4-347-150 (1998). STEVE FLORES.

• Case Date: November 25, 1998
• Court: Colorado

Colorado Workers Compensation 1998. 4-347-150 (1998). STEVE FLORES INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS OFFICEIN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF STEVE FLORES Claimant, v. MONFORT, INC., Employer, and SELF-INSURED, Insurer, Respondent.W. C. No. 4-347-150FINAL ORDER The claimant seeks review of a final order of Administrative Law Judge Gandy (ALJ), which reduced his compensation for temporary disability benefits due to willful violation of a safety rule. We affirm. The claimant did not file a brief in support of his petition to review. The only issue raised in the petition is the argument that the record does not contain evidence to support the ALJ's finding that the claimant's violation of the safety rule was willful. The ALJ found that the claimant violated a safety rule by failing to "lock out/tag out" a piece of machinery prior to breaking the machine's "plane of operation." Because of the claimant's failure to lock out the machine it snapped shut injuring the claimant's hand. The ALJ also found that the claimant's failure to lock out the machine constituted a "deliberate and willful act." In support of this determination, the ALJ found that the claimant underwent an extensive training program concerning the "lock out/tag out" procedure. Further, the claimant passed a written examination establishing his understanding of the rule, and he signed a document stating that he was trained in the procedure. Moreover, the ALJ discredited the claimant's testimony that violation of the rule resulted from a supervisor's decision to emphasize speed over safety. Under § 8-42-112 (1)(b), C.R.S. 1998, a claimant's compensation may be reduced fifty percent for "willful failure to obey any reasonable rule adopted by the employer for the safety of the employee." In order to establish a "willful" violation, the respondent must show that the claimant acted with "deliberate intent." Bennett Properties Co. v. Industrial Commission, 165 Colo. 135, 437 P.2d 548 (1968). A finding of willful conduct may be negated if the evidence demonstrates that the employer knowingly acquiesced in violations of the rule. See Lori's Family Dining, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office, 907 P.2d 715 (Colo. App. 1995). The question of whether the respondent carried its burden of proof to establish willful conduct is one of fact for determination by the ALJ. See Lori's Family...