"This Is Going To Be Fun!! " got me thinking

admin

The "This Is Going To Be Fun!! " thread stimulated me to start this thread.I hope there is a Lawyer or someone who has experienced the scenario who can respond.I am only interested in the legal stand point.Morally there is always an answer for the individual but different individuals have different morals.What are the legal ramifications of doing work under instruction for a client?I am self employed in the area of Glass Balustrading with my qualifications and experience I have confidence that in the majority of cases my work is slightly over engineered.  Now if a client was to come to me in balustrading he would have the expectation of me doing a job structurally adequate for the application.  In that case I would expect to have legal responsibility and I know that in Australia at least you cannot knowingly go outside of Standards even if instructed to.But I do a bit of welding.A client comes up and has a drawing says “Can you make that; it’s for a brewing plant”.  I’m not a brewer; I weld it up and poison 1,000 people.     Where do I stand?   Legally?What If I were to express a concern and still go ahead?What If I get an employee of mine to weld it up? Remember this is a fabbed part, the client is not going to a brewing supplier.Does anyone one know the legal side of this.Please remember this is purely a legal Q. not a moral one.BrettA good guess is better than a bad measurement
Reply:It's a good question.  I hope you get a good answer.
Reply:Brett, I would suspect it might go a little like the way workcover works, in that everyone involved is guilty and the fight is more about arguing the amount of liability of each party.eg was it a design error, fabrication error, lack of quality control, use of the equipment in service and who was responsible for each.I would expect you would be in a much better position if you fabricated something exactly to a spec provided by the customer as opposed to designing and building a solution to meet a functional requirement.Note the above are just thoughts and I have no legal experience
Reply:Originally Posted by BrettBut I do a bit of welding.A client comes up and has a drawing says “Can you make that; it’s for a brewing plant”.  I’m not a brewer; I weld it up and poison 1,000 people.     Where do I stand?   Legally?What If I were to express a concern and still go ahead?What If I get an employee of mine to weld it up? Remember this is a fabbed part, the client is not going to a brewing supplier.Does anyone one know the legal side of this.Brett
Reply:Well, there is a similarity in the IBEW electrical union.  By being a journeyman electrician, even though you work for a contractor, you can be held liable for miswiring something.The lawyers will add every name possible (assuming they have assets) to the defendant's list.
Reply:There are 2 sides to the coin.  If you have the customer sign off on the job before you do it because you know its wrong, You now have in writing you know its wrong even though the customer signed off on it.Make sense?Legal stuff............DavidReal world weldin.  When I grow up I want to be a tig weldor.
Reply:There is a concept in American law of "joint and several liability." In essence, it means that anyone and everyone who touches a defective part can -- and likely will -- be sued for whatever damage it does.That doesn't mean, however, that everyone who is sued will ultimately be held responsible. Part of the litigation process in such cases involves each party making the case why it doesn't belong in the litigation. I would imagine that, in such an instance, your high-priced lawyer would stand a good chance of getting you out of the case. Unfortunately, you'll still have to pay the lawyer.The problem you have is this doesn't just apply to the brewery. It applies to every part you make no matter what the application.I would consider talking with a lower-priced lawyer and figuring out what kind of legal remedies you might make in advance, such as waivers of responsibility for how the part is used after you make it. Such actions might not prevent you from getting sued, but they will make it easier to extricate yourself if it happens.Bob RosenbaumFormer PublisherPenton's WELDING Magazine
Reply:Originally Posted by David RThere are 2 sides to the coin.  If you have the customer sign off on the job before you do it because you know its wrong, You now have in writing you know its wrong even though the customer signed off on it.Make sense?Legal stuff............David
Reply:where i live, there is a similar debate/discussion going on, specifically with the younger "tuner" crowd of kids with souped-up cars... Window Tint. i'm not going to get back into my past history with it, but long story short, some kids want it to be darker than the legal limit for one reason or another. let's say that your windows can not have less than 35% light transmittance thru them. if you are caught, you can then turn around and sue the company that tinted your windows for you. they can get into even bigger trouble for doing it in the first place... UNLESS... they have the vehicle owner sign a waiver of liability.in your situation, i would have a serious sit-down with the client. tell them that you do not feel that it is sensible, ethical, sanitary, nor legal to weld a brewery pie system with mild steel. if they still continue to insist that you do it, you have two options, either decline the job all together and walk away from the situation, or you can have them sign a waiver. this waiver should say something to the effect of "my company told them that it would not be safe, sanitary, or legal, but they still wanted me to do it". if you choose the waiver, i would suggest sitting down with a lawyer first and having someone read over it, making sure that it is bullet-proof. i would work that fee of a lawyer consultation into the quote, but that's just me. some guys would just use it as a business expense and not charge the customer. it would depend on the situation i guess.anyway, i take no responsibility for your actions with this information, as i am not a lawyer, but that is my experience with it... if it's not done "under the table", they can track who did the work, and come after you.Later,Andy
Reply:Despite having ample reason, I've never been a plaintiff. Yet, I've been a defendant a dozen times without reason, -other than looking like an easy mark-. So I take it as a particular insult when I'm named as a defendant. I don't have many credentials to cite, other than never having a judgement stand when I was a defendant, and being adjudicated by the good and honorable court as having "more balls" (Whatever that legal mumbo jumbo means, it's a quote from the bench.) than anyone else ever before the court. "...Part of the litigation process in such cases involves each party making the case why it doesn't belong in the litigation..."
