holding that subcontractor foreman’s consultation with general contractor’s safety engineer did not mean that the two companies were engaged in a com mon activity
How later courts described this case
- holding that subcontractor foreman’s consultation with general contractor’s safety engineer did not mean that the two companies were engaged in a com mon activity
- holding that the fact that a steel structure would have to be completed before plumbers could begin their work did not mean that the steelworkers and the plumbers were engaged in a common activity
- concluding that because the steel workers would first have to set the structure before the plumbers could install the plumbing they were not “working together”
- stating that employees must be working together “[i]n such fashion that they are subject to the same or similar hazards” (emphasis added)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Dell, Chief Justice.
I join in the special concurrence of Mr. Justice Knutson.