When immigrant workers are injured at work

National origin is not a bar to recovery
Immigrants are a growing part of the labor force in the United States. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2014, there were 25.7 million foreign-born persons in the US labor force, comprising 16.5 percent of the total workforce.
According to the Office of Occupational Safety, an average of twelve workers die on the job per day due to work-related conditions, plus an additional 50,000 workers die each year from occupational disease. Between 8 million and 12 million work-related injuries or illnesses occur every year. For various reasons, immigrant workers are highly at risk for workplace safety and health problems. Even though the law has guaranteed workers the right to work in a safe and hazard-free workplace, immigrant workers continue to face serious threats to their safety and health at work on a daily basis.
Case in point: Pablo Padilla Ayala, a fruit harvester for employer Gold Grower Services, Inc., was electrocuted when his 20-foot ladder, provided to him by his employer, came into contact with a power line directly above a row of orchard trees, while he was harvesting grapefruit. He died from his injuries.
Ayala’s widow, two young children, and brother (who was working with him at the farm at that time and saw him die) sued Southern California Edison (SCE), who owned the power lines, and the employers, for negligence. Ayala’s family claimed that SCE was supposed to maintain the power lines at a minimum height of 25 feet and to ensure that there was 10 feet of clearance between trees and power lines. At the time of Ayala’s accident, the power lines were too low, a little over 18 feet. The family sought recovery for wrongful death damages.  SCE and the employers denied they were at fault. The case went to trial.
Where an injury or death was caused by the negligence of others, the injured party or their family may recover damages if 1) the other party was negligent and 2) the other party’s negligence caused the injuries or death.  If some negligence is established, the real challenge is how to measure damages.
How does the legal system value the loss of life to the spouse or to a family member left behind? First, there are economic damages such as medical bills and funeral expenses. There is also the loss of financial support that the decedent would have provided to the family but for the premature death.
Secondly, there are non-economic damages. Injury and death will affect the relationship between the decedent and the family. How does one put a price on the loss of love, companionship or consortium, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, moral support and the loss of training and guidance? How should the family of the wrongful death victim be compensated? Not surprisingly, there are no easy answers.
In the case of Ayala, who was originally from Mexico, SCE and the employers argued to the jury that the compensation to Ayala’s family should be reduced because Ayala, who travelled away for work, was living apart from his wife and children, and did not see his family for long periods of time due to the nature of his work.
However, the jury was urged that just because Ayala and his family did not speak English, that they come from Mexico, and that Ayala’s work required him to be away from his family for long periods of time, did not mean that their pain and loss is any less.
After nearly six weeks of trial and one day of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Ayala’s family, awarding them $4,745,000 in non-economic damages. The jury found that Southern California Edison was 80% liable for the death, with the remaining 20% liability assigned to the employer and labor contractor.
Whether the fatal accident occurred at home, on the road, or at work, courts continue to struggle with the question of damages in wrongful death cases. Trying to put a price tag on a human life is, indeed, a challenge. Families should, therefore, seek help from a knowledgeable and experienced attorney who can better articulate their true damages to a court or jury.

***

The Law Offices of C. Joe Sayas, Jr. welcomes inquiries about this topic. All inquiries are confidential and at no-cost.  Atty. Sayas’ Law Office is located at 500 N. Brand Blvd. Suite 980, Glendale, CA 91203. You can contact the office at (818) 291-0088 or visit  www.joesayaslaw.com. 

***

C. Joe Sayas, Jr., Esq. is trial attorney who has obtained several million dollar recoveries for his clients against employers and insurance companies. He has been selected as a Super Lawyer by the Los Angeles Magazine, featured in the cover of Los Angeles Daily Journal’s Verdicts and Settlements, and is a member of the Million Dollar-Advocates Forum.