Reply:Actually ony one can be sued. I know of a case where two truck drivers hauling produce water in the oil field were working together on a haul. There was a problen with the sump at the dump site. One driver went down in the sump to to clear the problem. Hydrogen sulfide gas was present and he went down. The other driver went down to rescue him and went down. Both died. The wife of the second driver sued the wife and the estate of the first driver for wrongful death. I'm sure some ambulance chasing lawer talked her into it. How low can you get?
Reply:What happend to the old days, you keep to your self, deal with your own problems, if some one steals cattle they got hung!  Now some one can drive by your place and sue you for something that has nothing to do with them, when is this sue happy world gonna change? Making money working for yourself is getting harder and harder
Reply:Originally Posted by David R...If you have the customer sign off on the job before you do it because you know its wrong, You now have in writing you know its wrong even though the customer signed off on it...
Reply:Originally Posted by Mondo  ...My LEGAL ADVICE is that you consult with an appropriate attorney who is licensed in the appropriate jurisdiction, preferably one who is experienced in product liability tort litigation.
Reply:denrep,Love your dog kennel analogy.
Reply:A couple comments here:1) Being an employee of a corporation, whether you own it or not, is not a complete defense.  Negligence is always a liability.2)  Criminal courts use "reasonable doubt" as a criteria, Civil courts use "preponderance of the evidence" as the criteria.  In other words, the bar is set much lower in civil courts for liability or judgements in favor of the plaintiff.3)  "Release of Liability" forms might as well be printed on toilet paper.  4)  "Ignorance" is not considered a valid defense under the law, especially in criminal courts, and to a large extent in civil courts.  In civil courts, it might possibly reduce the percentage of liability, but not the judgement of liability itself.5)  Whether you prevail or not in court, you (or your insurance company), still has to pay court costs, lawyers, expert witnesses, etc.  And also don't forget time, your own time, one hour of court time can require many hours of prep time in the lawyer's office (somebody's paying for that).  This can all add up to many thousands of dollars, whether you win or loose you can expect your insurance rates to jump in the next year or two.  And don't expect the judge to award you, as the defendant, court costs, or any other reimbursement, from the plaintiff ...   this normally only happens (at our level, anyway), if a determination is made that the original lawsuit was considered "frivolous" ...   rational being, it might discourage people from filing for legitimate claims.6)  The previous advice to consult a lawyer was good ....  but remember, not all lawyers are created equal.  DO THE RESEARCH  before you consult ....!!!!!!  Now as I mentioned before, I'm self-employed, have been for 20-odd years; as the owner, primary employee, and engineer, yeah, the buck very definitely stops here; hehehehe,  I'm liable no matter what.  The case of an employee, however, can be much more complicated; say the boss handed him two pieces of metal, "weld these", no further explanations or instructions, ZERO liability, heck, the lawyers wouldn't even bother, he doesn't have enough money or assets to make it worth it, and what's the case???  Were they welded???  YES!!!!!, Even a monkey could do that.    "Weld this, it's gotta be certified",  yeah, a little liability here, just be sure you make good welds.  Or, still as an employee,,,,   Boss comes up, "This is Mike, talk with him, find out what he wants and what he's doing, and take care of him" .....    NOW we're talking risk,,,,   and from the OP of the thread this thread is referring to, that's exactly what happened.  Once you know the reason and the purpose behind your specific job, as the "expert", it's your responsibility to educate yourself as much as possible everything concerning that particular job, how and why to do certain things to make it fully successful.  My customers depend on me to do the correct process, and the correct and proper work for the application, those that tell me, "do it this way, don't worry about it", are the "fools" .....  I can, and do, do very well without those types ...... and I have no problem telling them so, and again, to their face, one thing nobody's ever accused me of is being shy.Now, understand, I probably do every "difficult" and "risky" job out there, and more than a few "huge" possible liabilities, up to and including my own personal safety, but you can believe me here, anytime I do something "new", or outside of my own personal knowledge or expertise, I do all the possible research I can; depending on who I get the info from, and how it ties into my own personal science and engineering knowledge, I may or may not actually do the job.   If I do  the job, it's done my way.  AND THE RESEARCH ISN'T DONE ON THE INTERWEB!!!!!   ....    I prefer face-to-face interaction, with people I personally know and trust, or otherwise people who's credentials I can personally check out.BUT,,,,  the internet is valuable, for allowing me information or dangers I wouldn't have otherwise known about, and can then be looked into further in real life .....  and if I had a warning, from somebody I've observed in the past to only make truthful statements, you can bet I'd be asking around, and hard questions, before proceeding.My big question here is, the guy everybody is worshipping here, is he just so arrogant that everything he does, even when he doesn't know what he's doing, he thinks is "gold"?????   Or is he just so ethically deficient that he just don't care what happens, once the job leaves his welding table?????   Myself, I call fools for what they are, and I sleep well at night.  I also realize I'm not following the "party line" here, but I live, work, and make a living in "real life", not the "make-believe" world many here live in, and the decisions I make, the work I do, have a very real influence on my living .....  I can't falsely hide behind the "skirts" of an employer.......Last edited by mark8310; 05-02-2008 at 03:52 PM.
