Given the recent influx of work in the Eagle Ford Shale area in the last eight (8) years, the job market has been flooded with workers of all types such as:
- Drilling/Rig Personnel;
- Oilfield Services;
- Wireline Services;
- Geosciences/Geologists;
- Landmen;
- Health, Safety and Environment Personnel (HSE);
- Department of Transportation Personnel (DOT);
- Trades (Electricians, heavy machine, welders, etc.)
- Petroleum Engineering;
- Production/Construction;
- Mechanical and Electrical Engineering;
- Maintenance Services;
- Truck Drivers;
- Equipment Operators (motormen);
- Derrickhands; and
- Floorhands.
Obviously this is a non-exclusive list. There are individuals from all over Texas and all over the nation that are currently filling numerous other jobs not listed above. Because of the incredible increase in jobs and workers moving into the area, injuries and deaths have become inevitable. According to a 2012 San Antonio Express article, the emergency room visits in Dimmit Regional Hospital (Carrizo Springs) tripled from monthly levels noted back in 2008-2009. The most common injuries involved motor vehicle crashes. It is clear to anyone who drives on Texas Highway 83, Highway 85, Highway 16, and Interstate 35 that the amount of traffic has significantly increased since the early-mid 2000s. In addition, industry related accidents on job sites typically involve burns, fractures, falls, amputations, strains/sprains, and crushing type injuries.
In general, who is responsible for a worker who gets injured on the job? (A discussion of who may be responsible if the worker actually dies from a work related injury is a topic for another article). Assume that a worker is a welder working for Welding Company A. The Owner-Operator B contracts with Welding Company A to perform work at a particular location. Your typical owner-operators familiar to the general public are, for example, Chesapeake Energy, BHP Billiton Petroleum, ConocoPhillips, Shell, EOG Resources, and others.
The welder is given his assignment to install wellheads inside a cellar by Welding Company A. This includes cutting and grinding the conductor pipes and eventually installing (through tack welds) the wellheads onto the conductor pipes. Crane Company C is contracted by Owner Operator A to assist in the lifting and placing of the wellheads on the conductor pipes. Assume that during the lifting and eventual lowering of a wellhead, the wellhead comes loose and falls on top of the welder. The injured welder is then taken to the hospital where he is diagnosed with a broken neck, among other injuries. Let’s set aside the damages component of a potential lawsuit and focus on who is responsible for the welder’s injury. We have three potential defendants given the hypothetical above. Welding Company A, Owner-Operator B, and Crane Company C. Because the injured welder did not die, and assume that Welding Company A had workers compensation insurance, Welding Company A is not an option as a potential defendant. Thus, we look at the Owner-Operator B and Crane Company C as potential defendants. For the Owner-Operator B to be held liable, they must have done the following:
- There was a condition on the property that posed an unreasonable risk of harm;
- The Owner-Operator B knew or reasonably should have known of the danger;
- The Owner-Operator B failed to exercise ordinary care to protect the welder from danger by both failing to adequately warn him of the dangerous condition and failing to make the dangerous condition reasonably safe; and,
- The Owner-Operator B exercised or retained some control over the manner in which the injury-causing work was performed, other than the right to order the work to start to stop or to inspect the progress or receive reports.
Typically, one can prove elements 1-3 and survive a summary judgment motion. It is element number 4 that is typically impossible to prove. As such, your typical owner-operator is rarely liable for injury or death to a third party worker. The owner-operator rarely, if ever, exercises or retains control over the manner in which a third party contractor’s work is performed, other than the right to order the time that the work is to commence and stop, or to request progress reports from its third party contractors. In the above-referenced hypothetical, the only viable defendant is Crane Company C. Possible claims are improper operation of the crane, improper operation of the control system that lowered the wellhead, improper rigging of the wellhead as it was being lowered, among other claims. It is truly unfortunate that young men and women are being injured almost on a weekly basis. While we understand that the oil boom has increased the economic development of cities that otherwise were impoverished years ago, it comes at a great expense of human life and catastrophic injury to oil and gas workers.
Written by:
Joey G. Gonzalez
Watts Guerra LLP
4 Dominion Drive, Bldg 3, Suite 100
San Antonio, Texas 78257
Phone (210) 447-0500
© Watts Guerra LLP 2015
