Key Takeaways
- Violation of a Specific Safety Requirements (VSSRs) introduce additional liability beyond standard workers’ compensation exposure when a specific safety rule is violated and the violation is a proximate cause of the injury.
- Potential penalties are on a scale ranging from 15% to 50%. That percentage is then multiplied by the weeks of compensation paid in the claim at the maximum rate of compensation for that type of compensation for the year in the which the injury occurred. An additional discretionary penalty can be levied for repeat violations.
- Early investigation, strong documentation and coordinated legal strategy are critical to mitigating exposure.
What is a VSSR?
A Violation of a Specific Safety Requirement (VSSR ) is not simply an extension of a workers’ compensation claim. It is a constitutionally authorized penalty designed to compensate injured workers and enforce employer compliance with specific safety rules. Historically, these were designed to shape employer behavior and help create safer workplaces. Today, these rules are set forth in the Ohio Administrative Code.
For employers operating in Ohio, a Violation of a Specific Safety Requirement notification represents a distinct and often misunderstood layer of risk within the workers’ compensation system. While the underlying claim will likely have been in progress for some time, a VSSR allegation introduces a separate inquiry focused on workplace safety compliance, one that can materially increase both financial exposure and operational scrutiny.
A Separate and Punitive Framework
Because of its punitive nature, the analysis doesn’t just center around injury. Fault and issues of why or how an injury occurred are often not important to whether a claim is necessarily compensable. But when evaluating a VSSR as a penalty, one considers whether or not a clearly defined safety requirement applies to the industry, equipment or process in question. If the safety requirement is applicable, was it actually violated and did that violation cause or contribute to the injury. This distinction shapes both the defense strategy and the evidentiary burden.
Potential Exposure Now and in the Future
The financial implications of a VSSR claim can be significant. If liability is established, the Industrial Commission may impose an additional award ranging from 15% to 50%. The range is determined at the discretion of the Industrial Commission and is based on a variety of factors, including the perceived egregiousness of the violation. This percentage is then multiplied by the number of weeks of compensation paid in the claim at the maximum rate for the year of the injury.
As an example, if the injured worker was off work for 26 weeks following the injury and later received a permanent partial impairment award of 10% (20 weeks of compensation) for an injury from 2025, a 20% VSSR award would result in a penalty calculated as follows.
26 weeks x $1,231 max TTD rate = $32,006.00
20 weeks x $410.33 max PP rate = $ 8,206.60
$40,212.60 x 20% = $8,042.52
This penalty is not a one time penalty, either. Because the underlying claim continues, the penalty continues to exist alongside it. So, if the injured worker later required additional time off of work, was disabled and was entitled to additional temporary total disability, an increase in permanent partial impairment, or was awarded permanent total disability, the VSSR penalty would again be applied and continue.
In addition, repeat violations within a 24-month period permit the Industrial Commission to impose an additional penalty that is discretionary of up to $50,000 per violation.
Timing Considerations, Process and Practical Realities
Timing is important. VSSR applications must be filed within one year of the injury or onset of an occupational disease, creating a relatively short window for claimants but requiring employers to remain vigilant even after a claim appears to stabilize.
Once filed, a VSSR application initiates a structured process that includes investigation by the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation, evidence collection and eventual review by the Industrial Commission.
BWC handles the investigation of VSSRs through the BWC Safety Violations Investigations Unit (SVIU). Assigned investigators contact employers to arrange for on-site inspections, request copies of key documents and obtain witness statements. The Bureau also seeks to obtain a statement from the injured worker to include as part of the report. The purpose of the BWC investigation is not to find fault or render a judgment regarding whether or not a violation did or did not occur. The purpose is to create and preserve a factual record for review by an Industrial Commission Staff Hearing Officer in the event that the claim is eventually heard on the merits of the VSSR application.
Once the BWC SVIU finalizes its report, it is forwarded to the parties. The Industrial Commission then schedules a prehearing conference to review the status of the application and determine if the matter is ready to proceed to hearing. The Commission also actively encourages settlement.
From a practical standpoint, employers should anticipate that VSSR claims may be pursued strategically by injured workers and their attorneys. In some cases, claimants’ counsel files these applications to create additional leverage in broader claim negotiations, particularly because a VSSR can be resolved independently of the underlying claim.
Defense Considerations
Despite the exposure, VSSR claims present meaningful defense opportunities. Common arguments include the absence of an applicable safety rule, lack of an actual violation or a failure to establish causation between the alleged violation and the injury.
Employers may also assert that the injury resulted from the employee’s unilateral conduct or that compliance with the rule was not feasible under the circumstances.
Notably, because VSSRs are penal in nature, they are strictly construed, which can work to the employer’s advantage when regulatory language is ambiguous or broadly applied.
Coordinating an Effective Response
As with many compliance-driven risks, early action often determines outcome. Early investigation into claims and preservation of evidence, obtaining witness statements, taking photos, etc., is important generally. Sometimes, it is difficult to know which claims may give rise to a VSSR application 12 months later. So, proper investigation of all claims is a best practice.
However, employers should certainly prioritize immediate internal investigation following notice of a VSSR application, with particular emphasis on preserving physical evidence, training records and safety protocols.
Engaging experienced counsel early in the process can help shape the investigative record, coordinate responses to document requests and prepare for potential hearings. Where a claim proceeds to hearing, a well-developed presentation that includes witness testimony, documentary evidence and, where appropriate, expert analysis can materially affect the Commission’s evaluation.
Bottom Line
VSSR notifications should be treated as a distinct compliance event, not merely an extension of an existing workers’ compensation claim. The combination of financial exposure, investigative scrutiny and strategic use by claimants makes early coordination between legal, risk management and safety personnel essential.
Employers that approach these claims proactively, with disciplined documentation and a clear legal strategy, are best positioned to control risk and achieve favorable outcomes.
For any questions about VSSRs, contact your Dinsmore labor and employment attorney.