Reply:And BTW, there is only one lawyer I can think of that frequents any of these boards, Rvannatta, maybe somebody should PM or email him, about this thread.   Gotta warn you, though, he's not really a "feel-good" type ......    and can really cut thru the BS quick ....
Reply:Well I hope he knows enough not to "slap the dog"!Chalrie
Reply:And in many, if not most states here in the US, Civil law follows the "deep pockets" philosophy ....   that is, even if you are held only 1% liable for whatever dastardly deed or event that happened, maybe you just did the paperwork, you could very well be held responsible for all of the resulting damages, if you have more assets or more easily available assets or better insurance than the remaining defendants, who were responsible for 99% of the actual liability.  Not theory here, actual fact.
Reply:Unfortunately, its the BS such as this that is driving jobs away and stifling creativity and invention. Without someone willing to try something new we would still be sleeping on dirt floors in a cave and eating with our fingers. There is never a 100% safe venture except to not do it. So do nothing and be passed by the rest of the world or get busy and do something. The legalities need to be simplified and BS court cases thrown out and the lawyers penalized for bringing BS cases to court wasting tax payers money and time. Just like the hot coffee incident, regardless if the coffee was hotter than other makers, you ordered hot coffee, here's your sign. How about we get rid of all vehicles so you can't get in a wreck, shut off all electrical power, so you can't shock yourself, oh and you can't live in a house, it may come apart in a storm. People try and duck their personal responsibility and pass it along to someone else and our legal system has allowed it, such a sad situation we have created. We need to rectify the situation before we nullify ourselves from existence.
Reply:The real problem is there are too damn many over paid, under worked lawyers trying to interpret ideas into a law that was written to protect someone from "intentional" harm.Need to get a short rope & tall ladder for some, maybe make the rest think twice?MarkI haven't always been a nurse........Craftsman 12"x36" LatheEnco G-30B MillHobart Handler 175Lincoln WeldandPower 225 AC/DC G-7 CV/CCAdd a Foot Pedal to a Harbor Freight Chicago Electric 165A DC TIG PapaLion's Gate Build
Reply:like browny said the way workcover is now there wouldn't be much left for the lawyers to get workcover start's with who ever did the job then just adds zeros to the fine all the way to the top of the company I know at my shop if one of fellas fu&ksup bad and workcover gets in on the act they get $2500 I get $25000 and so one till the top of the company chain or a million plus is reached Creative metal Creative metal Facebook
Reply:I'm not a lawyer but if you build it you are liable. Here in the US objects such as you are describing fall under government regulations which covers the material that can be used and the joining process that can be used. Restaurant equipment is restaurant grade stainless steel and tig is the only process you can use (sterilization and contamination). I can't say on brewing equipment but you can bet it is regulated. Move down here to New Orleans and you will see why there are so many lawsuits with all the shysters on tv saying let me sue someone for you and I'll get ya lots of money.The difference between art and craft is the quality of the workmanship. I am an artist.
Reply:[QUOTE=Brett;183693Please remember this is purely a legal Q. not a moral one.Brett[/QUOTE]Uhhhhhhh,,,,,   why are we separating ethics from legalities??????     Starting to sound like you think it's ok to hurt or kill somebody, as long as you can get away with it?????     Legally that's possible, ethically it's not, and not anything I'd ever consider .....
