Labor Law §240(1) protects workers exposed to the hazards of elevation-related differentials. Not only is the statute precise about the types of hazards within its scope, but it specifically enumerates the types of tasks that a worker must be performing. The statute provides in pertinent part:
Section 240(l). All contractors and owners and their agents…in the erection, demolition, repairing, altering, painting, cleaning or pointing…of a building or structure shall furnish or erect or cause to be furnished and erected for the performance of such labor, scaffolding, hoists, stays, ladders, swings, hangars, blocks, pulleys, braces, irons, ropes and other devices which shall be so constructed, placed and operated as to give proper protection to a person so employed.
Clearly, certain of the enumerated activities specified in the statute, such as painting and pointing, are easily defined. Others have required and continue to demand judicial interpretation. One of the more difficult tasks to identify and define is an “alteration.” In this column, we will examine recent case law with respect to the judicial interpretation of what constitutes an alteration under Labor Law §240(1).
Question of Alteration
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
