Follow Us
Join our newsletter
Get the latest news delivered to your inbox.
What General Contractors, Project Owners and Property Owners Need to Know about NY Labor Law
July 28, 2021
NY State is one of the toughest states to comply with business laws and regulations. Not only are the tax laws and statutory requirements some of the most stringent in the country, but we also have some of the strictest laws when it comes to worker’s rights and employer’s responsibilities. Often business owners believe that because they do not have employees that they do not have liability from the same types of claims that an employer might face in the case of an injured worker. In NY state you couldn’t be farther from the truth. The sole remedy of an employer is a worker’s compensation employer’s liability policy which statutorily protects the employer from being sued under any other liability. That’s where the property owner, project owner or the GC come in, after the injured worker calls Dewey Cheatum and How, they are advised that there are other “responsible parties” to access and may be seen as deep pockets. There is typically no such coverage afforded to those who do not have employees under a general liability policy unless that policy is endorsed to include these types of claims.
When it comes to people working on projects in which you have control you have a web of litigation land mines that are hard to navigate and hard to purchase risk transfer products without breaking the bank. The origination of these laws that affect owners without direct employees were enacted over 100 years ago and still persist today creating a legal environment heavily in favor of workers and their rights to be compensated adequately for injuries sustained while working for others.
Three Laws Employers Should Know About
The statutes in question are actually three different laws but are commonly referred to by several monikers such as “third party action-over”, the “scaffold law”, “fall from height”, or just plain “labor law.” The law refers to sections 200, 240 and 241 of the NY State labor law.
- Labor Law § 200 (the Safe Work Environment Statute) requires a reasonably safe work environment for all employees and others legally at the worksite. Employers must properly maintain, guard, and light the worksite, safely operate machinery, equipment, and other devices.
- Labor Law § 240(1) (the Scaffold, Ladder and Working at a Height Statute) has been interpreted by New York courts to impose a nondelegable duty to provide safety devices to protect against elevation-related hazards on construction sites. Project owners and general contractors are absolutely liable for any violation that results in an injury, regardless of whether the project owner or general contractor (GC) supervised or controlled the work.5 Further, the worker’s own negligence will not bar or reduce the worker’s recovery.
- Labor Law § 241(6) (the Construction, Excavation and Demolition Work Statute) imposes a nondelegable duty on project owners and GCs to keep workplaces safe from trip and slip hazards and other related hazards. A plaintiff seeking damages pursuant to this statute is not required to show that the project owner or GC exercised supervision or control over his worksite to establish a right of recovery. However, a violation under this statute, unlike a violation of Labor Law § 240(1), is only evidence of negligence on the part of project owner or GC. Absolute liability is not imposed by proof of a violation; therefore, the injured worker’s contributory and comparative negligence are considered viable defenses to a claim under this section
Responsible Parties
These laws allow an injured worker to collect workers compensation benefits from their employer as well as litigate against other “responsible parties.” These other “responsible parties” are subject to absolute liability, meaning common law negligence standards don’t apply. This is known as a third-party-over action, a type of action in which an injured employee, after collecting workers compensation benefits from the employer, sues a third party for contributing to the employee’s injury. Typically, the target of such suits are project owners or general contractors for damages such as:
- Lost Wages;
- Medical Expenses;
- Pain and suffering; and
- Any other damage, as the court may see fit.
These laws apply to employers, general contractors, property owners and their agents. A property owner includes any person with an interest in the property and any person who fulfills the role of owner by contracting to have work performed on the property for his or her benefit. This definition includes anyone who may have leased the property but retains the right to control how the work is to be performed on the property.
New York courts have consistently held that an entity is subject to Section 200’s duty of care if it exercises supervisory control over the work performed on the property. The courts have also clarified that merely monitoring the timing and quality of the work is not sufficient to establish control.
Good Defense needs Offense
The underlying purpose of these laws which were enacted over 100 years ago, is to ensure that construction workers injured on job sites receive fair compensation for the losses they suffer. Over the years, New York courts have broadened the scope of these statutes and adapted them to modern worksite dangers. At the same time, juries in the five boroughs have consistently awarded large verdicts to injured workers who allege violations of these laws. This confluence of factors has created unique challenges for risk transfer: insurance premiums are higher and beneficial coverage terms are harder to obtain. Even when you’re not doing work downstate you still can be subject to litigation; we have the same laws, just not the same judicial environment, YET.
