The SOII [Leigh et al., 2004; Rosenman et al., 2006; Boden and Ozonoff, 2008], we sought to recognize underreporting on anInjury not OSHA recordableA smaller variety of claims met the eligibility requirements for Title Loaded From File workers’ compensation wage replacement for time loss, butReasons Employers Underreport Claims within the SOIIestablishment basis. In our study, most employers weren’t classified as under-reporters, but amongst these with SOIIeligible workers’ compensation claims, more than two in five establishments failed to report an eligible claim. By interviewing respondents from these underreporting establishments about person workers’ compensation claims not reported inside the SOII, we built around the operate of earlier interview studies with SOII respondents that offered insights into recordkeeping practices, but had been restricted to discussions of generalities or, amongst respondents with restricted knowledge, hypothetical recordkeeping scenarios [Phipps and Moore, 2010; Wuellner and Bonauto, 2014]. To our understanding, this really is the very first study to discuss using the SOII respondent particular workers’ compensation claims not reported within the SOII. Causes for underreporting in SOII have been varied, and reflected each systematic recordkeeping errors or anomalies and indiscriminate data entry errors. Previous research of OSHA log information identified many recordkeeping errors, like incorrect severity classification amongst circumstances recorded around the OSHA log and omission of recordable situations from the log [Eisenberg and McDonald, 1988; Conway and Svenson, 1998; Messiou and Zaidman, 2005; Eastern Analysis Group and also the National Opinion Research Center, 2009]. Our study identified recordkeeping practices which will lead to these errors. Omissions and misclassifications followed confusion about whether or not to record the physician’s advisable restrictions, the employee’s actual restrictions, or the restrictions paid by workers’ compensation. Injuries also went unreported because of the troubles inherent in tracking the development of a case over time, collecting information from diverse sources (e.g., worker, supervisor, human sources, or earlier record-keeper) and updating records when vital. Seligman et al. [1988] identified no logs maintained by 25 of establishments required to perform so. In our study, some establishments failed to retain not only OSHA logs, but an injury tracking technique of any sort. The SOII instructions had been a further supply of confusion, with respondents failing to report on all requested worksites. Linking workers’ compensation claims data to SOII data produced it clear that some employers critically engage within the determination of an injury’s work-relatedness. Although the OSHA recordkeeping rule “provides that the determination of work-relatedness ultimately rests together with the employer,”3 it is actually noteworthy that a number of employers disagreed using the workers’ compensation determination, and instead decided that the injury was not work-related. Some employers invoked the second exception for the rule’s geographic presumption requirement, asserting that the injury for the claim in query might have had symptoms that surfaced at perform but resulted solely from a non-work-related occasion or exposure that occurred outdoors the perform atmosphere. Other employers contested the assumption that the symptoms surfaced at work, and as an alternative believed that the worker wasseeking workers’ compensation insurance coverage coverage for any non-work injury that became symptomatic outdoors with the perform environmen.