Cuando un trabajador de la construcción sufre una lesión, la responsabilidad no se limita al empleador directo del trabajador. La Ley Laboral de Nueva York extiende dicha responsabilidad a lo largo de la cadena hasta llegar al contratista general y al propietario del inmueble; y es precisamente de ahí de donde proviene, en realidad, la indemnización.
Under Labor Law §240(1), the property owner and the general contractor owe a non-delegable duty to provide proper protection from elevation-related hazards. “Non-delegable” means the owner cannot escape liability by hiring a contractor; the duty stays with the owner regardless of who performs the work. The same framework applies to Labor Law §241(6) violations of specific Industrial Code provisions (12 NYCRR Part 23).
Under Russin v. Picciano, a party that has the authority to control the work — even if not the formal GC — can be held liable as a statutory agent. Construction management firms, project owners with on-site representation, and substantive subcontractors who direct other subs can all be statutory agents and therefore liable under §240/§241(6).
Construction contracts almost always include indemnification clauses pushing liability downstream from the owner to the GC, from the GC to the subs. These clauses are enforceable in many cases but are limited by General Obligations Law §5-322.1, which voids any contract that purports to indemnify a party for its own negligence on a construction project.
Most owner/GC contracts on NYC projects layer an OCIP or CCIP policy on top of subcontractor indemnification — both run in parallel. Pulling the OCIP/CCIP certificates and the indemnification language during pre-suit investigation lets us tell, before filing, which carrier is on the risk and at what limits. That changes the case strategy.
Workers’ Compensation Law §11 generally bars a worker from suing their direct employer (the comp exclusivity rule). The exception: “grave injury” under §11 — death, permanent and total loss of use of an arm, leg, hand, or foot, total loss of vision in both eyes, total loss of hearing, paraplegia or quadriplegia, severe facial disfigurement, loss of multiple fingers, or acquired injury to the brain caused by external physical force resulting in permanent total disability. When the injury meets the grave-injury standard, the GC can pursue indemnification or contribution against the direct employer.
Beyond Labor Law claims, contribution among joint tortfeasors is governed by CPLR Article 14 (the Dole v. Dow framework, codified). Defendants can apportion fault among themselves through cross-claims, and recovery against any one defendant is reduced by the fault apportioned to others. CPLR §1601 — the so-called “1601 cap” — limits joint and several liability to defendants 50%+ at fault for non-economic damages in many contexts.
Same-day callback. English and Spanish. Available 24/7.
The owner, the general contractor, and any subcontractor who controlled the work are all potentially liable for a construction injury. Labor Law §240(1) and §241(6) make owners and general contractors non-delegably liable — they cannot contract their way out of responsibility by blaming the subcontractor. Russin v. Picciano & Son, 54 N.Y.2d 311 (1981).
General Obligations Law §5-322.1 voids contract provisions that try to indemnify a party for its own negligence on a New York construction project. So even if a subcontractor agreed to indemnify the GC, that clause cannot relieve the GC of its own statutory liability.
Direct claims against your employer are barred by Workers’ Comp exclusivity (WCL §11). But under §11, the employer can be impleaded by the owner or GC for contribution if you suffered a “grave injury” — paraplegia, loss of an arm or leg, severe brain damage, blindness, certain other catastrophic conditions enumerated in the statute.
Most GC contracts require subcontractors to name the owner and GC as additional insureds on the sub’s commercial general liability policy. This often funds the recovery in a §240 case. Preserving these contracts, certificates of insurance, and OCIP/CCIP documentation early is critical.
After judgment or settlement, defendants apportion responsibility among themselves under CPLR Article 14. As the injured worker, you typically recover from any defendant for the full judgment; the defendants then sort out percentages between themselves.