Recommendations
- Use vetted contracts
- Seek the advice of council for contract agreements
- Know what is in the contract and what each requirement means
- If you choose to seek liability insurance covering this type of action speak with your trusted insurance advisor early on and allow adequate time for marketing
Sign up for our newsletter.
Overview of the New Ruling New York employers are once again required to provide a notice in their employee handbooks about reproductive health rights following a recent ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The ruling vacated a previous permanent injunction that had blocked the enforcement of the law, meaning employers must now comply with the New York Reproductive Health Bias Law (Labor Law § 203-e). Reproductive Health Bias Law Requirements The Reproductive Health Bias Law was enacted in November 2019 to ensure employees and their dependents can make reproductive health decisions without facing discrimination in the workplace. The law prohibits employers from taking retaliatory actions against employees regarding their reproductive health decisions and requires employers to keep employees' reproductive health information confidential unless there is prior written consent. Under the law, employers must include a notice in their employee handbooks informing employees of their rights and remedies under the Act. This is an essential update that must be made to comply with the law. Impact of the Second Circuit Ruling Religious organizations had challenged the law, arguing that the notice requirement violated their First Amendment rights. However, the Second Circuit disagreed, ruling that the notice requirement was lawful and similar to other workplace disclosure laws. The court noted that while the policy motivating the law may be controversial, the law itself and the obligation for employers to comply are not in question. Action Required for Employers Even though there is no specific penalty for failing to comply with the notice requirement, employers are encouraged to review and update their employee handbooks in light of the court's ruling to ensure they are compliant with the law. For Simco Clients: For clients who utilize Simco’s employee handbook services, rest assured this requirement is already included, and no additional steps are needed.
Pre-employment drug testing is a hiring practice that has sparked debate in recent years. While some industries rely on it for safety and compliance, others are rethinking its necessity—especially as marijuana laws evolve. If you're actively job searching, knowing what to expect can help you prepare, avoid surprises, and understand your rights. Who Still Requires Drug Testing? Not all industries conduct pre-employment drug testing, but for certain roles, it's still a non-negotiable requirement. Some of the most common sectors where testing remains standard include: Transportation & Public Safety – Truck drivers, pilots, transit operators, and law enforcement Healthcare & Childcare – Nurses, physicians, pharmacists, and daycare providers Government & Military Contracts – Federal employees, military personnel, and defense contractors Manufacturing & Construction – Heavy equipment operators and industrial workers handling hazardous materials However, policies vary widely even within these industries. Some companies are now loosening restrictions for non-safety-sensitive positions, recognizing that outdated drug testing policies may limit their talent pool. What Substances Are Typically Screened? Most pre-employment drug tests screen for common illicit substances, but the depth of testing can vary. Standard screenings include: Five-Panel Test – Detects marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, opiates, and PCP Expanded Panel Tests – Can include benzodiazepines, barbiturates, synthetic opioids, and even alcohol Employers may use different types of tests, including urine, saliva, blood, or hair follicle analysis. Hair follicle testing, for example, can detect drug use from months prior—something applicants should be mindful of. The Evolving Landscape of Marijuana Testing One of the most significant changes in pre-employment drug testing involves marijuana. With over half of U.S. states legalizing marijuana in some form, companies are reevaluating their stance. Some states prohibit employers from disqualifying candidates for off-duty marijuana use. Other states still allow testing but require employers to prove impairment, not just presence. Federally regulated positions, such as those in transportation, maintain strict no-tolerance policies. This shift means that while some applicants may no longer face automatic disqualification for marijuana use, it’s still important to know an employer’s policy before assuming it won’t impact hiring decisions. What Happens If You Fail a Pre-Employment Drug Test? The consequences of failing a drug test depend on multiple factors, including company policy, industry regulations, and state laws. In regulated industries (e.g., transportation, healthcare, federal employment), a failed test almost always results in immediate disqualification. Some employers allow re-testing or a waiting period before reapplying, particularly for marijuana use in certain states. If you have a valid prescription for a tested substance (e.g., opioids or ADHD medication), you may need to provide documentation to avoid disqualification. Additionally, some companies offer assistance programs or second-chance policies, especially if an applicant is upfront about past use or addiction recovery. Do Employers Really Benefit from Drug Testing? With the workforce evolving, many companies are questioning whether