'My Employer Forced Me to Return to Work': 3 Tips From Lawyers as South Florida Businesses Prepare to Reopen
If OSHA inspects the building, the government agency will examine whether the company is failing to provide a safe environment, and will focus its attention on policies the company has in place to mitigate the risks of not social distancing.
May 12, 2020 at 03:39 PM
4 minute read
South Florida businesses set to reopen May 18 need to develop and implement new policies in place to shield them from potential liability and costly COVID -19 lawsuits.
The advice comes as Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez pinpointed May 18 as the target reopening date under Phase 1 of the state's guidelines for reopening, with Broward County also set to follow that date. Palm Beach County has already implemented Phase 1, having reopened Monday.
But attorneys note the reopening could be problematic for South Florida employers as Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach counties lead the state with the greatest number of deaths and confirmed cases of the coronavirus.
As of Tuesday morning, the Florida Department of Health tallied 14,385 cases and 505 deaths in Miami-Dade County from the coronavirus. Broward and Palm Beach Counties collectively reported around 10,000 total cases and just over 500 deaths.
1. Stagger employee return dates
With the reopening of a number of businesses next week is inevitable, Alison Smith, a partner at Kelley Kronenberg in Fort Lauderdale, says logistical preparations have to be developed so that local businesses can minimize their exposure to liability.
For instance, one of Smith's clients is spacing out the start date of employees in four phases of 25% each after auditing the positions and considering the business' needs. Another client is spacing out employee desks to be six feet apart, and those who need to move are placed in a large conference room to work with social distancing in place.
"The worry is if you don't have these policies, you could be subjected to an OSHA complaint," Smith said, referring to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. "The employee could go to OSHA and say, 'My employer forced me to return to work. I don't feel safe because they have all these people congregating together, people are breathing on me and sneezing like crazy!'"
2. Focus on social-distancing policies
If OSHA inspects the building, the government agency will examine whether the company is failing to provide a safe environment, and will focus its attention on policies the company has in place to mitigate the risks of not social distancing.
"As the employer, that policy is your insurance," Smith said. "It is to say, 'This is not my child. I cannot police this person any more than I have already done. The liability does not rest with me. It rests with this singular individual.'"
Smith says a company that has its reopening policy spelled out in a document shows that it takes the social distancing measures seriously from a liability standpoint. As long as the company distributes the written policy to staff, it has done its part in large measure. The rest is a trust factor that the employees will follow the dictates of the reopening policy, subject to reinforcement by management.
3. Revise and update
April Boyer, a partner at K&L Gates in Miami, says revising a reopening policy could be expensive for a company, especially if the revision seeks to enforce new procedures, such as the initial verification of an employee's health upon return to work and the frequency with which the company will follow up on the employee's health after returning to work. She advises her clients to find the balance that works with their bottom line.
"People are going to get sick," Boyer said. "We can't prevent people from catching COVID-19. But we can certainly create a physical workspace that does what's possible to create a healthy environment for employees to work in."
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllForum Clause Axes $844M Case Against Reinsurer Over Deadly Plane Crash, Judge Rules
Once the LA Fires Are Extinguished, Expect the Litigation to Unfold for Years
5 minute readAttorneys, Health Care Officials Face Nearly $80M RICO Suit Over Allegedly Fabricated Spreadsheet
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Public Notices/Calendars
- 2Wednesday Newspaper
- 3Decision of the Day: Qui Tam Relators Do Not Plausibly Claim Firm Avoided Tax Obligations Through Visa Applications, Circuit Finds
- 4Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-116
- 5Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250