The Liability Beyond Federal Fines
Want an AUDIO VERSION of this Blog? Get it HERE
Understanding the implications of non-adherence to federal laws like Kari’s Law and RAY BAUM’S Act in the Enterprise is crucial in today’s fast-evolving corporate compliance and safety landscape. As for organizations continuing to use older multi-line telephone systems (MLTS), relying on vague waivers that lack any credible source or case law, they are taking a significant risk of a considerable liability judgment from the plaintiff in a Tort lawsuit.
What is tort? Since I am not an attorney, I defer to my colleague, Marth Buyer, who practices law and advises the MLTS industry on many telecom-related issues. Martha’s definition of Tort is as follows:
“Tort law addresses circumstances where someone’s wrongful conduct causes harm to another person. It encompasses claims for damages outside of contractual disputes. In the context of non-compliance with Kari’s Law or the RAY BAUM’S Act, if an incident occurs where delayed or inadequate emergency response due to non-compliant MLTS leads to harm, the affected parties could pursue a tort claim against the organization, such as negligence or wrongful death.”
As I said, I am not a lawyer, but I can certainly understand that logic. First, you have wrongful conduct, which, in this case, violates federal law. Second, the fact that someone was harmed exists. A juror’s decision becomes very binary at that point. Harm occurred, and it was caused by non-compliance; therefore, the non-compliance aggravates the fact that the law was broken. Again, I am not an attorney, but I am confident I can make that argument to 12 rational people.
Legislative Requirements
Codified under the US Code of Federal Regulations, Kari’s Law, along with the RAY BAUM’S Act, mandates direct 911 dialing, as well as providing an accurate Dispatchable Location (as defined by the FCC) of a caller making an emergency call from an MLTS (Multi-Line Telephone System) typically used in commercial buildings and facilities like schools, hotels, hospitals and office buildings. These new requirements make 911 compliance a regulatory formality and a critical component of an organization’s duty to protect and provide for employee and visitor safety.
As clearly stated in the FCC proceeding documents, these rules were designed to be FORWARD LOOKING. This is where the casual, non-attorney reader stops reading. To acknowledge the ever-constant evolution of technology and software capabilities, the law also has the caveat of applicability to “significantly upgraded systems” and “technically feasible.” In case law, upgrades have been previously defined as a Major software release upgrade or 51% hardware upgrade. Squabbling over Major and Minor, or how 51% of the system is calculated, when a life safety functionality exists but lays dormant and unconfigured is a battle that cannot be won. This is NOT the loophole you want to ride to the finish line, as the optics are horrible either way.
I have found that many organizations will assume systems installed before these laws are automatically exempt from compliance. However, even so, an exemption does not cover the organization from any liability, particularly in tort law.
Waivers – A Paper-thin Security Blanket
Nearly a decade ago, some states, such as Texas, established a waiver program since the problem was widespread and caused financial hardship for many. The program, run by Texas’ CSEC in Austin, as part of their overall state 911 management responsibility, provided a 12-month waiver for any business that could show an active quote for a system upgrade, enabling compliance and cost justification of that expense being excessive and a financial burden. Manufacturers worked with the state to create a master list of systems with built-in functionality, and many waiver requests were rejected. Based on that fact. Those waivers issued had to be recertified each fall as they are still required.
Sovereign Nations and Compliance
For sovereign nation entities like Native American reservations, which may technically operate outside the purview of specific U.S. federal laws, the concept of tort still applies. Sovereign nations often adopt laws that mirror federal standards to ensure safety and liability protection within their territories. Non-compliance, while not directly breaching federal law, could expose these entities to tort claims should an incident lead to injury or death.
The Benefits of Compliance as Best Practice
Aligning with best practices as outlined by federal laws like Kari’s Law and RAY BAUM’S Act is more than just a regulatory requirement—it is a proactive measure to mitigate risks associated with emergencies. Observing these practices for organizations, especially those on sovereign land, can prevent potential tort claims and foster a safer environment.
Three Key Steps to Compliance
- Assessment and Upgrades: Evaluate your current MLTS to determine if it meets the new laws’ direct dial and location reporting requirements. Suppose it does not plan for necessary upgrades regardless of the system’s installation date.
- Regular Testing and Maintenance: Ensure your MLTS is regularly tested and maintained to function correctly during emergencies. This not only aids compliance but also enhances the system’s reliability, which could be crucial in tort defense.
- Training and Awareness: Educate your staff about effectively using your MLTS’s emergency features. Awareness can be critical in preventing accidents and enhancing response times during emergencies.
Relying on a waiver for older MLTS installations is a frail attempt to insulate an organization from fines. It also provides no tort liability protection in wrongful death or injury cases. This makes compliance with Kari’s Law and the RAY BAUM’S Act not just a legal requirement but a moral and ethical necessity. For any organization, including those within sovereign territories, aligning with these laws is a prudent strategy to mitigate risks, protect lives, and uphold the safety standards expected by all stakeholders.
Special thanks to Martha Buyer for her regular legal guidance and support. You can reach her at Email: Martha@MarthaBuyer.com
Thanks for reading, please follow me on Social Media at:
X @fletch911
LinkedIn
Facebook
Mark J. Fletcher, ENP
VP Public Safety at 911inform, LLC
833-333-1911 http://www.911inform.com
The World According to Fletch . . . 