traditional drug testing policies still serve their intended purpose. Some argue that testing reduces liability, improves workplace safety, and ensures reliable employees. However, others believe that outdated policies exclude qualified candidates, especially in a competitive job market. The Arguments for Drug Testing: Reduces workplace accidents in safety-sensitive roles Ensures compliance with federal and industry regulations Discourages drug use in high-responsibility positions The Arguments Against Drug Testing: May eliminate qualified candidates for non-safety-sensitive roles Does not account for impairment vs. past use (especially with marijuana) Can be costly and time-consuming for employers Companies that still require drug testing must weigh these factors and ensure their policies align with modern workforce expectations. The Future of Pre-Employment Drug Testing The debate over drug testing isn’t going away anytime soon. As laws and attitudes continue shifting, companies may move toward impairment-based testing rather than zero-tolerance screening. This means job seekers should stay informed, especially in industries where testing is likely to remain a requirement. For now, the best approach is to understand employer expectations, know your legal protections, and be prepared for potential screenings as part of the hiring process.
Workplace Posting for Form 300A Begins February 1 Employers with 11 or more employees at any point in 2024 must display the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Form 300A, Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses, from February 1 to April 30. Even if no recordable incidents occurred in 2024, this posting is mandatory. The form must be certified by a company executive and displayed prominently in each workplace where employee notices are typically posted. Certain businesses are exempt from OSHA’s regular recordkeeping requirements, including this posting, if they employ 10 or fewer people or if their primary business activity is considered low hazard according to OSHA's guidelines. A full list of low-hazard industries, categorized by NAICS codes, is available here . However, even exempt companies must report fatalities or incidents resulting in hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye. Electronic Submission of Form 300A Due by March 2 Businesses with 250 or more employees from the previous year, or those with 20-249 employees in high-risk industries, must submit their Form 300A data electronically through OSHA's Injury Tracking Application (ITA) by March 2, 2025. This requirement applies based on the number of employees at a specific location, not the entire company. Employers under State Plans are also required to submit electronically. Exemptions from this electronic submission apply to employers who: Are exempt from OSHA's regular recordkeeping rules. Had fewer than 20 employees in the past year. Had between 20 and 249 employees but aren’t in the designated high-risk industries. Additional resources, FAQs, and access to the ITA are available on OSHA’s ITA page . Submission of Forms 300 and 301 Required by March 2 Employers in high-hazard industries with 100 or more employees are required to submit data from both their Form 300 (Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses) and Form 301 (Injury and Illness Incident Report) through the ITA, in addition to their Form 300A submission. Help with Coverage Determination Employers can use OSHA’s ITA Coverage Application to assess whether they need to submit injury and illness data electronically or refer to the State Plan for specific reporting requirements.
Have a question? Get in touch.
Our Services.
From the Blog.
Overview of the New Ruling New York employers are once again required to provide a notice in their employee handbooks about reproductive health rights following a recent ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The ruling vacated a previous permanent injunction that had blocked the enforcement of the law, meaning employers must now comply with the New York Reproductive Health Bias Law (Labor Law § 203-e). Reproductive Health Bias Law Requirements The Reproductive Health Bias Law was enacted in November 2019 to ensure employees and their dependents can make reproductive health decisions without facing discrimination in the workplace. The law prohibits employers from taking retaliatory actions against employees regarding their reproductive health decisions and requires employers to keep employees' reproductive health information confidential unless there is prior written consent. Under the law, employers must include a notice in their employee handbooks informing employees of their rights and remedies under the Act. This is an essential update that must be made to comply with the law. Impact of the Second Circuit Ruling Religious organizations had challenged the law, arguing that the notice requirement violated their First Amendment rights. However, the Second Circuit disagreed, ruling that the notice requirement was lawful and similar to other workplace disclosure laws. The court noted that while the policy motivating the law may be controversial, the law itself and the obligation for employers to comply are not in question. Action Required for Employers Even though there is no specific penalty for failing to comply with the notice requirement, employers are encouraged to review and update their employee handbooks in light of the court's ruling to ensure they are compliant with the law. For Simco Clients: For clients who utilize Simco’s employee handbook services, rest assured this requirement is already included, and no additional steps are needed.