Reply:Originally Posted by mark8310Uhhhhhhh,,,,,   why are we separating ethics from legalities??????     Starting to sound like you think it's ok to hurt or kill somebody, as long as you can get away with it?????     Legally that's possible, ethically it's not, and not anything I'd ever consider .....Originally Posted by wellolike browny said the way workcover is now there wouldn't be much left for the lawyers to get workcover start's with who ever did the job then just adds zeros to the fine all the way to the top of the company I know at my shop if one of fellas fu&ksup bad and workcover gets in on the act they get $2500 I get $25000 and so one till the top of the company chain or a million plus is reached
Reply:Since lawyers care nothing for ethics (in the pure sense of their profession, not in their personal sense), why shouldn't we be able to talk about legalities separately?  No problem.  If the two were inseparable, there'd be no need for laws or lawyers, we'd all act ethically.
Reply:Originally Posted by Weldordiep.s.:  Was this a theoretical or real event?
Reply:Originally Posted by OldtimerActually ony one can be sued. I know of a case where two truck drivers hauling produce water in the oil field were working together on a haul. There was a problen with the sump at the dump site. One driver went down in the sump to to clear the problem. Hydrogen sulfide gas was present and he went down. The other driver went down to rescue him and went down. Both died. The wife of the second driver sued the wife and the estate of the first driver for wrongful death. I'm sure some ambulance chasing lawer talked her into it. How low can you get?
Reply:Bob, you are right and I probably stated the case poorly. Both women suffered a tragedy. The law that allows suing someone for something that is not their fault and the lawyers that take advantage of it are wrong in my book. The first driver that died did not force the second driver to come to his aid and his wife who became the receiver of his estate certainly did not. The law that allows this was written to benefit lawyers and not the people involved in the situation. I have been involved in a couple of problems that involved lawyers and my opinion of lawyers isn't very high because of it. I realise there are honest and ethical lawyers practicing. I just haven't been party to their aquaintance. The particular ones I watched in action lied and distorted facts anyway they could to benefit their client. It was strictly for how much money the lawyer could make in fees, not for what was right or ethical. Maybe I'm wrong to still believe in ethical and moral deeds.
Reply:Oldtimer,Overall, I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of lawyers.Unfortunately, many unethical and/or immoral parties, through their actions, have allowed the profession to flourish.Just my .02Syncro 250 DX Dynasty 200 DXMM 251 w/30A SG XMT 304 w/714 Feeder & Optima PulserHH187Dialarc 250 AC/DCHypertherm PM 1250Smith, Harris, Victor O/ASmith and Thermco Gas MixersAccess to a full fab shop with CNC Plasma, Water Jet, etc.
Reply:Originally Posted by Bob at WeldingMag...That's what the "joint and several liability" clause does. It forces you to sue EVERYONE you can think of, and then puts the burden on the court and the defendants to get themselves out of the suit.
Reply:Originally Posted by Oldtimer...The law that allows this was written to benefit lawyers and not the people involved in the situation. ...
Reply:Originally Posted by MAC702Can't anybody sue anybody for any reason...?
Reply:Originally Posted by Bob at WeldingMag. That's what the "joint and several liability" clause does. It forces you to sue EVERYONE you can think of, and then puts the burden on the court and the defendants to get themselves out of the suit.
Reply:That's true.  Civil law has so many differences from criminal law.  You might not ever go to jail for something, and still lose.  It is judged by a preponderance of evidence, and a majority of the jury, not having to convince all 12 people beyond a doubt that you did something illegal.Self-defense shootings often fall under this catagory.Sometimes it works, though.  Like OJ losing the civil suit.
Reply:OK now..Lets do this..This whole fiasco started with the whatchamacallits that certian individuals had a problem with.People will die..Boats will sink..Yeah Yeah..I've heard it all...Now take into concideration that they are still "sitting there" not doing any harm to anyone...And if and when they pass muster then what?But years ago when I welded defence stuff for the Military..That stuff was designed for one thing..To kill people.Plain and simple..No problem then right??I made stuff to sink boats no problem..I made stuff to kill no problem..Who is to say what is what anymore..All depends on what you are doing and for who right?This can go on forever..Give it a rest and we will see what happens now won't we.....zap!I am not completely insane..Some parts are missing Professional Driver on a closed course....Do not attempt.Just because I'm a  dumbass don't mean that you can be too.So DON'T try any of this **** l do at home.
Reply:Originally Posted by zapsterThis whole fiasco started with the whatchamacallits that certian individuals had a problem with...
Reply:Originally Posted by denrepZap, I think you're reading something into this, that is not here. Post #1 gave a hypothetical completely unrelated to your project. I don't believe that any poster in this thread had your particular project in mind (I know I didn't); just a general discussion about law, from which we can all learn.
Reply:I agree.  I was hoping it WOULDN'T get tied to your project, Zap, because this is a good question for fabricators in general to discuss.
Reply:Originally Posted by BrettPlease remember this is purely a legal Q. not a moral one.Brett