After you have read the material on affirmative defenses, respond to this actual case study. Your re ...

---

After you have read the material on affirmative defenses, respond to this actual case study. Your response should be a one page paper, double spaced, within one week of being assigned. Case study: A full time employee working for a carpenter contractor in the Midwest was assigned to clean a shift's worth of debris, wood, nails, and packaging materials from an elevated work platform prior to washing it down with a high pressure hose at the end of the shift. The employee was trained on fall protection; was provided a fall harness, lanyard and connection devices and he was given ample time to do the job according to the JSA (Job Safety Analysis) which showed the employee the risk of falls from heights, and required the employee to hook his lanyard to an established anchorage which was engineered by his employer. On the day of the incident in mention, the employee climbed up to the work platform and did not use his harness or lanyard, nor did he hook himself to the established anchorage, all of which was against his training, the JSA and against company work rules. After about ten minutes, he fell from the elevated work platform and broke his arm and his back leaving with permanent, costly and debilitating injuries. Exclusive of an OSHA consideration of violation for fall protection, the employee sued his employer for in civil court for unsafe working conditions. On one hand, the court would have to decide if the employer provided a safe workplace and safe working conditions; did the employer do its due diligence? On the other hand, the court would have to decide if the employee was trained, had been exposed to the employer's JSA and had ample equipment and time to complete the job. Using the affirmative defenses we have studied, which of them (one or more) apply to this scenario, if any, and why? You should use the exact language provided, Defend your position which would support the employer or the employee. It is not a legitimate response to divide responsibility in this assignment using the theory of comparative negligence.