Pre-employment drug testing is a hiring practice that has sparked debate in recent years. While some industries rely on it for safety and compliance, others are rethinking its necessity—especially as marijuana laws evolve. If you're actively job searching, knowing what to expect can help you prepare, avoid surprises, and understand your rights. Who Still Requires Drug Testing? Not all industries conduct pre-employment drug testing, but for certain roles, it's still a non-negotiable requirement. Some of the most common sectors where testing remains standard include: Transportation & Public Safety – Truck drivers, pilots, transit operators, and law enforcement Healthcare & Childcare – Nurses, physicians, pharmacists, and daycare providers Government & Military Contracts – Federal employees, military personnel, and defense contractors Manufacturing & Construction – Heavy equipment operators and industrial workers handling hazardous materials However, policies vary widely even within these industries. Some companies are now loosening restrictions for non-safety-sensitive positions, recognizing that outdated drug testing policies may limit their talent pool. What Substances Are Typically Screened? Most pre-employment drug tests screen for common illicit substances, but the depth of testing can vary. Standard screenings include: Five-Panel Test – Detects marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, opiates, and PCP Expanded Panel Tests – Can include benzodiazepines, barbiturates, synthetic opioids, and even alcohol Employers may use different types of tests, including urine, saliva, blood, or hair follicle analysis. Hair follicle testing, for example, can detect drug use from months prior—something applicants should be mindful of. The Evolving Landscape of Marijuana Testing One of the most significant changes in pre-employment drug testing involves marijuana. With over half of U.S. states legalizing marijuana in some form, companies are reevaluating their stance. Some states prohibit employers from disqualifying candidates for off-duty marijuana use. Other states still allow testing but require employers to prove impairment, not just presence. Federally regulated positions, such as those in transportation, maintain strict no-tolerance policies. This shift means that while some applicants may no longer face automatic disqualification for marijuana use, it’s still important to know an employer’s policy before assuming it won’t impact hiring decisions. What Happens If You Fail a Pre-Employment Drug Test? The consequences of failing a drug test depend on multiple factors, including company policy, industry regulations, and state laws. In regulated industries (e.g., transportation, healthcare, federal employment), a failed test almost always results in immediate disqualification. Some employers allow re-testing or a waiting period before reapplying, particularly for marijuana use in certain states. If you have a valid prescription for a tested substance (e.g., opioids or ADHD medication), you may need to provide documentation to avoid disqualification. Additionally, some companies offer assistance programs or second-chance policies, especially if an applicant is upfront about past use or addiction recovery. Do Employers Really Benefit from Drug Testing? With the workforce evolving, many companies are questioning whether traditional drug testing policies still serve their intended purpose. Some argue that testing reduces liability, improves workplace safety, and ensures reliable employees. However, others believe that outdated policies exclude qualified candidates, especially in a competitive job market. The Arguments for Drug Testing: Reduces workplace accidents in safety-sensitive roles Ensures compliance with federal and industry regulations Discourages drug use in high-responsibility positions The Arguments Against Drug Testing: May eliminate qualified candidates for non-safety-sensitive roles Does not account for impairment vs. past use (especially with marijuana) Can be costly and time-consuming for employers Companies that still require drug testing must weigh these factors and ensure their policies align with modern workforce expectations. The Future of Pre-Employment Drug Testing The debate over drug testing isn’t going away anytime soon. As laws and attitudes continue shifting, companies may move toward impairment-based testing rather than zero-tolerance screening. This means job seekers should stay informed, especially in industries where testing is likely to remain a requirement. For now, the best approach is to understand employer expectations, know your legal protections, and be prepared for potential screenings as part of the hiring process.
Our Company.
Sign up for our Newsletter.
Designed and Developed by Vessel Digital Marketing