the Sixth Circuit’s rule stands where it applies, and the disagreement among appeals courts remains. Employers, workers, and OSHA will continue to face different proof rules depending on which appeals court governs a case. The dissenting Justice would have granted review because the split of authority affects how OSHA enforces safety across the country and creates uncertainty for enforcement and defenses.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White, joined by Justice O’Connor, dissented from the denial of review and said the Court should have resolved the long-standing circuit split about the burden of proof in OSHA cases.