N all, five mutually exclusive themes emerged that described the key reasons that compensable claims for the establishments in our sample weren’t reported to the BLS SOII: (i) noncompliance with OSHA recordkeeping rules; (ii) noncompliance with SOII reporting guidelines; (iii) the employer did not take into account the injury work-related; (iv) data entry errors; and (v) claimsReasons Employers Underreport Claims within the SOIIwith Title Loaded From File indeterminate SOII eligibility. Inside these key themes, detailed reasons clustered into secondary categories which described the occasion, aspect or claim characteristic that led towards the key explanation for non-report (Table II). For asmall number (5 ) of the claims, respondents weren’t in a position to supply sufficient info to permit to get a main category determination. Major and secondary motives are described under.TABLE II. Reasons for Non-Report Grouped by Principal Explanation and Secondary Category1. Noncompliance with OSHA recordkeeping guidelines Misunderstanding recordkeeping rules Establishment does not record Kept on Salary claims with missed function as DAFW cases on OSHA log Non-full time workers treated differently on records Injury resulted in each DAFW and days of operate restriction, respondent chooses severity category with higher quantity of days Injured worker paid full salary via trip leave.There was no WC wage replacement, DAFW were not recorded Physician advised DAFW, but injured worker returned to function Employer cannot accommodate physician encouraged job modifications, but will not record DAFW (based on claim data, not facts supplied by respondent) Injury facts transfer or communication failure Injury was not reported via corporation system, was not place on OSHA log Break down in recordkeeping system, details transfer did not happen as it really should have Employer policies suppressed reporting of injury (mandatory post-injury drug screen) Waiting on L I for resolution of claim prior to recording on OSHA log, or just before recording DAFW Waits to record DAFW till injured worker returns to perform Employer “lost touch” with worker straight away following the injury, no DAFW recorded Present DAFW not supplied to respondent by other individuals inside business Respondent has no record of DAFW for this claim Notified of injury following the SOII was completed Duty of prior record-keeper two. Noncompliance with SOII reporting directions Didn’t involve all sampled locations or workers Confusion in regards to the establishment’s enterprise structure led respondent to believe the claim was not SOII eligible Reported instances for some organization web sites, but not all Did not maintain OSHA logs or track injuries in the course of survey year SOII completed from memory, no injury tracking technique Respondent was aware from the injury, but keeps no OSHA logs Randomly chosen subset of instances for inclusion within the SOII Did not include things like all kinds of injuries Respondent believes non-acute injuries are usually not SOII reportable three. Employer didn’t think about the injury work-related Late notification of injury Employer believed activities outdoors the perform environment brought on injury Injury was not attributed to a distinct incident Employer believed the injury was as a result of a pre-existing condition 4. Data entry errors Date of injury recorded incorrectly Injury erroneously recorded on earlier year’s OSHA log Classified as DAFW, but variety of days on OSHA log was left blank or zero days away were recorded Many similar circumstances caused confusion Respondent was aware of inju.